kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Europaudvalget 2025
KOM (2025) 0340
Offentligt

EUROPEAN

COMMISSION

Brussels, 30.6.2025

SWD(2025) 169 final

PART 1/2

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

EVALUATION

of the 2021-2030 European Education Area strategic framework

Accompanying the document

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE

COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE

COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

on the interim evaluation of the 2021-2030 European Education Area strategic

framework

{COM(2025) 340 final}

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Table of contents

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 1

URPOSE

SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY OF THE EVALUATION

....................................................................... 1

WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION? ................................. 4

2.1. D

ESCRIPTION OF THE INTERVENTION AND ITS OBJECTIVES

................................................................... 4

2.2. P

OINT

(

)

OF COMPARISON

.................................................................................................................... 6

HOW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATION PERIOD? ................... 8

URRENT STATE OF PLAY

............................................................................................................................ 8

EVALUATION FINDINGS (ANALYTICAL PART) .................................................................... 10

4.1. T

O WHAT EXTENT WAS THE INTERVENTION SUCCESSFUL AND WHY

? ................................................. 10

4.1.1. Overall effectiveness .................................................................................................................. 10

4.1.2. Effectiveness by EEA implementation instruments .................................................................... 12

4.1.3. Effectiveness by EEA strategic priorities ................................................................................... 15

4.1.4. Promoting education and training from a global perspective ................................................... 18

4.1.5. Efficiency.................................................................................................................................... 19

4.1.6. Coherence .................................................................................................................................. 22

4.2. H

OW DID THE

INTERVENTION MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND TO WHOM

? ............................................ 24

4.3. I

S THE INTERVENTION STILL RELEVANT

? ............................................................................................ 27

WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN AND LESSONS LEARNT?................................ 29

5.1. EEA SP

AND

EU-

LEVEL TARGETS

...................................................................................................... 29

5.2. EEA

DESIGN

....................................................................................................................................... 31

5.3. EEA

REPORTING

MONITORING AND EVALUATION

............................................................................. 32

5.4. EEA

COMMUNICATION AND DISSEMINATION

..................................................................................... 33

5.5. R

ESULTS AT

EMBER

TATE LEVEL

.................................................................................................. 34

5.6. R

ESULTS AT

UROPEAN LEVEL

........................................................................................................... 35

5.7. EEA

PRIORITIES

ACTION STRANDS AND MONITORING

....................................................................... 37

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Glossary

Terms and acronyms are used for both singular and plural forms.

Term or acronym

AES

CARE

CPD

CSR

DEAP

DEQAR

DG EAC

DG EMPL

ECEC

EDUC

EEA

EENEE

EFTA

EIT

EIT HEI

EPALE

EQAR

EQF

ERDF

ESF+

ET2010

ET2020

ETM

Meaning or definition

Adult Education Survey

Artificial intelligence

Cohesion’s Action for Refugees in Europe

High-Level Group on Education and Training Coordination Board

Continuous professional development

Country-specific recommendations

Digital Education Action Plan

Database of External Quality Assurance Results

Directorate-General

Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture

Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion

Early childhood education and care

Education Committee

European Education Area

European Expert Network on Economics of Education

European Free Trade Association

European Institute of Innovation and Technology

European Institute of Innovation and Technology Innovation Capacity Building for Higher Education

European Parliament

Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in Europe

European Quality Assurance Register

European Qualifications Framework

European Regional Development Fund

European Social Fund Plus

Education and Training 2010

Education and Training 2020

Education and Training Monitor

European Union

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

EYCS

HEI

HLG

ICILS

ICT

ITE

LFS

LGBTIQ

NESET

NQF

OECD

PISA

REACT-EU

RRF

SGIB

STEM

TFEU

TSI

UNESCO

UOE

VET

WG DELTA

WG ECEC

WG Equality and Values

WG HE

WG Schools

WG Schools – Pathways

Education, Youth, Culture and Sport Council

Higher education

Higher education institution

High-Level Group on Education and Training

International Computer and Information Literacy Study

Information and communications technology

Initial teacher training

EU Labour Force Survey

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, queer

Member State

Network of Experts working on the Social Dimension of Education and Training

National Qualifications Framework

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

Programme for International Student Assessment

Recovery Assistance for Cohesion and the Territories of Europe

Recovery and Resilience Facility

Standing Group on Indicators and Benchmarks

Strategic priority

Science, technology, engineering and mathematics

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Technical Support Instrument

United Nations

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

UNESCO-UIS / OECD / Eurostat joint data collection

Vocational education and training

(EEA strategic framework) working group

Working Group on Digital Education: learning, teaching and assessment

Working Group on Early Childhood Education and Care

Working Group on Equality and Values in Education and Training

Working Group on Higher Education

Working Group on Schools

Working Group on Schools sub-group Pathways to School Success

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

WG Schools – Learning for

Sustainability

WG VET and the Green

Transition

Working Group on Schools sub-group Learning for Sustainability

Working Group on Vocational Education and Training (VET) and the Green Transition

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

NTRODUCTION

This staff working document describes the purpose and methodology and presents the main

findings of the European Commission’s interim evaluation of the strategic framework for

European cooperation in education and training towards the European Education Area

(EEA) 2021-2030. The EEA strategic framework was set out by the Council Resolution of

February 2021

, and complemented by the Council Resolution on the strategic

framework’s governance structure of November 2021

and the Council Resolution ‘The

European Education Area: Looking to 2025 and beyond’ of May 2023

Purpose, scope and methodology of the evaluation

Purpose

Based on the 2021 Council Resolution establishing the EEA strategic framework, and in

line with the European Commission’s

Better Regulation Guidelines,

the purpose was to

evaluate the EEA at the midpoint of the 2021-2030 strategic framework, assessing its

effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, relevance and EU added value. In line with the

Council Resolution, the results of this evaluation will inform reflections on and

preparations for European cooperation towards the EEA in the next cycle (2026-2030),

with the aim of reinforcing the EEA’s contribution to Europe’s competitiveness,

preparedness and resilience, social cohesion, equity and fairness, as well as democracy and

EU values.

Scope

Data was collected in a structured way between 2021, when the Council Resolution on the

EEA strategic framework was adopted, and June 2024. The evaluation was discussed and

completed with inputs from Member State (MS) representatives at the meetings of the

High-Level Group (HLG) on Education and Training held in July and December 2024.

The evaluation assesses progress towards building the EEA at EU and MS level. It covers

the five EEA strategic priorities (SP) outlined in the Council Resolution of 2021 (see Table

2) and the six EEA implementation instruments (see Table 1). The global perspective of

cooperation is also considered.

Methodology

The Commission’s interim evaluation has been supported by an external support study,

which was carried out between January 2024 and March 2025

. It collected evidence

through desk research (portfolio analysis, policy context analysis, literature review,

citation analysis) and an extensive stakeholder consultation strategy consisting of

interviews, surveys and focus groups. The consultation strategy took a fully participatory

approach, engaging relevant EEA actors

and the wider education and training community

through open and targeted consultation activities, as summarised in Figure 1. An

interservice group made up of relevant Commission departments oversaw the evaluation.

OJ C 66, 26.2.2021.

This Council Resolution was preceded by the

Commission’s Communication on achieving the

EEA by 2025, (COM/2020/625

final).

OJ C 497, 10.12.2021

OJ C 185, 26.5.2023.

This Council Resolution was preceded by the Commission’s Communication on Progress towards

the achievement of the EEA, (COM/2022/700

final).

See Support study for the interim evaluation of the EEA (2021-2030) (July 2025).

EEA actors are the participants (policymakers, practitioners, stakeholder representatives, experts, etc.) participants in

activities under the EEA implementation instruments, who act as multipliers towards their organisations and thus help

generate impact at the level of education and training systems.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Figure 1. Stakeholders’ participation in consultation activities

The data gathered was analysed by applying five main analytical techniques:

▪

portfolio analysis

to assess the comprehensiveness and complementarity of the

activities under each of the EEA implementation instruments to achieve progress

towards the SP;

contribution analysis

to assess the extent to which the EEA and its

implementation instruments have contributed to the effects observed;

qualitative comparative analysis

to identify the conditions required for EEA

implementation instruments to support actual reform processes in MS based on an

analysis of national case studies;

most significant change narratives

to identify EEA actors’ understanding of the

EEA, and what they value the most about European cooperation towards the EEA;

cost-effectiveness analysis

to assess a selected number of illustrative processes

and activities under the EEA implementation instruments in terms of costs accrued

and benefits generated.

The EU competence as outlined in the Treaties

and the open method of coordination

the field of education carried certain implications for the intervention logic

. The EEA

contributes to the development of education policies by encouraging cooperation and

supporting and supplementing MS’ actions. The impact of the EEA relies largely on MS

activities, their interest in exchanging and learning from each other, their use of the

instruments available at EU level and committing resources at national, regional and local

levels to pursue the common objectives.

Articles 165 and 166 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

The open method of coordination in the EU may be described as a form of ‘soft’ law. It is a form of intergovernmental

policymaking that does not result in binding EU legislative measures, and it does not require EU countries to introduce

or amend their laws.

See intervention logic in Figure 2 below.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

The evaluation faced several limitations, in particular:

▪

the broad scope of the EEA limiting the level of detail the evaluation can provide

for each activity and making assessment of overarching impacts challenging;

the results of the European cooperation towards the EEA on national, regional, and

local policies being non-linear and also influenced by the EU’s broader agenda and

other international initiatives;

the indirect impact of European cooperation towards the EEA on the ground,

making quantification of its contribution to results and impacts impossible;

the short implementation timeframe limiting the ability of the evaluation to

comprehensively assess impacts;

the lack of a clear baseline to measure progress against, as this is the first evaluation

of an overarching EU education and training policy framework.

To mitigate these limitations, the data collection tools were designed to capture concrete

examples of impact, and contribution analysis was used to validate assumptions that would

allow for conclusions on impact to a higher degree of certainty. The methodology,

including how it addressed the above limitations, is detailed in Annexes I and II.

Table 1. EEA implementation instruments

EEA implementation

instrument

Scope

Council of the EU (Education, Youth, Culture and Sport Council (EYCS)) and the

Council’s Education Committee (EDUC)

HLG and its Coordination Board (CB)

Directors-General (DG) formations

EEA strategic framework working groups (WG), Standing Group on Indicators and

Benchmarks (SGIB) and other Commission expert groups

Communities of practice like the Learning Lab on Investing in Quality Education

and Training

Alignment of funding priorities (e.g. European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), European

Regional Development Fund (ERDF) including Interreg, Recovery and Resilience

Facility (RRF)) with EEA SP and take-up of structural support for reforms

(Technical Support Instrument, TSI)

Initiatives adopted by the Commission and/or the Council, including Commission

Communications and Council Recommendations. Evaluation covered 19 of such

initiatives (adopted and/or implemented under the first 2021-2025 cycle of the

EEA strategic framework). (See Annex III for full list.)

Projects and calls funded at EU level (primarily through Erasmus+ programme)

aimed at learners, practitioners and/or education and training institutions.

Evaluation covered 17 of such projects and calls. (See Annex III for full list.)

EU-level targets in education and training

Education and Training Monitor (ETM)

Indicators developed by SGIB

Country-specific recommendations (CSR) as part of the European Semester

DG EAC-DG EMPL EEA Taskforce

EEA portal

European Education Summits

EU platforms like the European School Education Platform

EEA midterm review event

EEA communication contract

Sector specific events and communication campaigns linked to specific initiatives

or projects

Governance

Mobilisation of EU funds

and instruments for

national reforms

Strategic EEA initiatives

EU-level projects and calls

Reporting, monitoring and

evaluating progress

Communication and

dissemination

The following seven EU-level targets should be attained to fully realise the EEA: (1) The share of low-achieving 15-

year-olds in reading, mathematics and science should be less than 15%, by 2030; (2) The share of low-achieving eight-

graders in computer and information literacy should be less than 15%, by 2030; (3) At least 96% of children between

3 years old and the starting age for compulsory primary education should participate in early childhood education and

care, by 2030; (4) The share of early leavers from education and training should be less than 9%, by 2030; (5) The

share of 25-34-year-olds with tertiary educational attainment should be at least 45%, by 2030; (6) The share of recent

graduates from VET benefiting from exposure to work-based learning during their vocational education and training

should be at least 60%, by 2025; (7) At least 47% of adults aged 25-64 should have participated in learning during the

last 12 months, by 2025.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

HAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION

2.1. Description of the intervention and its objectives

Education and training systems are essential for boosting Europe’s competitiveness,

democracy and cohesion, and are the foundation for personal fulfilment, employability,

and active and responsible citizenship. The right to quality and inclusive education,

training and lifelong learning is the first principle of the

European Pillar of Social Rights.

The EEA (2021-2030) is a single overarching framework that brings together education

and training policies and investments across the EU to deliver high-quality education and

training for all, in line with Articles 165 and 166 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the

European Union (TFEU). It supports MS in developing their national education and

training systems in line with shared priorities and strengthens transnational cooperation on

education and training, which is voluntary. European cooperation towards the EEA builds

on previous cooperation frameworks, notably

Education and Training 2020

and

Education

and Training 2010

(ET2020 and ET2010 respectively). Erasmus+ is the main EU

programme in the area of education and training and is a key enabler of the EEA.

The strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training towards the

EEA sets out five SP.

Table 2. EEA SP as set out in the 2021 Council Resolution

SP1

SP2

SP3

SP4

SP5

Improving quality, equity, inclusion, and success for all in education and training

Making lifelong learning and mobility a reality for all

Enhancing competences and motivation in the education profession (teachers and trainers)

Reinforcing European higher education

Supporting the green and digital transitions in and through education and training

European cooperation towards the EEA supports MS in their efforts to build more resilient,

high-quality inclusive education that covers all learning contexts (formal, non-formal and

informal learning) across all levels – from early childhood education and schools to higher

education, vocational education and training, and adult learning. It acknowledges the role

of a global perspective in cooperation on education and training, which has become an

essential component of EU external policies, grounded in European values and the

principles of cooperation and solidarity.

The EEA provides a comprehensive framework for cooperation that can help bridge the

innovation gap and equip learners with the digital, green and cross-cutting skills that are

essential for creating a resilient and competitive economy. Robust education and training

systems are a necessary condition for a thriving single market, which is critical for

fostering research and development, driving digital and green innovation, and securing

strategic autonomy

. Furthermore, European cooperation towards the EEA contributes

to the development of a more inclusive and participatory democracy by promoting

democratic values and by empowering individuals to participate actively in Europe’s

democratic processes. By enhancing access to lifelong learning and facilitating mobility

across borders, the EEA strategic framework reinforces social cohesion and ensures that

Europe’s knowledge and skills base is future-ready.

Letta, Enrico. (2024). Much more than a market

Draghi, Mario. (2024). The future of European competitiveness

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Intervention logic of the EEA 2021-2030

The EEA supports MS in their efforts to develop, reform and evaluate policies and

practices, and strengthens transnational cooperation in education and training. The impact

of the EEA on policy debates and decision-making processes can range from agenda

setting to direct contributions on shaping new strategies or measures. The EEA also enables

more effective cooperation between policymakers, civil society organisations, social

partners, practitioners, and academic and policy researchers in the areas related to EEA

SP. At operational level this means that European cooperation towards the EEA seeks to:

▪

build synergies between different levels of governance;

enable and support co-creation and mutual learning;

ensure alignment between funding and policy priorities;

carry out dissemination and communication activities;

encourage an evidence-informed approach to policy design and investment;

improve performance monitoring and analysis of progress towards EU-level

targets.

These general and operational objectives are pursued through six EEA implementation

instruments. Each objective can be addressed through one or several instruments. Each

instrument is associated with a set of unique activities and outputs (see Section 3).

Figure 2. Intervention logic of the EEA

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

2.2. Point(s) of comparison

Points of comparison between ET2020 and the EEA strategic framework

There is a high level of connection and continuity between the activities carried out under

ET2020 and those carried out under the EEA. The 2019 assessment of ET2020’s tools and

deliverables highlighted the potential of the initiative to further strengthen European

cooperation in education and training

. Although the ET2020 strategic objectives were

considered broad and flexible, the need to streamline them was highlighted, as this would

help make the framework a strong and consistent driving force for change across education

and training systems. The governance structure of ET2020 included a High-level group,

whose informal nature was highly appreciated, but it was felt that the group needed a

stronger role on steering strategic issues. The working groups were assessed as adequate

for addressing ET2020 objectives and priorities and considered an important forum for

cooperation on sectoral and cross-cutting issues related to education and training.

As such, the EEA strategic framework was designed to build upon previous cooperation

frameworks, with some adjustments.

Points of comparison between the intended impacts of the EEA strategic framework

The long-term impacts of the EEA are expected to include improved education and training

and better labour market outcomes. To establish a baseline with points for comparison,

three groups of indicators were considered as appropriate for measuring the long-term

impact of European cooperation towards the EEA, namely: (i) participation in education

and training (including attainment of qualifications); (ii) the achievement of skills; and (iii)

labour market outcomes. The points of comparison focused on trends – wherever possible

– prior to the launch of the EEA strategic framework.

Crises occurring during the period in the focus of this evaluation (such as the COVID-19

pandemic and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine) have had a considerable impact

on education and training systems and the labour market. It should be noted that the EEA

is only one of the contributing initiatives (at various levels) that seek to promote the aims

of the SP and the EU-level targets. These trends should therefore not be regarded as

illustrating the impact (or lack thereof) of European cooperation towards the EEA, but

rather the context in which such cooperation takes place.

Participation in education and training, and attainment of qualifications

Several EU-level indicators relate to the levels of participation in education and training

and to obtaining qualifications

. On average in the EU, participation in early childhood

education and care (ECEC) stood at 92.5% in 2021, demonstrating good progress towards

the target of at least 96% of children starting ECEC from the age of 3 by 2030. Early school

leaving rates have dropped over the past few years, with an EU average of 9.8% in 2021,

slightly above the 2030 target of less than 9%. Progress has also been made in tertiary

educational attainment, with 41.5% of 25-34-year-olds having completed a short-cycle

tertiary, bachelor, master, doctoral or equivalent level of education in 2021 (EU target: at

least 45% by 2030). Finally, participation rates in adult learning (excluding guided on-the-

job training) steadily increased from 34.4% to 37.4% between 2011 and 2016 (latest

available data for establishing a baseline). However, this is still significantly below the

Assessment of tools and deliverables under the framework for European cooperation in education and training

(ET2020), European Commission, 2019.

2021 is the baseline for the EEA. More recent data are included in Table 6.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

EU-level targets of at least 47% by 2025 and the European Pillar of Social Rights headline

target of 60% by 2030.

Achievement of skills

Education and training systems play a crucial role in skills acquisition, and therefore in

ensuring learners’ prospects for future success. According to PISA data

underachievement among 15-year-olds is on the rise in reading, mathematics and science,

and well above the EU-level target of an underachievement share below 15%. In 2018, the

share of low achieving students stood at 22.9% in mathematics, 22.5% in reading and

22.3% in science. There was also a significant equity gap of 19.3 percentage points on

average across the EU, with students of low socio-economic status 5.6 times more likely

to underachieve in basic skills than students of high socio-economic status. There was no

comparative data available to establish a suitable baseline for the level of digital skills

for work-based learning for VET graduates

. The target for reducing underachievement in

digital skills has been set at below 15% by 2030 and the target for participation in work-

based learning has been set at 60% by 2025.

Labour market outcomes

Obtaining higher levels of qualifications tends to be associated with higher rates of

employment, as reflected by the EU-average rates of employment by level of education

attained. In 2021, the rate of employment for 20-64-year-olds with less than primary,

primary and lower secondary education was 55.0%, while the rate for those with upper

secondary and post-secondary non-tertiary education was 72.7% (within this category

62.4% for general education and 76.4% for vocational education) and the rate for those

with tertiary education was 85.0%.

European Commission:

Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, PISA 2018 and the EU –

Striving

for social fairness through education,

Publications Office, 2019.

Only seven EU countries (Denmark, Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Portugal and Finland) participated in the

2018 International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS), rendering the data unsuitable for establishing a

baseline for comparison. 22 EU countries participated in the 2023 ICILS study, including Austria, Belgium (Flanders),

Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany (North Rhine Westphalia), Greece, Hungary, Italy,

Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden. This broad

participation marks a significant step forward, offering a much more comprehensive view of EU students’ digital skills

proficiency.

There is no available data for establishing a suitable baseline, with the earliest data available dating to 2021. However,

participation in work-based learning by VET graduates has surpassed the EU-level target of 60%, with an EU average

of 60.5 in 2021, 60.3% in 2022 and of 64.6% in 2023.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

OW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATION PERIOD

Current state of play

Implementation of the EEA strategic framework 2021-2024

The first cycle of the implementation of the EEA began with the Council Resolution of

2021 setting out the SP and direction for the work. Several activities have been

implemented since then. This section provides an overview of these activities under each

of the implementation instruments to support progress towards the EEA SP and EU-level

targets. Progress towards the seven EU-level targets has been mixed, with one target

reached, several on track to being reached and others still requiring significant efforts.

Trends in the progress towards these targets since the EEA’s launch are discussed in

Section 5.1 (see Table 6).

Governance

The

EEA governance bodies

provided a political steer and coordinated approaches on

shared priorities and challenges. They have demonstrated a high level of flexibility in

responding to crises such as COVID-19 and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.

The

EEA WG

supported mutual learning and exchange of best practices through regular

meetings, peer-learning activities and webinars. WG provided opportunities for EEA

actors (from MS, non-EU countries, EU agencies, international organisations and

stakeholder organisations) to participate in knowledge exchange and co-creation (i.e.

setting priorities and developing policies with the input of all actors). The

SGIB

supported

the Commission in work towards building supplementary indicators in the areas of equity,

teachers and learning for sustainability. Several EU-led initiatives also promoted mutual

learning through

expert groups

focused on supportive learning environments and quality

investment in education and training, the community of practice of the

Learning Lab,

policy dialogue and Team Europe approaches, and through European guidance for the

development of national school education career frameworks.

Mobilisation of EU funds and instruments

Commission departments have worked together and with MS to support

alignment

between the EEA SP and the use of the relevant EU funds,

taking into account the

respective scope of their support and their management modes. EU funds and instruments,

including ESF+, ERDF, RRF and TSI, facilitated reforms at national and regional levels

towards the EEA SP. The ESF+ prioritised skills and workforce resilience, while the ERDF

supported infrastructure and equipment for quality and inclusive education as well as skills

for smart specialisation and cooperation in education and training in the Interreg context.

The RRF supported national reforms and investments in broad policy areas relevant to

EEA SP. The TSI provided technical support for related reform projects (72 interventions

in 23 MS over 2021-2024). Over EUR 150 bn (EUR 75 bn from RRF

, 40.4 bn from

Estimated expenditure based on the pillar tagging methodology for the Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard and

corresponds to the measures allocated to the policy areas ‘Adult Learning, Including Continuous Vocational Education

And Training; Recognition And Validation Of Skills’, ‘Early childhood education and care: accessibility, affordability,

quality and inclusiveness, including digitalisation and infrastructure’, ‘General, vocational and higher education:

accessibility, affordability, quality and inclusiveness, including digitalisation and infrastructure’, ‘Human capital in

digitalisation’ and ‘Green skills and jobs’, as primary or secondary policy area. Source: European Commission’s own

calculation. The data was retrieved on 11 February 2025.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

ESF+, 8.7 bn from ERDF and over 26 bn from Erasmus+ in 2021-2027.) have been

invested in education, skills and infrastructure, promoting progress towards the EEA SP.

Strategic EEA initiatives

Nineteen

strategic initiatives

(mainly Council Recommendations, and some Commission

Communications)

were launched or advanced

, guided by extensive consultation and

co-creation including in the WG, followed by Commission proposals negotiated in

Council. These initiatives provide a structured framework and strategic guidance to drive

changes in national policies, supporting progress towards the EEA SP. Council

Recommendations addressed all areas of relevance to the EEA SP, such as promoting

school success, enhancing mobility. supporting learning for sustainability, improving

digital education and skills, or enhancing European higher education. Several initiatives

launched before 2021, such as those on inclusive education and language learning and on

automatic recognition of qualifications, continued to be supported under the current

strategic framework.

EU-level projects and calls

Seventeen

EU-level projects and calls

(most funded under Erasmus+)

supported

education and training institutions and practitioners

under the EEA strategic

framework.

The majority of these projects and calls provided concrete opportunities for

beneficiaries to exchange information and experiences and co-create scalable practices,

and to develop concrete skills through project-based activities. Projects and calls, such as

Erasmus+ Teacher Academies

and

Centres of Vocational Excellence,

addressed key

education priorities, including teacher training and vocational excellence. Tools for

facilitating education and training have also been developed as part of this implementation

instrument (e.g. the

European Student Card initiative, European Digital Credentials for

Learning).

Reporting, monitoring and evaluating progress

The

ETM

tracked progress towards EU-level targets and provided information on the

reforms under way in the MS. At the request of the Council,

new indicators

were

developed in areas like equity, the teaching profession and sustainability. The ETM

country reports were used to inform CSR under the European Semester. In 2024, CSR

linked to education and training topics were issued to 18 MS.

Communication and dissemination

Activities to

communicate and disseminate EEA activities

included the

EEA portal,

European Education Summits, the EEA communication contract, the EEA midterm review

event and targeted campaigns. Between 2021 and 2023, the EEA portal, which provides

information on resources and funding opportunities, attracted 4.5 million unique visitors

and generated 10.2 million page views. The European Education Summits provided

stakeholders with a forum to discuss progress and opportunities for collaboration, while

social media campaigns amplified the reach of EEA initiatives, including outside the EU.

An additional 2.6 bn from the external funds has supported international mobilities of EU students, staff, youth and

youth workers towards partner countries, as well as partnerships between EU and third countries’ higher education and

VET institutions.

See Annex III for the list of strategic EEA initiatives.

See Annex III for the 17 EU-level projects and calls that were included in the scope of this evaluation (given their link

the EEA strategic framework).

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

VALUATION FINDINGS

(

ANALYTICAL PART

)

4.1. To what extent was the intervention successful and why?

In the absence of regulatory power, the EEA’s ability to drive impact is indirect and stems

from

combining different instruments and support mechanisms,

setting quantified

targets, establishing EU policy frameworks, providing policy guidance, supporting

cooperation, allocating EU funds, monitoring progress and supporting evaluation of

relevant reforms. The first subsection on overall effectiveness summarises main findings

in two respects: Firstly, results that participation in the EEA strategic framework (and

engagement with its EEA implementation instruments) brought for individual EEA actors

(who act as potential multipliers), organisations, and education and training systems.

Secondly, it zooms in on the EEA actors who drive the overall governance and are

therefore key to the generation of results and impacts. Subsequent sections present an

overview of evaluation results on the effectiveness of the six EEA implementation

instruments, on progress under the five SP, and on promoting education and training from

a global perspective. The chapter concludes by an assessment of the efficiency of EEA

implementation instruments and of the coherence of the EEA strategic framework.

4.1.1. Overall effectiveness

Key findings on results at the level of EEA actors, organisations and systems

The evaluation assessed results at three interconnected levels:

▪

EEA actors:

participants in activities under the EEA implementation instruments

(policymakers, practitioners, stakeholder representatives, experts, etc.)

organisations:

ministries and stakeholder bodies where follow-up actions towards

EEA SP are taken

education and training systems

at national/regional level.

The analysis highlighted specific achievements at all three levels, though their extent

varies. The

most significant direct results

of the EEA were in the areas of

mutual

learning, knowledge generation and structured coordination mechanisms

through

various EEA governance bodies. Results were most visible at the level of EEA actors. At

organisational level,

the biggest results were observed for those organisations that take a

systematic approach to sharing information and organisational learning.

System-level results

were best achieved when countries were proactive in making the best

combined and

coordinated use of several EEA implementation instruments.

overview of results at the three levels identified with evidence of the contribution of

specific EEA implementation instruments is provided in Table 3 below.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Table 3. Findings on results at different levels

Results achieved

Evidence of contribution made by the EEA implementation instruments

At individual level among EEA actors

Improved

•

Improved awareness was enabled by EEA governance that engaged EEA actors continuously

understanding and

and enabled the reiteration and internalisation of EEA’s SP (to varying degrees among the EEA

awareness of the

actors involved in the HLG and WG). EEA governance also contributed to increased awareness

EEA policy agenda

on the use of EU funds.

and of the funds that

•

Communication and dissemination, especially at European Education Summits, also helped raise

can be used to

awareness on key EEA SP and EU-level initiatives and projects, including among those EEA

support reforms

actors who were not directly involved in the governance bodies.

•

EEA governance, through regular meetings and exchanges, allowed EEA actors to build

knowledge on good practices and common challenges.

Increased

•

EU-level projects and calls provided a foundation for improving the knowledge of those EEA

knowledge of good

actors not involved directly in governance on good practices and common challenges.

practices and

•

Activities that were part of the EEA implementation instrument reporting, monitoring and

common challenges

evaluation were used by EEA actors (e.g. the ETM comparative and country reports) to inform

their discussions in the HLG/CB and WG, as well as (to some extent) within organisations at

national level.

•

Engagement in co-creation practices was enabled through EEA governance, including the WG

(e.g. through the development of thematic outputs and contribution to strategic EEA initiatives).

Enhanced

•

EU-level projects and calls involved EEA actors in the exchange and co-creation of practices.

engagement in co-

Many EU-level projects and calls showed positive trends in participation, reflecting enhanced

creation practices

engagement.

•

In some cases (VET), tasks attributed to the WG could have been attributed to other bodies

instead (Advisory Committee on Vocational Training).

At organisation level

•

Results were mixed on improved coordination and knowledge / sharing of practices via EEA

Coordination and

governance and EU-level projects and calls. In some cases, the coordination and dissemination

knowledge/sharing

of knowledge within organisations (gained via EEA actors in WG) was very well established; in

of practices

other cases, it was limited and not systematic.

•

EU-level projects and calls enabled co-creation between participating organisations (e.g. EIT’s

Co-creation

Innovation Capacity Building for Higher Education initiative (EIT HEI)), but the extent of the

results was not always clear.

•

Outputs associated with reporting, monitoring and evaluation of progress (e.g. ETM, Learning

Use of evidence for

Lab) and EEA governance (knowledge gained by EEA actors via WG, thematic outputs) were

policymaking

taken up to a varying extent by the MS in informing their policies. Examples of success were

identified, yet they were not applied systematically across MS.

Follow-up on

strategic EEA

•

The extent of further operationalisation of strategic EEA initiatives by EEA actors at national

initiatives by EEA

level varied, and the nature of national follow-up was unclear, due to a lack of national reporting.

actors at MS level

At system level

•

MS are pursuing reforms that contribute to building the EEA. In some cases, these were directly

inspired by involvement in the EEA governance. Alignment between the policies of MS and the

Agenda setting,

EEA SP was observed.

However, because the SP are broad, and given the voluntary nature of

innovation and

European cooperation in education and training and its ‘soft’ instruments, causality (direct

policy development

influence of the EEA) could not be confirmed.

at national level

•

EU-level projects and calls drove policy progress in MS (e.g. the European Universities initiative

in relation to facilitating transnational cooperation, recognition, micro-credentials, joint

programmes and degrees, etc.).

•

The instrument for reporting, monitoring and evaluating progress contributed to the use of new

knowledge, but the systematisation of knowledge was not yet evident.

•

Information produced within the EEA remained to be processed and synthesised into accessible

Use of new

resources. Knowledge transfer within EEA governance requires a more systematic approach –

knowledge

not simply by sharing the growing volume of information, but by organising and distilling the

(including evidence-

wealth of information into actionable insights. Currently, the sheer quantity of documentation

informed

makes navigation challenging for EEA actors. This hinders synergies between governance

policymaking)

bodies, as well as across other implementation instruments.

•

The EEA’s Learning Lab holds significant potential in this regard, especially for strengthening

national capacity to conduct impact evaluations in education and training.

Increased awareness

•

EU funds and instruments were used by the MS to support reforms that were in line with the

of EU funds and

EEA SP. EU funds and instruments appear to be crucial in ensuring that MS have the capacity to

instruments and

pursue reforms that align with the EEA SP.

their use

In the area of adult learning, the impact has been limited, in particular on interplay and impact with labour market

policy and structures.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Key findings on the effectiveness of EEA governance

The evaluation results showed that the reformed governance of the EEA has contributed

a better understanding of shared priorities and challenges

in education and training

and increased ownership

among participants in the various governance bodies.

The reformed governance, driven at informal level by the HLG, has contributed to

strengthening the political steer

on shared priorities and challenges. The shift towards a

more strategic agenda setting and greater continuity in the work of the HLG was attributed

to the HLG CB. The efforts to implement the 18-month policy agenda could provide a

further boost to strategic agenda setting. However, limitations were seen in various degrees

of commitment among Council Presidencies to steer European cooperation on common

priorities and challenges. Furthermore, the HLG is still to take up its role in providing

steering on the key topics in the two Council Recommendations on digital education and

skills of November 2023.

Mutual learning and the exchange of good practices in the WG are among the EEA

activities that have been the most effective in helping to build the EEA.

The WG

contributed to the development of strategic EEA initiatives and supported their national

follow-up, by providing a valuable forum for information sharing, co-creation, peer

learning and exchange on national policy developments. However, these exchanges were

not always consistently translated into concrete policy actions at MS level. There is

potential to optimise the WG’ working methods to strengthen their effectiveness, by

exploring different formats and approaches. Further opportunities to provide peer-

counselling support to MS for implementing evidence-informed reforms, including for

small groups of countries facing similar challenges, could also be explored.

The SGIB has made progress in promoting the systematic collection of data and has

contributed to the development of new types of indicators

and to evidence-informed

policy discussions. At the same time, there were gaps in information across governance

bodies on the status of implementing key strategic EEA initiatives. According to

stakeholder consultations, systematic reporting would help to increase consistency and

regularity in the way the evidence is used.

The evaluation concluded that the effectiveness of the EEA strategic framework

governance was somewhat limited by an

inconsistent flow of information between WG,

DG formations, HLG and EDUC.

In addition, EEA actors did not always clearly

understand the specific roles of and the lines of cooperation between some of these

governance bodies. Efforts by the HLG CB to streamline activities and links between the

WG, the HLG and EDUC still need to be strengthened (see Section 5.2.).

4.1.2. Effectiveness by EEA implementation instruments

The

delivery and combination of EEA implementation instruments

were given a

positive assessment for enabling collaboration, flexibility in crisis response, mutual

learning and other ways of supporting national reforms. Table 4 summarises the main

findings regarding the most important identified

strengths,

as well as

areas for possible

improvement

with a view to improving the instruments’ effectiveness.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Table 4. Key results and areas of improvement for the effectiveness of EEA implementation instruments

Strengths

Governance

•

Better understanding of shared priorities & challenges

•

Stronger political steering & more strategic agenda setting

•

Highly appreciated mutual learning & knowledge

exchange

•

Co-creation of strategic EEA initiatives & support for

national follow-up

•

Flexibility of EEA governance enabled effective EU-level

coordinated response to tackle the education impact of

crises (COVID-19 pandemic, Russia’s war of aggression

against Ukraine)

•

Providing a longer-term comprehensive policy framework

& guidance for further work by policymakers and

practitioners

•

Co-creation of initiatives increases ownership by MS &

other EEA actors

•

Impact reinforced where there is complementary support

for national follow-up through other EEA implementation

instruments

•

Use of EU funds & instruments align with EEA SP

•

Increasing awareness & knowledge of available EU funds

& technical support in MS

•

Structured discussions on funding priorities between

Commission departments responsible for EU funds and

policies help contribution to EEA SP

•

The European Semester and the CSR serve as channel

through which the EEA strategic framework informs

programming of EU funds for national reforms

•

Some actions (e.g. EIT HEI initiative, European

Universities initiative, European Student Card initiative)

achieved high visibility & already demonstrated impact

confirmed by external evaluation studies

•

Enabling internalisation of EEA SP at practitioner level,

potential to promote them at learner level

•

Contribution to system-level change stronger, when clear

links with strategic EEA initiatives

•

Erasmus+ funded activities support progress towards

EEA (e.g. increased capacity of organisations,

contribution to policy development, promotion of

inclusion & diversity, digital & green transitions,

participation in democratic life & civic engagement)

•

EU-level targets provide a direction for reforms

•

ETM serves as an important flagship publication

providing useful, high-quality quantitative and qualitative

evidence that can support policymaking

•

Under the EEA strategic framework, ETM extended its

scope to new indicators fields (some of which can support

target-setting)

•

SGIB & Learning Lab contribute to building a culture of

evidence-informed policymaking in education and

training, and help guide policy monitoring and evaluation

practices, considering especially the identified need for

support at national level

Areas for improvement

•

Clarify roles of different EEA governance bodies

•

Reinforce systematic feedback loop and linkages between

the various bodies

•

Optimise WG’ working methods and boost dissemination

of outputs to facilitate further organisational learning at

national level, leading to system improvement

•

Improve synergies with governance in other sectors (such

as employment)

Strategic EEA initiatives

•

Increase focus on and limit the number of strategic EEA

initiatives, in view of MS’ limited capacity for follow-up

Launch evaluations of flagship strategic EEA initiatives

(recency of initiatives & lack of MS reporting on

implementation limit the evidence base on results &

impacts)

Mobilisation of EU funds & instruments

•

The task of assessing the quality of investments could be

supported through more systematic reporting and capacity

building support, including at the national and regional

level, on the outcomes/results of investments linked to the

EEA SP and by embedding EEA SP in impact evaluations

of EU funds. These measures could help improve the

evidence base.

EU-level projects & annual calls

•

Communication on EU-level projects and calls to use EEA

brand and be embedded in renewed EEA narrative

•

Evidence on the effectiveness of EU-level projects & calls,

and their links to EEA SP to be reinforced

Reporting, monitoring & evaluating progress

•

Monitoring of effectiveness & national impact of EEA

implementation instruments (especially follow-up of

strategic EEA initiatives) is hampered by lack of

engagement of MS in data collection for EU-level

monitoring & evaluation. This is a challenge for evidence-

informed policymaking through open method of

coordination.

•

ETM could be further used to stimulate policy dialogue at

national level

•

Available channels of data collection on education &

training systems (e.g. Eurydice, independent expert

networks such as EENEE, NESET) to be better connected

with EEA SP and synthetised to inform the EEA

•

Renew and reinforce EEA ‘brand’ to ensure distinctiveness

& recognition among stakeholders who do not participate

in EEA activities

•

Renewed EEA narrative to drive overarching

communication strategy ensuring alignment of all EU-level

education & training activities

Communication & dissemination

•

Building a community of education & training

stakeholders who have an aligned view of EEA SP

•

Better visibility and understanding of EEA activities (e.g.

through EEA portal, European Education summit)

•

Essential in supporting effectiveness of other instruments

•

Information shared can support national policy design &

implementation

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Box 1. Examples of combined support from several EEA implementation instruments

▪

Improvement of ECEC.

This included efforts to improve quality standards through strategic EEA

initiatives (the European quality framework for ECEC), supported by mutual learning in WG ECEC,

participation of ECEC institutions in Erasmus+ projects, and through mobilisation of EU funds and

instruments (RRF, Cohesion Policy funds, TSI).

Support for disadvantaged learners.

This included the Pathways to School Success (strategic EEA

initiative), policy guidance developed in WG Schools, WG Equality and Values and the Expert Group

on supportive learning environments for groups at risk of underachievement and for supporting well-

being at school, mobilisation of EU funds and instruments, and monitoring under ETM.

Boosting digital skills of learners.

European cooperation towards the EEA, alongside actions under

the Digital Education Action Plan (DEAP), provided guidance for enhancing digital skills across all

education levels (strategic EEA initiatives), and mobilised substantial EU funding and technical

support. They were supported by EU-level projects and calls (European Universities initiative) and

mutual learning in WG (including WG DELTA and WG HE).

Acceleration of the Bologna Process in higher education.

European cooperation towards the EEA

(EEA strategic initiatives, mutual learning under WGs, EU-level projects and calls) accelerated the

Bologna Process, which would otherwise have been likely to progress more slowly (or in certain

cases not at all). This speeded up the alignment of higher education systems, enhanced mobility, and

improved the recognition of qualifications across countries.

▪

E.g. in Lithuania ESF+ and RRF supported the implementation of the reform to increase inclusiveness and quality in

ECEC through renewed curriculum guidelines, established quality assurance mechanism and improved teacher

training. In Bulgaria the introduction of a national quality framework was supported under RRF and TSI. (Evidence

from national case studies, see evaluation support study, July 2025).

E.g. in Romania implementation of education reform to address equity gaps, attendance, learning outcomes,

progression to HE and employment was supported by strategic EEA initiatives (such as the Council Recommendations

on Pathways to School Success, and on promoting common values, inclusive education and European dimension of

teaching), as well as EU funding (RRF, TSI, ESF+). In Portugal implementation of reforms on inclusive education and

school autonomy were influenced by discussions in EEA governance bodies (EYCS, WG Schools), with measures

supported by Erasmus+, ESF+, technical support and RRF. CSRs and ETM have been used to inform monitoring

progress. (Evidence from national case studies, see evaluation support study, July 2025).

E.g. in Austria reform to digitalise higher education has been supported through EU-level projects and calls (e.g.

European Universities initiative), RRF, TSI, Reform is in line with relevant CSRs. In Czechia a comprehensive reform

to support digital transition was informed by discussions in WG DELTA, aligned with DigComp, and supported by

EU-level projects and calls (European Universities initiative), RRF and TSI. (Evidence from national case studies, see

evaluation support study, July 2025).

E.g. in Croatia reform of quality assurance in higher education were supported by mutual learning in WG HE, informed

by EEA strategic initiatives, and supported under RRF, ESF+, TSI. In Italy the reform on automatic recognition of

qualifications was initiated in reaction to the Council Recommendation on promoting automatic mutual recognition

and was supported under Erasmus+. In Slovakia peer learning under WG HE contributed to amendments of the Higher

Education Quality Assurance act, and Erasmus+ and RRF supported implementation. (Evidence from national case

studies, see evaluation support study, July 2025).

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

4.1.3. Effectiveness by EEA strategic priorities

EEA implementation instruments facilitated progress towards the achievement of the

five EEA SP.

Notable progress towards the EEA SP was made at EU level, but this was

not consistently translated into progress in each MS at regional and national levels (see

Section 5.5.).

The current design of SP, which combines horizontal and sectoral priorities, ensures

comprehensive coverage of education sectors.

Though not every SP is relevant to all

education levels, the activities carried out under the EEA strategic framework and

complementary framework strategies in education and training (such as the European

Skills Agenda) covered all education and training sectors.

Intensity of support

for various SP

through different types of EEA implementation

instruments varied:

from high coverage (SP1, SP4, SP5 – digital), through medium (SP2,

SP5 – green), to low (SP3).

In addition to the EEA implementation instruments, the achievement of progress towards

the EEA SP was also influenced by the existence of

other policy frameworks

in education

and training.

In particular,

SP3 (teachers and trainers) received a low focus

as, unlike all other SP, it

was not supported by a dedicated strategic EEA initiative and there were no other

complementary EU policy frameworks that focused on the education profession. The

breadth of challenges across all EU MS in this area (teacher shortages, attractiveness of

the profession, working conditions etc.) suggests there is a need to strengthen efforts.

Table 5 summarises key evaluation findings regarding the effectiveness (and relevance) of

efforts by EEA SP, highlighting:

▪

coverage of education and training levels;

coverage by (support through)

EEA implementation instruments;

support by other

complementary frameworks

in education and training

(contributing to impact);

the most important

results;

persisting

challenges

that remain to be addressed.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Table 5. Key findings on SP

Education

levels

covered

ECEC: high

School: high

HE: high

VET: high

AL: high

Non-formal:

medium

Coverage by EEA

implementation

instruments

OVERALL: high

Governance: high

Mobilisation of EU funds:

high

Strategic initiatives: high

EU-level projects: high

Monitoring: high

Communication: high

Complementary

frameworks

EU Youth Strategy,

Child Guarantee;

Council

Recommendation on

vocational education

& training for

sustainable

competitiveness,

social fairness &

resilience

European Skills

Agenda; Council

Recommendation on

vocational education

& training for

sustainable

competitiveness,

social fairness &

resilience; Council

Resolution on a

European Agenda for

Adult Learning;

Osnabrück

Declaration; EU

Youth Strategy;

Council

Recommendation on

vocational education

& training for

sustainable

competitiveness,

social fairness &

resilience

(for VET

teachers & trainers)

Key results

Sharing good practices & fostering mutual learning (WG Schools-

Pathways, WG ECEC, WG Equality and Values, other expert

groups);

Evidence of progress in implementing strategic EEA initiatives

(Pathways to School Success, ECEC quality framework);

Establishment of common targets & indicators; progress in reducing

early school leaving;

Inclusion of the equity in education indicator in the 2022 EEA

progress report & ETM;

Support for learners with fewer opportunities through Erasmus+ &

European Solidarity Corps

Lifelong learning

Implementation of micro-credentials & automatic recognition

facilitated by referencing NQF to the EQF, digitalisation of the

Diploma Supplement via Europass, launch of DEQAR by the EQAR;

Mutual learning facilitated by WG Adult Learning.

Mobility

Virtual & blended mobility initiatives integrated into regular

programmes & courses;

European inter-university campuses developed by the European

Universities initiative;

Increased inclusiveness & flexibility for all types of learners;

Enhanced learners’ experiences;

Progress in learning mobility enabled by Erasmus+ & European

Solidarity Corps

Key remaining challenges

SP1:

quality,

equity,

inclusion

High underachievement & low top performance

in basic skills;

Persisting equity & inclusion gaps across and

within MS;

Structural challenges highlighted by COVID-

19;

Inclusion & support needs of refugees &

displaced persons from Ukraine

Lifelong learning

Low participation in adult learning;

Limited visibility of non-formal lifelong

learning (all levels);

Structural challenges in integrating Ukrainian

refugees into education and labour market;

Measures for integration and inclusion of

refugees remain primarily short-term

Learning mobility

Inclusivity issues, particularly for

disadvantaged learners;

Inconsistent implementation of automatic

recognition – only 12 MS with fully compliant

national legislation for the automatic

recognition of higher education qualifications

Teacher shortages, especially in STEM & ICT

and in remote & disadvantaged regions;

Challenges related to attracting, upskilling and

retaining talents across the MS;

Unsatisfactory working conditions, including

well-being at work, level of pay, recognition of

the teaching profession;

Lack of diversity & inclusion training or

measures to ensure the participation of teachers

in such training; No strategic EEA initiatives

primarily targeting teachers

SP2:

lifelong

learning

mobility

ECEC: low

School:

medium

HE: high

VET: high

AL: high

Non-formal:

high

OVERALL: medium/high

Governance: high

Mobilisation of EU funds:

high

Strategic initiatives: high

EU-level projects: covered

Monitoring: medium

Communication: medium

SP3:

teachers

& trainers

ECEC: high

School: high

HE: high

VET: high

AL: high

Non-formal:

high

OVERALL: medium/low

Governance: medium

Mobilisation of EU funds:

medium

Strategic initiatives: none

EU-level projects: medium

Monitoring: medium

Communication: medium

Teacher Academies & the European Innovative Teaching Award

enabled by Erasmus+ funding;

European guidance for the development of national career

frameworks;

Introduction of teacher-related indicators in 2023 ETM;

Recognition of progress achieved by EU-level projects & calls

supporting SP3 among EEA actors at national level

While EU projects and calls specifically attributed to EEA as part of this evaluation did not address SP2 as their primary thematic focus, the nature of this instrument and its support through Erasmus + is enabling

mobility and lifelong learning as the core of its design, and therefore contributes to the progress of SP2.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Education

levels

covered

Coverage by EEA

implementation

instruments

OVERALL: high

Governance: high

Mobilisation of EU funds:

medium

Strategic initiatives: high

EU-level projects: high

Monitoring: medium

Communication: high

Complementary

frameworks

Key results

Recognised progress among different EEA actors;

EU-level target on HE attainment is likely to be achieved; Visibility

& recognition of European Degree package, European Universities

initiative (65 European University alliances) and HEI initiative (in

cooperation with EIT) at institutional level;

Mutual learning facilitated by WG HE;

EEA-informed reforms in higher education across MS (largely driven

by the European Universities initiative); European Student Card

initiative scaling up and enabling digital exchanges of student data

between HEIs across the EEA;

Simplified management of student mobility & cross-border

validation of student status through European Student Card initiative

Initiatives to enhance digital competences & digital readiness of EEA

actors;

Mutual learning facilitated by WG DELTA;

DEAP contributing directly to the EEA;

Adoption of Council Recommendations on the key enabling factors

for successful digital education & training, and on improving the

provision of digital skills & competences in education & training

Key remaining challenges

SP4:

European

higher

education

ECEC: none

School: low

HE: high

VET: high

AL: low

Non-formal:

none

European Higher

Education Area /

Bologna Process

Legal obstacles in MS prevent more effective

transnational cooperation;

Long-term sustainability of European

Universities alliances;

Involvement of further European HEIs in digital

exchange of data through the Erasmus Without

Paper network

SP5: green

digital

ECEC: high

School: high

HE: high

VET: high

AL: high

Non-formal:

high

OVERALL: high

Governance: high

Mobilisation of EU funds:

high

Strategic initiatives: high

EU-level projects: high

Monitoring: medium

Communication: high

Digital Education

Action Plan

EU Youth Strategy;

Council

Recommendation on

vocational education

& training (VET) for

sustainable

competitiveness,

social fairness &

resilience

Green Deal; EU

Youth Strategy;

Council

Recommendation on

vocational education

& training (VET) for

sustainable

competitiveness,

social fairness &

resilience

SP5:

green

digital

ECEC: high

School: high

HE: high

VET: high

AL: high

Non-formal:

high

OVERALL: Medium

Governance: medium

Mobilisation of EU funds:

medium

Strategic initiatives: medium

EU-level projects: high

Monitoring: high

Communication: high

Adoption of Council Recommendation on learning for the green

transition and sustainable development; GreenComp;

Mutual learning facilitated by WG Schools and WG VET and the

Green Transition;

Dedicated community of practice around GreenComp embedded in

the Education for Climate Coalition mobilising EEA actors to

collaborate on the green transition;

Gradual integration of sustainability topics into curricula across all

MS;

Greener Erasmus+ & European Solidarity Corps providing

fundamental support through dedicated calls for forward-looking and

policy-experimentation projects; Sustainability as a focus topic in

several Erasmus+ Teacher Academies; Researchers at Schools

initiative

Tensions between the digital and green

transitions due to resource- and energy-

intensive nature of digital technologies;

Perception of insufficient mainstreaming of

achieving green & digital transitions together;

Longer legacy of prioritising the digital

transition under ET2020 contributing to

perception of disparity in focus; Need for

greater visibility of activities related to

sustainability within the EEA; Room for greater

exploitation of innovation in education to

advance the green & digital transitions

SP5 - Digital

Disparities in infrastructure and access to digital

tools; Scepticism of certain MS towards the use

of digital tools in education;

Advances in AI and concerns linked to AI

(ethics, capacity, infrastructure)

SP5 – Green

Practical implementation of Learning for

Sustainability hampered by educators’ lack of

capacity to design, facilitate & assess

transformative learning experiences;

Gap between attitudes & actions towards

sustainability

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

4.1.4. Promoting education and training from a global perspective

Cooperation under the EEA strategic framework contributed to advancing education

and training from a global perspective.

This was achieved through the EEA

implementation instruments that allow for participation of some non-EU countries.

candidate

and

European Economic Area / EFTA countries participated in some parts

of the EEA governance

(in particular in HLG, WG and SGIB), benefited from mutual

learning and exchange, and aligned closely with EEA SP. In particular, for EU candidate

countries, this participation in the EEA governance and peer learning significantly

supported the process of modernisation of their education and training systems, facilitating

alignment in view of enlargement.

Several EU-level projects and calls under the Erasmus+ programme open to some

non-EU countries proved effective in advancing the EEA SP and promoting the

global perspective

of European cooperation in education and training. One notable

example is the European Universities initiative, which brought progress towards the

strategic objectives of the Bologna Process by enabling higher education institutions in

other Bologna countries to take part in alliances as associated partners. The opening of the

European Universities alliances to the Western Balkans helped extend the benefits of this

initiative to close partners and potential future EU members. Other examples include EIT

HEI initiative, or activities that increasingly emphasise digitalisation, sustainability and

international reach through the Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps programmes.

The

Global Gateway Strategy

and the 2021

Western Balkans Agenda

reinforced the

EU’s commitment to supporting non-EU countries’ educational advancement, contributing

to regional integration and alignment with the EEA SP.

The

EEA served as an inspirational framework for international cooperation,

particularly in the Eastern Neighbourhood, Africa, Asia, and Latin America, through

initiatives like Erasmus Mundus and Jean Monnet actions that promoted high-level

international joint degrees and EU values outside the EU, and people-to-people dialogue.

Cooperation projects under the

international dimension of Erasmus+

met specific needs

in non-EU regions, strengthening educational ties and supporting capacity building in

higher education and vocational education and training. From the point of view of skills

development, these projects supported the modernisation of education systems in partner

countries (e.g. looking at curricula and recognition of diplomas), which in turn helps

deliver a pool of skilled people the EU MS could tap into in the future.

The

mobilisation of EEA governance allowed for effective reaction to global crises,

playing an important role in particular in ensuring continuation of education and training

of Ukrainian refugees following Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.

Enhancing visibility and communication about the EEA’s contributions globally

could foster a better understanding and stronger partnerships with non-EU actors, as well

as an increased attractiveness worldwide of European education and training systems.

Streamlining the global perspective across all SP of the EEA strategic framework

would ensure a more consistent approach, leveraging the strengths of international

partnerships in education for mutual benefit, strengthening EU’s competitiveness and

democracy, allowing essential know-how exchanges with partner countries that could

support, among others, developments in innovation, STEM and AI-related fields in the EU,

strengthen the competitiveness of European universities and attract talent to the EU (see

also Sections 4.3., 5.1.).

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

4.1.5. Efficiency

Measuring the cost-effectiveness

of efforts under the strategic framework to build the

EEA is complex and

constrained by several major limitations.

A major challenge is that European cooperation towards the EEA comprises a wide and

varied range of processes and activities and is influenced by the EU’s broader agenda and

other international initiatives. Improvements cannot be solely attributed to the EEA, and it

is difficult to isolate the EEA’s specific impacts as the strategic framework builds on

previous cooperation frameworks (ET2020 and ET2010). Furthermore, there is no baseline

data.

In view of this, for the analysis information was collected on the costs and benefits of

selected illustrative examples of processes and activities under the EEA implementation

instruments. This approach was taken to minimise the response burden on the providers of

such information and to keep the costs of producing the necessary data in proportion to the

importance of the results sought. Due to the

incremental nature of the EEA,

it was not

possible to quantify the additional monetary and time inputs due to the EEA (as compared

to the previous period under ET2020).

These constraints therefore limit the possibility

to generalise the findings and to draw comparative conclusions with regard to cost-

effectiveness.

The

processes and activities covered by the analysis

were the following:

EEA governance

HLG and its CB.

The main cost-generating items were HLG meetings, especially those

organised in person

. Costs relate to time spent by participants (EU MS, European

Economic Area / EFTA countries, Commission) preparing for meetings, attending them

and doing follow-up work; and, for in person meetings, to costs for the meeting venue,

accommodation and travel. The costs of the CB, with most meetings taking place online,

were very low. Main benefits included strategic agenda setting and steering, enhanced

ownership of EEA priorities by the EU MS, responsiveness and agility of the EEA strategic

framework governance in addressing crises (for example, to ensure continuity of education

and training for refugees from Ukraine following Russia’s war of aggression), and mutual

learning. Consulted members of the HLG mostly agreed that the benefits of their

participation outweigh the resources invested.

WG.

External expertise, covered by dedicated contracts, and physical WG meetings and

peer-learning activities were the main cost-generating items. Clear benefits include

supporting the design of and follow-up to strategic EEA initiatives and advancing the

European dimension in education and training. The WG were found to represent an

important regular and structured forum for co-creation, mutual learning and dissemination

of good practices, with contributions also from social partners, EU-level stakeholder

organisations and agencies. The various activities of the WG resulted in almost 80

deliverables – including input papers, reports, factsheets, key policy messages and briefs.

The mutual learning and deliverables fed policy development and supported reforms in

several MS. For example, they contributed to the reform of ECEC in Bulgaria and

Lithuania, the Higher Education and Science Act and the Act on Quality Assurance in

Higher Education in Croatia, improved governance and modernisation of the VET system

in Cyprus, the digital education reform in Czechia, citizenship education reform in Spain,

legislation on inclusive education and curriculum flexibility in Portugal, or the integration

One HLG meeting per Council Presidency took place in person, in the country of the Presidency.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

of Ukrainian refugees in Germany. Furthermore, WG supported the global dimension of

the EEA by facilitating exchanges and mutual learning with EU candidate and European

Economic Area / EFTA countries. They also helped ensure that the EEA strategic

framework was aligned with the work of international organisations such as UN agencies

or the OECD, who are regular participants in most WG. The survey of WG members

revealed that they had favourable perceptions of the cost-benefit ratio

. Knowledge gained

informed national policymaking and promoted institutional knowledge-sharing, albeit with

varying results across countries linked to their level of engagement.

SGIB.

The twice-yearly SGIB meetings were the main cost-generating items. Benefits

included technical advice for DG EAC on data usage and indicator development, covering

topics such as equity and inclusion, the teaching profession, learning for sustainability,

civic knowledge and learning mobility. Such technical advice contributed to proposals to

revise EU-level targets and work on the online Monitor Toolbox (from 2022), which

allowed more detailed and transparent monitoring of progress towards existing EU-level

targets.

Expert Group on Quality Investment in Education and Training.

The main cost-

generating items were the 16 meetings of the expert group in 2021-2022. Benefits included

contribution to EU policy discussions (published a key report on quality investment) and

laying the foundations for the establishment of the Learning Lab.

Learning Lab on Investing in Quality Education and Training.

Contracts on

administrative and communication aspects, which also cover the costs of meetings, were

the main cost-generating item. The Lab helps to develop a culture of education policy

evaluation across the EU to improve the effectiveness of education and training policy and

the efficiency of education spending.

Strategic EEA initiatives

Council Recommendations.

Four Council Recommendations were included in the

analysis

. The costs for developing and following up on each recommendation vary widely

depending on the nature of each recommendation, and implementation costs at MS level

are difficult to estimate.

Regarding benefits, the Recommendation on automatic mutual recognition acted as a

strong enabler of European cooperation in education and training by facilitating

transnational cooperation and mobility. Progress in implementing the recommendation

was made in several MS, with the benefits of the automatic recognition of qualifications

being especially important for students moving across borders and for higher education

institutions seeking to attract such students. Cost savings are also possible in the

qualification recognition process itself, given its expected simplification, although much

depends on what institutional solutions are finally adopted. While some progress was

made, the ultimate objective of the recommendation is yet to be achieved.

The Recommendation on pathways to school success contributed to a common

understanding of school success and of the impact of well-being on educational outcomes.

Most of the respondents who answered this question considered that the benefits outweighed the time invested by

participants (55%; n=130); more than one third (36%; n=130) considered that the benefits were proportional to the

time invested; and only 8% had a negative view on the cost-benefit ratio.

The selected Council Recommendations were: Council Recommendation on promoting automatic mutual recognition

of higher education and upper secondary education and training qualifications and the outcomes of learning periods

abroad adopted in 2018; the Pathways to School Success Council Recommendation (2022); and the 2023 Council

Recommendations on the key enabling factors for successful digital education and training and on improving the

provision of digital skills and competences in education and training.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

It also provided guidance on improving equity and quality in education. The

recommendation significantly influenced the inclusive education reforms e.g. in Romania,

with the aim to address equity gaps, attendance, learning outcomes, progression to HE and

employment.

The Recommendations on digital education and skills brought to light inter alia a lack of

availability of high-quality digital education content and pedagogical approaches for

teaching computer science. This prompted the establishment of relevant Commission

expert groups in 2024 to draw up guidelines to support teachers and school leaders.

Mobilisation of EU funds for national reform

This implementation instrument invited

MS to make use of EU funds to support national

and regional reforms in line with EEA objectives,

e.g. TSI technical support and RRF

funds for the VET reform to support the green transition in Denmark and ESF+ funds and

technical support for reforms in Estonia to improve the competences and motivation of

teachers. There appeared to be only negligible costs involved in promoting the use of these

funds to achieve objectives in line with the EEA SP. Such costs would also be very difficult

to separate from costs already calculated (e.g. for the functioning of the WG) as raising

awareness of EU funds often takes place as part of other activities (e.g. during meetings at

different governance levels). Regarding the benefits, the mobilisation of EU funds for

national reforms contributed effectively to mainstreaming the EEA SP into MS’

policymaking. Evaluating the extent to which this will result in mature reforms and a

positive impact on the performance of education and training systems will be possible only

in the coming years.

EU-level projects and calls

Jean Monnet actions for schools and VET.

The main cost-generating items were an

external contract (communication activities linked to the launch of the action) and

Commission staff time to prepare project calls. Outputs included over 100 teacher training

events and school networks and projects under the Learning EU initiative with a total

budget of EUR 21.1 million, contributing to the promotion of European values.

Education for Climate Coalition.

The main cost-generating items were platform hosting

and Commission staff time dedicated to the action. The benefits were 166 online and 8 in-

person events, with combined audience of around 5,650 persons between 2021 and mid-

2024. The Coalition led to the consolidation of a participatory community of practice that

supports teaching and learning for the green transition, with over 8,000 registered users of

the online platform. It also led to the mobilisation of EEA actors to collaborate and work

towards the green transition and sustainable development. The community is growing, so

benefits are expected to rise.

Reporting and monitoring

ETM

(comparative and country reports). An external-expert contract and Commission

staff time to analyse and draft reports were the main cost-generating items. On the benefits

side, the ETM provided regular updates on progress towards targets at EU and national

level and was an important source of country-specific and thematic information. In

addition to its growing visibility among education experts and policymakers, the ETM’s

analysis was used internally in the Commission to inform country-specific analysis and

recommendations under the European Semester and to guide funding priorities for national

reforms, investments and projects across various EU funds and instruments.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

DG EAC-DG EMPL EEA Taskforce.

The main cost-generating item was Commission

staff time to prepare for, participate in and follow up on meetings. The Taskforce ensured

coordination between DG EAC and DG EMPL units most closely involved in building the

EEA. The Taskforce played an important role in monitoring and reporting progress

towards the EEA (including the 2022 EEA progress report and this evaluation). There are

grounds for concluding that the associated benefits outweighed the costs associated with

the time invested.

Communication and dissemination

The main communication and dissemination activities related to the

EEA portal,

European Education Summits, and social media campaigns.

The main cost-generating

items were the external contract covering Summit costs, venue costs and other costs related

to the Summit (in-person format), and the communication contract. On the benefits side,

the portal attracted around 1.5 million users annually, facilitating access to funding

opportunities. The summits brought together all key actors in education and training,

helped raise awareness on key EEA-related topics and fostered synergies across EEA EU-

level actions. The social media campaigns achieved increased engagement and their

performance was cost-effective. The communication activities raised awareness and made

selected information more accessible for EEA actors and to some extent for the wider

education and training community.

More detailed information is provided in Annex IV

Overview of benefits and costs.

4.1.6. Coherence

Overall, the EEA was delivered in a coherent way.

Efforts to build the EEA under the

strategic framework were fully

consistent with the priorities of the European

Commission (2019-2024)

and of the

EU Strategic Agenda

Complementarity between the EEA strategic framework and other EU-level

strategies and frameworks was observed,

including those directly linked to education

and training (DEAP, European Higher Education Area, European Skills Agenda, European

Qualifications Framework, European Research Area, EU Youth Strategy, New European

Innovation Agenda) and in other fields more broadly

The analysis nevertheless found that the

links between the EEA and other frameworks

in education and training were not always clear

for EEA actors, leading to varying

interpretations of what the EEA is. It was challenging to build a common understanding of

the EEA, delineating it from other complementary frameworks. This requires: (i) a better

integration of policies with clearer division of responsibilities relating to skills, VET and

adult learning under the EEA; and (ii) improved communication on the links between the

EEA and other frameworks in education and training (such as the European Higher

Education Area, EU Youth Strategy, European Skills Agenda or the New European

Innovation Agenda).

The EEA SP were found to be consistent with the priorities pursued by the MS.

have carried out reforms that complemented the EEA SP (given the broad and consensual

EU Strategic Agenda 2019-2024

and

2024-2029.

European

Strategy on the Rights of the Child, Gender Equality Strategy 2020 – 2025, EU Action Plan on Integration and Inclusion

2021-2027, EU Anti-racism Action Plan, European Democracy Action Plan, European Media Literacy actions,

Strategy on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, EU Strategy on Combating Antisemitism and Fostering Jewish

Life 2021-2030, EU Roma Strategic Framework for Equality, Inclusion and Participation 2020-2030, LGBTIQ

Equality Strategy 2020-2025.

European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan, New European Innovation Agenda, European Child Guarantee,

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

nature of the SP, there was no great risk of misalignment).

Some reforms in the MS were

directly inspired by the European cooperation,

such as Austria’s Universities and

Digital Transformation 2030 framework, reform of ECEC in Lithuania, or the Higher

Education and Science Act in Croatia

Furthermore, there was

strong complementarity between the EEA strategic framework

and initiatives by other international organisations

like the OECD, UNESCO, United

Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Council of Europe or the World Bank. This was

achieved through complementary objectives, the participation of several international

organisations in the EEA WG, and active collaboration in delivering joint initiatives.

The

EEA implementation instruments were largely delivered in an internally

coherent way.

Synergies were sought and exploited between instruments to ensure more

impactful results. The analysis concluded that closely linking different instruments can be

a useful strategy for maximising effectiveness.

For example, the

had strong links with several strategic EEA initiatives, helping to

shape their development and supporting their implementation. Some EU-level projects and

calls also showed clear links with the working groups, for instance the link between

Erasmus+ Teacher Academies and the European Innovative Teaching Award with the WG

Schools. Since 2021, there has been some attempt to exploit synergies between the WG.

This included holding several joint meetings (e.g. joint sessions between WG Schools –

Pathways and WG Equality and Values; joint meetings between WG DELTA and WG

Schools, and between WG Schools – Learning for Sustainability and WG VET and the

Green Transition). The synergies established to date were mostly assessed positively by

the WG’ members. Nevertheless, there is still potential for more synergies between the

WG. Additionally, better integration of the WG’ activities and political governance is

needed to maximise their contributions to the EEA SP.

Many interviewees noted a strong synergy between the

European Universities initiative

and other EEA implementation instruments. The initiative drove implementation of other

EEA activities under various EEA implementation instruments, including the Blueprint for

a European Degree, the European Recognition and Quality Assurance System, a possible

legal status for alliances of HEIs, or the European Student Card initiative, and at the same

time benefits from them. This mutual support enhances the progress and effectiveness of

the initiative.

More broadly, however, the evaluation found

evidence gaps regarding the results and

impacts of the key strategic EEA initiatives

and EU-level projects and calls (with some

exceptions like the European Universities initiative, the Council Recommendation on

automatic recognition, or the EIT HEI initiative). Efforts to assess progress with their

implementation were often scattered and lacked robust assessment (partly linked to the

recency of several initiatives).

Strong complementarity was established through contributions made to the

European Semester, which in turn was linked to RRF and other funding and actual

reforms that were financed and implemented.

For instance, the recovery and resilience

plans of MS were assessed also based on their capacity to address the CSR advanced in

the framework of the Semester. The negotiations for the current cohesion policy

programming period (2021-2027) were informed by the challenges and investment

priorities in the field of education and training outlined in the European Semester 2019

country reports. MS were invited to prioritise ERDF and ESF+ investments in line with

See national case studies in annex of external evaluation support study (July 2025).

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

the CSR falling within the scope of the respective funds. The possibility of using EU funds

is also mentioned in several strategic EEA initiatives. The ETM also included information

on the use of EU funds, including EU cohesion policy funds, RRF and TSI, in the country

reports.

While

EU funds

and instruments contributed to the EEA SP, the ability to assess their

impact was hindered by a

lack of consistency in how these investments were monitored

and evaluated.

Moreover, there was

not always clear understanding among EEA actors about the full

range of activities entailed by the EEA.

This can hinder internal coherence of the EEA

and support for it.

4.2. How did the EU intervention make a difference and to whom?

The primary added value recognised by EEA actors and the wider education and training

community consulted was that the EEA strategic framework establishes shared priorities,

enables

coordination of policy discussions and mutual learning on how to tackle

common challenges across EU MS.

The contribution analysis conducted as part of the

external evaluation support study suggested that the EEA strategic framework helped to

maintain

political attention

on education and training policies. It offered an internally

cohesive set of implementation instruments,

in addition to those at national level,

foster improvements in national and regional education and training systems,

and

promoted the European dimension

of education and training.

Significant EU funding

was mobilised

to invest in education, skills and infrastructure in Member States,

supporting the green and digital transitions, higher education reforms, inclusion and

innovation

Box 2. Examples of the added value provided by the EEA strategic framework

▪

Improvement of ECEC:

ECEC reform in

Lithuania

to improve access to ECEC for all children, especially children with

disabilities and those from vulnerable backgrounds. Connected to SP1 and SP3. The reform was

inspired by the 2019 Council Recommendation on high-quality ECEC systems and supported by

knowledge shared through the WG ECEC and through ESF+ and RRF funds.

▪

Enhancing inclusion and equity:

Adoption of policies in

Romania

to establish a more equitable pre-university education system,

promoting student-centred practices and ensuring resources for quality education. Connected to

SP1 and SP4. The policies were linked to the CSR and aligned with several Council

Recommendations (including the 2022 Council Recommendation on Pathways to School

Success, the 2018 Council Recommendation on promoting common values, inclusive education,

and the European dimension of teaching) in strategic documents. They were supported by the

TSI, and funding from RRF and ESF+ funds.

Reforms in

Portugal

to enhance inclusion, autonomy and curriculum flexibility by creating a

structure that gives schools flexibility to adjust pupils’ learning path in order to boost inclusion,

also leading to a reduction in early school leaving. Connected to SP1. The reforms were informed

by the work in different WG and ETM country reports, EU-level targets and CSR to track

progress on policy reforms. They received technical support as well as funding from ESF+, RRF,

and Erasmus+.

▪

Boosting digital skills:

Digital education reform in

Czechia

to modernise the content of education, equipping schools

with digital technologies and supporting the digital literacy of teachers. Connected to SP5. This

reform was informed by discussions in WG DELTA, including through peer-learning activities,

and supported by RRF and Erasmus+ funding and the TSI.

Mobilisation of EUR 75 billion under the RRF, EUR 40.4 billion under ESF+ and EUR 8.7 billion from ERDF (2021-

27).

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

•

▪

France,

recent school reforms to improve the digitalisation of education and digital skills have

been influenced by European cooperation and EEA SP and has benefitted from RRF funding and

technical support through the TSI.

School reform in

Greece

aiming to support the development of skills and competences needed

for various societal and labour market transformations, including green and digital skills, was

inspired by common European priorities. Aligned with CSR and ETM findings, the reform

received ESF+ and Erasmus+ funding, as well as technical support.

Improvement of VET:

A series of reforms to improve and modernise the VET system in

Cyprus

have been influenced

by European cooperation, including the Council Recommendation on VET for sustainable

competitiveness, social fairness and resilience. Funding from the RRF and Just Transition Fund

been instrumental in designing and implementing the national reform.

Strengthening higher education:

The adoption of the Universities and Digital Transformation 2030 strategic framework in

Austria

aims to address universities’ digitalisation issues, including learning and teaching, as

well as research, supporting organisation and infrastructure in terms of digital transformation.

Connected to SP4 and SP5. The framework was informed by the work in the WG HE and aligned

with CSR, and received RRF and Erasmus+ funding and technical support through the TSI.

Reform in

Italy

to establish an institutional framework for the recognition of qualifications which

has led to a simplified recognition of the qualifications process and improved international

mobility. Connected to SP4. The framework was aligned with the 2018 Council

Recommendation on promoting the automatic mutual recognition and benefitted from Erasmus+

funding to support the recognition of qualifications and to establish an international database of

higher education entry qualifications.

Slovakia,

the adoption of the Higher Education Quality Assurance Act led to the development

of new accreditation standards and a more university-led approach to quality assurance. The

reform was informed by peer learning opportunities in WG HE and received technical support,

as well as Erasmus+ and RRF funding.

In terms of mutual learning and knowledge-sharing, added value was most visible at the

level of individual EEA actors (i.e. policymakers and practitioners, who participated in

various activities under the EEA implementation instruments); and at organisational level,

for those organisations that had a more systematic approach to sharing information and

organisational learning.

At system level, added value was best achieved when countries

were proactive in making the best combined and coordinated use of several of the

EEA implementation instruments.

For small EU countries and those with limited resources, the added value

participating in mutual learning activities under the EEA strategic framework was

particularly pronounced.

These countries were also more likely to see the benefit of using

EU-level guidance to open up to transnational cooperation and to access EU funds to

support educational reforms.

All countries,

regardless of their size and level of advancement on certain topics,

can

benefit from support under the EEA strategic framework,

including the variety of

instruments and funds available, which might not yet be fully utilised.

For EU candidate countries,

the participation in the EEA governance and peer learning

supported

modernisation of their education and training systems,

facilitating alignment

in view of enlargement.

The consultations carried out show that most countries acknowledge that

it was much

easier for some challenges to be addressed at EU level.

For instance, challenges relating

digitalisation and AI in education and training,

including data protection and

security, can be addressed more efficiently through cooperation at EU level.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Such structured cooperation was particularly beneficial at times of crises, such as the

COVID-19 pandemic

and

Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine

, when

coordinated response and mobilisation of EU support were crucial to maintaining the

continuity and quality of education and training.

Strengthening European cooperation in education and training served as a clear

indicator of added value.

The EEA strategic framework facilitated the development of

advanced structural cooperation structures that extend beyond individual MS, such as the

European Universities initiative or the Centres of Vocational Excellence.

Continued added value

The

importance of continuing European cooperation in education and training

towards the EEA was widely recognised

by the EEA actors consulted.

According to the consulted actors, the

main risks associated with discontinuing

European cooperation towards the EEA

are as follows.

▪

For individual EEA actors: reduced opportunities for knowledge creation and

sharing.

According to members of the WG and SGIB surveyed (83 %; n=130), the

discontinuation of the EEA would disrupt connections between policymakers

across the EU. Moreover, individual EEA actors may also have

potentially

reduced mobility opportunities.

For organisations: reduced opportunities for policy learning.

Organisations

would also be most negatively affected by the loss of European dimension of

education and training, focused on enabling advanced structures for cooperation

that go beyond individual MS. The

progress towards internationalisation of

organisations, especially in higher education, and its possible transfer to other

areas, would be hindered.

Organisations would have

reduced project

opportunities

and would face an

increased burden

in terms of time, human and

financial resources to tackle education issues on their own.

At system-level:

loss of coordinated approaches and reduced access to EU

guidance could

widen gaps between MS. Progress on pressing issues would

likely slow down, in particular on digital education, quality and equity across

educational levels or higher education

as these areas have advanced significantly

through the activities under various EEA implementation instruments.

Discontinuing the EEA would

hinder the implementation of national reforms

according to 73% (n=130) of respondents to the WG and SGIB survey.

Furthermore, for half of the policymakers surveyed (n=107), ending the EEA

would

negatively affect education policy development in their country.

▪

Discontinuing European cooperation towards the EEA would have a likely negative impact

beyond the education and training field.

For example, 25 MS participated in a joint data collection on the inclusion of displaced children from Ukraine in

education systems, organised by the Council Presidency and the European Commission.

https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/224f94b0-32a8-11ef-a61b-

01aa75ed71a1/language-en

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

4.3. Is the intervention still relevant?

The various analyses conducted as part of the external evaluation study

strongly indicated

that the

thematic focus of the EEA strategic framework is considered highly relevant

by the EEA actors and the wider education and training community consulted. The EEA

SP are

highly pertinent

and

well-aligned with national priorities and issues within

national education systems,

including teacher shortages, declining basic skills, low levels

of digital skills, and widening equity gaps. National representatives that were interviewed

(including members of the WG) pointed out that while country-specific challenges exist,

the activities under the EEA strategic framework cover a wide spectrum of issues that

matter to them.

While all SP were considered relevant, with no significant differences in the perceived

importance of one over another, respondents considered the EEA particularly significant

tackling low levels of digital skills and competences,

with 72% (n=130) of

respondents agreeing on this. This was followed by the contribution of the EEA to

raising

the quality of education and training provision

(68%; n=130) and to

reducing

inequalities

in education and training (66%; n=130). Two thirds of respondents believed

that the EEA could help

address teacher shortages and the lack of attractiveness of the

teaching profession,

while 53% agreed that it can help to

tackle skills mismatches

between the supply of skills and labour market demand.

The EEA remains

relevant even when faced with crises

such as the COVID-19 pandemic

and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine

. The EEA strategic framework mobilises

EU funds and cooperation efforts to support national education systems, in line with the

EEA SP on promoting quality, equity and inclusion. In fact, EEA actors further confirmed

that the EEA SP are even more relevant during these crises, as collaborative efforts are

instrumental in addressing immediate needs, adopting responsive strategies and upholding

a consistent approach to these common challenges.

The continued relevance of the EEA SP

The EEA’s

flexibility and focus on long-term, overarching priorities ensure its

continued relevance.

Consulted EEA actors provided examples of issues of continued

high relevance for EEA SP to emphasise, in light of the new EU priorities and persistent

challenges:

▪

The EEA strategic framework needs to ensure continued and reinforced focus on

diversity, mental health, well-being, and resilience,

at all levels of education and

training. Tackling underachievement and

building basic skills

should be further

prioritised in light of decreasing performance.

Inclusiveness

should remain a priority for access to lifelong learning and cross-

border mobility, targeting especially learners with disabilities, students from

migrant backgrounds and students from a disadvantaged socio-economic

background. In addition to SP1, equity should be mainstreamed as a cross-cutting

objective under all EEA SP.

More attention should be given to improving the

working conditions of teachers

and the

attractiveness of the teaching profession.

▪

See external evaluation support study for details on the analyses (July 2025).

European Commission, Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, ‘Progress

towards the

achievement of the EEA

– Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the

European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions’, Luxembourg: Publications Office of

the European Union, 2022.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

▪

Priority should be given to

sustaining the transnational cooperation

necessary

to boost the EU’s competitiveness globally, while increasing inclusivity and equal

access for vulnerable students.

A sustained focus on digital skills is needed, with more attention also given to

developments in AI.

Synergies between

digital education and learning for

sustainability

should be further enhanced. There should also be more focus on

innovation in and through education.

While the current SP were seen as broadly relevant, the EEA actors consulted mentioned

a need to further streamline the EEA SP to address common and national challenges more

effectively. The evaluation identified

three potential pathways

to ensure the EEA’s

continued relevance and effectiveness in its upcoming 2026-2030 cycle.

Pathway A: Maintain the agreed broad SP with strengthened focus on relevant

(re)emerging and persistent challenges under each of the current SP.

The EEA actors consulted considered that the long-term SP should remain sufficiently

broad to accommodate emerging issues. Nevertheless, respondents suggested that the

strategic framework could benefit from identifying a limited set of priority issues to be

addressed (e.g. basic skills, innovation, STEM, teachers, etc.).

Pathway B: Introduce cross-cutting objectives across the current SP, and revise

them to improve their clarity

EEA actors saw the benefit of introducing cross-cutting objectives (such as lifelong

learning and skills development; socio-economic, regional/territorial, and gender equality;

innovation in and through education, and the global perspective) across current SP to

address cross-cutting issues. These objectives can create a cohesive framework, allowing

for targeted initiatives while maintaining a general framework that addresses a range of

challenges.

At the same time, overarching objectives aligning with the new EU political priorities –

such as boosting Europe’s competitiveness, preparedness and resilience, social cohesion

and fairness, and promoting democracy and EU values – could drive progress towards the

SP.

Pathway C: Consider introducing a new SP

(namely, in the area of citizenship

education).

The increased importance of citizenship education was highlighted throughout the

consultations, as well as in numerous recent EU documents (for example, the

EP's 2024

resolution on the Commission’s 2023 Rule of Law Report,

the

2023 Issue Paper on

Citizenship Education of the WG on Equality and Values,

the

2023 Council conclusions,

and

Conference on the Future of Europe report).

The EEA actors consulted also stressed

the importance of continuing efforts to improve the implementation of citizenship

education, calling for the development of a common citizenship education framework and

for action to enhance its role and improve its quality across MS.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

5. W

HAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN AND LESSONS LEARNT

The evaluation found that the EEA in its first cycle (2021-2025) proved its strong added

value by reinforcing agreement on shared priorities across the wider education and training

community, boosting EU resilience in the face of crises, and mobilising support for

structural reforms. The EEA strategic framework provides an overarching strategy for

quality education and training in all contexts, at all levels and in all forms, underpinned by

lifelong learning across borders. Since 2021, the building blocks of a comprehensive

approach towards developing the EEA, serving as a solid basis for further work, have been

gradually put in place. In recent years this comprehensive approach has brought together

education and training actors at different levels to share experiences, cooperate and co-

create the EEA. The overall assessment of European cooperation in education and training

is positive.

The strategic framework will continue to be relevant beyond 2025, by offering a platform

for mutual learning, knowledge creation, and policy and funding support to address

common challenges and opportunities shared by education and training systems across the

EU. EEA actors and the wider education and training community consider the EEA as a

framework that helps Member States build high-quality and inclusive education and

training systems, and which advances the European dimension of education and training

by enabling structured cooperation and promoting mobility, citizenship education and EU

values. At the same time, the evaluation identified some room for improvement to further

boost results and impacts. Six key conclusions were formulated, each paired with lessons

learnt. This chapter concludes with a table providing a structure for operationalising work

under EEA SP.

5.1. EEA SP and EU-level targets

There was progress on the five EEA SP, supported by European cooperation under

the EEA strategic framework.

European cooperation towards the EEA contributed to an

increased ownership and understanding of common priorities in education and training

across EEA actors and stakeholders in the wider education and training community. MS

pursued reforms that are aligned with EEA SP (see Section 5.5. below).

Coverage of both SP and education sectors was varied, with some priorities supported more

than others in the first cycle (2021-2025) of the EEA strategic framework (see Table 5).

Addressing persisting and (re)emerging challenges will require even greater efforts and the

prioritisation of issues that have not made sufficient progress during the first cycle of

implementation (see column on priority themes in Table 7, section 5.7.).

EU-level targets and supporting indicators provided a valuable tool for both driving

and tracking progress.

At the same time, EU-level targets were not fully aligned with the

EEA SP (see Table 6 below), as some priorities (and related education challenges) do not

lend themselves for being measured quantitatively via a single target domain. While SP1

has several targets that can be associated with it, no targets cover SP3 (teachers and

trainers) or learning for sustainability (under SP5). But the Commission has developed

indicator areas for both (as well as equity), with the support of the SGIB, at the request of

the Council.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Trends towards meeting the EU-level targets show a mixed picture. On the plus side: we

see a

trend of positive upward convergence

(since 2020) with EU-average progressing

towards the achievement of several long-standing 2030 targets (early school leaving,

tertiary attainment and participation in ECEC). Moreover, the 2025 target on VET has been

exceeded. Despite some progress, significant efforts are needed on adult learning. There

are significant warning signs of a persistent and even growing level of

underachievement

in basic and digital skills,

hitting disadvantaged students especially hard.

Table 6. Progress towards EU-level targets and need for adjustments

EEA SP

EU-level target

Early childhood education and

care: ‘By 2030, at least 96% of

children between 3 years old and

the starting age for compulsory

primary education should

participate in ECEC’

Early school leaving: ‘By 2030,

the share of early leavers from

education and training should be

less than 9%’

Current

value

94.6%

(UOE

2023)

Progress & need for adjustment

Progress towards achieving the target.

Further

efforts needed

achieve target by 2030

. Target remains relevant (together with the second

Barcelona target for under 3-year-olds), also because increased provision

of ECEC is seen as a key contributor to the European Pillar of Social

Rights EU target linked to employment for 2030

. Increase in the 2030

target value would be unrealistic.

Progress towards achieving the target.

Reducing early school leaving is

also seen as a key contributor to the European Pillar of Social Rights EU

target linked to adult participation in training for 2030

. It is also one of

the headline targets on the Social Scoreboard

. Target level could be made

more ambitious.

SP1 – quality, equity, inclusion and success for all

9.3%

(LFS

2024)

Basic skills: ‘By 2030, the share

of underachievement in reading,

mathematics and science should

be less than 15%’

26.2% in

reading

Falling even further short of the target. Significant effort needed

29.5% in

fully explore the reasons and achieve the target. The target remains highly

maths

relevant for helping to improve equity and the quality of education and

24.2% in

training and thus boosting EU competitiveness, social cohesion and

science

fairness. More ambitious target value would be unrealistic.

(PISA

2022)

65.3%

(LFS,

2024)

2025 target has been exceeded.

Decisions on VET targets will be taken as part of the forthcoming

European Strategy for Vocational Education and Training.

Work-based learning in VET: ‘By

2025, at least 60% of recent VET

graduates should have

experienced work-based learning

as part of their VET programme’

‘By 2025, at least 47% of adults

aged 25-64 should have

participated in learning during the

last 12 months’

‘By 2030, at least 60% of adults

aged 25-64 should have

participated in learning during the

last 12 months’

(European Pillar

of Social Rights)

The share of 25 to 34-year-olds

with tertiary educational

attainment should be at least 45%

by 2030

SP2 – Lifelong

learning & mobility

39.5%

(AES

2022)

Progressing towards achieving the target. Significant effort needed

achieve the target. EU level target for 2030 (as taken forward in the

European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan) remains relevant.

SP 4 –

Higher

education

44.2%

(LFS

2024)

Progressing towards achieving the target.

Target remains relevant.

Target level could be made more ambitious.

SP5 –Digital

Digital skills: ‘By 2030, the share

of underachievement in digital

skills should be less than 15%’

42.5%

(ICILS

2023)

Significant gap

between the target value and the level of achievement.

Given the rapidly changing technological landscape and the future needs

of the labour market this target will continue to be highly relevant for

contributing to the EU’s preparedness and competitiveness.

EU-level targets as set under the 2021 EEA strategic framework resolution, see Annex II. Except the 2030 AL target.

European Commission:

Employment and social developments in Europe 2024,

2024.

Council Recommendation of 8 December 2022 on early childhood education and care: the Barcelona targets for 2030

(2022/C 484/01).

European Commission,

The European Pillar of Social Rights Action Plan,

2021.

Ibid.

Eurostat, Social Scoreboard.

Target also adopted by

2021 Council Resolution on a new European agenda for adult learning 2021-2030

(Annex II).

Share of eighth-graders were below Level 2 proficiency. IEA, ‘IEA

Releases Latest Results of the International

Computer and Information Literacy Study, ICILS 2023’,

2024.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Lessons learnt

▪

While current SP were recognised as providing a good basis for further work, there is room for

increasing impact by focusing work-strands on

issues related to the most pressing challenges

(see Table 5 on SP).

▪

Systematically tackling

cross-cutting objectives

(e.g. innovation in and through education;

socio-economic, regional/territorial or gender equality, or the global perspective) across all SP

could increase their impact. In addition, promoting lifelong learning and skills development

might be more effective as a horizontal priority to increase its coverage across all sectors of

education and training.

▪

Introducing a new

SP on citizenship education

would enhance the EU’s democracy and

preparedness, and help address calls from the European Parliament, the Council and the

Conference on the Future of Europe

5.2. EEA design

The overall design of the EEA strategic framework was found to be appropriate and

fit for achieving strategic priorities.

In the absence of regulatory power, the ability of the

EEA strategic framework to create impact arises from its combination of various ‘soft’

implementation instruments. These include: (i) setting quantified targets; (ii) providing

concrete policy guidance (on the implementation of strategic EEA initiatives); (iii)

fostering mutual learning and exchange; (iv) supporting transnational cooperation between

policymakers, practitioners and education and training institutions; (v) mobilising relevant

EU funds and instruments for national reforms; (vi) monitoring progress; and (vii)

supporting the evaluation of relevant reforms.

While

EEA implementation instruments, their combination and delivery were overall

positively assessed,

further

prioritisation

(of most relevant challenges to tackle and

strategic EEA initiatives to implement) and a more

systematic combination of several

EEA implementation instruments could lead to stronger results

and national impacts.

As highlighted by some EEA actors consulted for this evaluation, the strategic framework

risks becoming overly ambitious, by aiming to deliver on too many strategic EEA

initiatives. Given limited resources, pursuing SP through a high number of diverse

activities could result in dispersed efforts (at EU level) and constraints on implementation

capacity (at national level). This could hinder effectiveness and coherence.

Prioritising

through more concentrated efforts

a smaller number of strategic EEA initiatives,

supported by a systematic combination of other EEA implementation instruments

and periodic evaluation

of their implementation, would also help fill evidence gaps,

feeding into policy reviews and increasing impact (for new flagship initiatives that could

be prioritised see bold in column ‘strategic initiatives’ in Table 7, see also section 5.3.

below on filling evidence gaps).

EEA governance bodies proved suitable for supporting collaboration on SP, enabling

mutual learning, and allowing flexibility in reacting to crises. At the same time, the EEA

governance architecture would profit from further reform, including

clarification of the

specific roles and responsibilities of governance bodies and ensuring more systematic

feedback loops between them and stronger linkages with governance bodies in other

relevant policy areas.

European Parliament Resolution on the implementation of citizenship education actions

(2022); Conference on the

Future of Europe (April 2021-March 2022)

final report; Council conclusions on the contribution of education and

training to strengthening common European values and democratic citizenship

(2023).

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Lessons learnt

▪

A more focused approach with key strategic EEA initiatives supported by a systematic

combination of EEA implementation instruments

could lead to stronger outcomes and

impact, and open the door to

exploring targeted approaches for supporting and tracking

progress.

This could include identifying under each SP one or two flagship initiatives as

framework strategies setting out work and mobilisation of EEA implementation instruments.

▪

Further governance reforms setting out clear roles for various governance levels, ensuring a

continuous feedback loop between political steering, implementation and monitoring of

progress

towards the EEA and reinforced connection with business and other relevant

stakeholders (social partners, labour market and civil society actors), could foster

a whole-of-

government approach

driving further development of the EEA. A reinforced governance

with improved cross-sectoral linkages could also ensure synergies across education and skills

and employment policies.

5.3. EEA reporting, monitoring and evaluation

Reporting and monitoring under the EEA focused on assessing the effectiveness of

education and training systems

using EU-level targets and supporting indicators, such as

participation, attainment and quality of education. This approach helped focus attention on

and drive national reforms and contributed to building a more systematic and coherent

body of evidence, supported by the work of the SGIB. Tools like the ETM informed

policymaking but could be further used to stimulate policy dialogue at the national level.

While the

EEA strategic framework

has developed a regular monitoring practice around

the EU-level targets and a growing number of supporting indicators, it

lacks a mechanism

for systematically building and collecting evidence on national reforms aimed at

achieving EEA SP

(including the national implementation of strategic EEA initiatives and

the impact of EU funding on progress towards EU-level targets), or on outcomes and

impacts of activities carried out under EEA implementation instruments

. The

absence of

systematic monitoring and evaluation

to track progress on achieving EEA SP, reforms

in line with strategic EEA initiatives and the use of other EEA implementation instruments,

hinders learning about the impact of strategic EEA initiatives, and creates a

knowledge gap

weakening its potential to drive evidence-informed policymaking.

Importantly, it makes it difficult to identify and support with robust evidence how national

governments are following up on strategic EEA initiatives and translating them into

concrete policies and practices. It also hinders the assessment of the effectiveness of other

EEA implementation instruments, such as EU-level projects and calls, to support

meaningful change within MS (or at EU level). While some strategic EEA initiatives have

been evaluated, this is not true of all, and evaluations are not repeated regularly. Without

systematic and targeted monitoring and evaluation, it is

not possible to identify

implementation gaps and barriers

(such as regulatory mismatches, resource constraints

or lack of political will), which could impede the realisation of the EEA SP.

There have been efforts to track the EEA’s delivery at the output level, including the 2022 EEA progress report, the

present evaluation, and internal reporting to track progress of activities under EEA implementation instruments.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Lessons learnt

▪

A limited number of EU-level education and training targets should be maintained to ensure

that they are effective in mobilising action. A

layered system of targets and indicators

that

differentiates between thematic targets (e.g. on basic skills, including citizenship education

and digital skills, as well as STEM or equity), sectoral targets (on attainment and

participation in different levels of education and training) and relevant supporting indicators.

As the EEA strategic framework ultimately seeks to promote progress towards the SP, each

SP could be linked to indicators/targets.

▪

more comprehensive EEA monitoring and evaluation scheme

could consist of:

regular impact evaluations of national reforms in line with EEA priorities or of the

follow-up of flagship strategic EEA initiatives;

periodic impact evaluations and monitoring of the use of EU funds, with embedded

focus on EEA SP;

light but consistent reporting by MS (e.g. national implementation plans on specific

strategic EEA initiatives or overall follow-up on Union of Skills / EEA) to enhance

comparability and feed mutual learning;

enhanced synthesis and analysis of data — with a focus on progress towards EEA SP

and implementation of strategic EEA initiatives — collected from various sources and

European Commission knowledge providers

to create a cohesive understanding of

progress and impact.

5.4. EEA communication and dissemination

Strengthening the shared understanding of the EEA strategic framework and its

benefits is essential for further progress.

The success of the EEA in supporting

improvements to national education and training systems, and fostering effective

transnational collaboration, depends on two key factors: (i) a clear understanding by

national-level actors of the benefits of cooperation and active engagement in EEA

governance bodies (for stronger multiplier effects at the organisational and system levels);

and (ii) ownership by these actors of the activities supported through the EEA

implementation instruments. Communication activities directed at EEA actors and

stakeholders at the EU-level, and their active engagement disseminating knowledge and

outputs of EEA governance processes (such as WG deliverables) could therefore have a

significant impact on the overall effectiveness of the EEA strategic framework.

According to the consultation carried out for this evaluation, the precise scope of the EEA

remains somewhat unclear to some stakeholders, leading to varying interpretations of the

EEA strategic framework and its instruments. The

lack of a comprehensive

communication strategy at EU level driven by a strong EEA narrative

was a barrier

to reaching a consistent and shared understanding. Enhancing the EEA’s branding and

visibility is therefore essential both for achieving a stronger impact at national level and

for reinforcing transnational collaboration. The communication strategy could draw on

activities that have proven effective such as the EEA portal, European Education Summits

and other participatory events (under the Learning Lab, Jean Monnet actions or linked to

a SP, such as the Digital Education Dialogues). Due to their participatory formats, such

events were found to help participants gain a deeper insight into EEA activities and

achievements, fostering greater visibility of strategic EEA initiatives and EU-level

projects, and increasing co-creation and networking within the education and training

community.

Such comprehensive monitoring and evaluation would require additional resources and analytical capabilities.

Such as European Semester Country Reports, Eurydice, ENESET network, independent expert network, EACEA

Feedback-to-policy reports.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Lessons learnt

▪

An overarching EU education and skills communication strategy, driven by a renewed

EEA narrative with a strong focus on branding

(ensuring consistent visual identity across

activities under all EEA implementation instruments) with clearly defined target groups and

communication channels could support the effectiveness of EEA implementation

instruments. Communication to EEA actors and the wider education community should

provide clarity on the overall design of the EEA strategic framework (what is included in it,

how the EEA and the Union of Skills will interact, etc.).

▪

Communication on specific EEA implementation instruments should

systematically use

the EEA brand

and its central messages to boost the visibility of the EEA

National/regional/local events that mobilise the education and training community could be

encouraged to cover EEA topics, share results of the strategic EEA initiatives / EU-level

projects and calls and their contribution to the EEA. The EEA portal’s user-friendliness and

attractiveness could be further enhanced by reviewing the search functionality, creating

mobile-friendly designs and interactive content (e.g. success stories, case studies, progress

dashboards, etc.).

5.5. Results at Member State level

European cooperation towards achieving the EEA laid an important foundation for

improving education and training systems in Europe. One of the key objectives of the EEA

strategic framework was to support reforms in MS. It did so by engaging EEA actors

(policymakers, practitioners, education and training institutions and other education and

training stakeholders) in cooperation and co-creation focusing on the EEA SP, supported

by various EEA implementation instruments.

MS pursued reforms that were aligned with and contributed to the achievement of

the EEA SP. Progress varies by MS

and depends on several factors. This is partly due to

the nature of European cooperation (i.e. voluntary cooperation and no regulatory power at

the EU level). Box 3 shows selected examples at various education levels from ECEC,

through primary and compulsory secondary to VET and higher education.

Box 3. Examples of national reforms that aligned with and contributed to the achievement of EEA SP

▪

Adoption of the National

ECEC

Quality Framework in

Bulgaria

(as a direct follow-up of the 2019 Council

Recommendation on high-quality ECEC systems, informed by WG ECEC, supported by TSI, linked to a CSR

under the European Semester). The implemented reforms aligned with SP1 (improving quality, equity, inclusion,

and success for all in education and training) led to improvements in quality standards in ECEC through their

institutionalisation, professional development of staff and the creation of monitoring instruments.

Spain,

educational reforms have made

citizenship education

a compulsory subject since 2021, contributing

to SP1. The reform outlines the basic and specific competences for citizenship education in

primary and

compulsory secondary

education. The Spanish EU Presidency prioritised citizenship education, and, ahead of

its presidency, hosted a peer-learning activity under WG Equality and Values in 2023, followed by a discussion

in the HLG. These discussions informed the 2023 Council Conclusions on the Contribution of Education and

Training to Strengthening Common European Values and Democratic Citizenship, connecting the technical and

the political levels of the EEA strategic framework.

Germany inclusion of refugee learners in schools and VET and employment opportunities to teachers

from Ukraine

was supported by mutual learning and policy transfer through WG, and funding opportunities (for

integration efforts, language support, education infrastructure, teacher training) from ESF+, CARE and REACT-

EU, as well as Erasmus+ Horizon Europe projects.

The

higher education

reform in

Croatia

(including new legislation on governance) aims to strengthen quality

assurance, accreditation, and enable joint programmes thus supporting the European dimension,

internationalisation. The new legal framework directly incorporates core aspects of strategic EEA initiatives in

higher education. Regular participation of Ministry representatives and experts in the EEA governance structures

(WG HE) ensured policy consistency between the national reforms and strategic EEA initiatives. Significant EU

funding (RRF, ESF+, Erasmus+) as well as TSI support has been mobilised to support the implementation of the

reforms, and the broader digitalisation of higher education.

The reforms in the

Netherlands

to address the pressing challenges facing teachers, aims to enhance the

competences and motivation of teachers.

Having used WG Schools as a knowledge-exchange forum, the

reform is fully aligned with SP3.

▪

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

The evaluation identified the following

EEA pathways of influence on national reforms:

Contributing to agenda setting through

building consensus on the shared

priorities (including guiding policy

development in line with Council

Recommendations)

EEA SP are reflective of the needs of the MS, as they are

agreed by consensus.

When specific national needs closely

align

(become salient), political will is more likely to

facilitate the translation of priorities into concrete actions.

EEA impact is greater

if national policymakers actively

participate

in meetings of different governance bodies. WG

and their peer-learning activities serve as crucial fora for

discussing policy issues. These policymakers play a key role

in disseminating the knowledge gained and promoting EEA

SP within their institutions and broader national contexts.

When the guidance developed and the good practices

discussed are systematically shared at the national level, they

inspire reforms and foster policy innovation.

EEA impact is greater

if the EEA implementation

instruments are used in synergy.

For instance, using

strategic EEA initiatives to guide ongoing policy reforms

and addressing CSR can help identify which challenges to

act upon, including through a collaborative search for

solutions.

The evaluation found that

strong complementarity has

been established between the EEA and the European

Semester, which in turn is linked to the RRF, TSI, and

Cohesion Policy funding

and the actual reforms financed,

supported and implemented. The use of EU funding and

technical support to design and implement national reforms

is instrumental in supporting the implementation of EEA SP.

→

Providing opportunities for mutual

learning

→

Ensuring complementary use of different

EEA implementation instruments

→

Aligning use of EU funding to support

national reforms on EEA SP and

providing project-based funding

opportunities

→

Lessons learnt

In the light of the evaluation findings and considering the ‘soft’ nature of the EEA strategic

framework, more impact at national level could be achieved by:

▪

ensuring

better sharing of results by national EEA actors

participating in EEA

governance with their counterparts in the respective education systems (e.g. disseminating

outputs across their administrations, feeding into national reforms and the follow-up of

strategic EEA initiatives) to enhance multiplier effects, and build a more solid evidence base

to develop the EEA;

▪

further supporting MS’ reform processes and

inclusive dialogue at national level

(e.g. use

annual recovery and resilience plans meetings to discuss progress, present selected EEA

initiatives, bring together education authorities, practitioners, and national level stakeholder

organisations; build on national ETM launch events to engage the education community);

▪

further supporting MS in

building a culture of evaluation

and evidence-informed

policymaking on education and training at national level through the Learning Lab on

Investing in Quality Education and Training.

5.6. Results at European level

While the EEA strategic framework aims to support MS in achieving their educational

objectives, its ambition extends beyond this role. The framework creates a European

dimension by facilitating a transnational exchange of experiences, mutual learning and co-

creation among policymakers and other education and training stakeholders and by

promoting transnational cooperation between education and training institutions and

learning mobility.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

While the EEA strategic framework builds on the legacy of the earlier frameworks that

promoted transnational cooperation and mobility, this objective was further strengthened

through efforts to

consolidate sustainable structures of European cooperation,

embodied in activities under EEA implementation instruments. Such activities include the

European Universities initiative, Centres of Vocational Excellence, the European Degree

and the European Student Card initiative.

In its first cycle, the EEA demonstrated its potential to foster more sustainable and

structured transnational cooperation in education and training,

by making significant

progress in promoting mobility, innovation and shared standards. Several initiatives

(including those on learning mobility, micro-credentials and recognition) already

demonstrated significant benefits (documented by evaluations)

, such as boosting

mobility, fostering more flexible learning pathways and enhancing recognition of

qualifications. This facilitated smoother collaboration, especially at the level of HEIs,

which would probably not have been achieved without European cooperation. These

activities also contributed to new knowledge and practices being developed through

transnational cooperation, and to increased mobility and the reduction of legal obstacles to

further cooperation. At the same time, hurdles related to regulatory diversity and legislative

alignment might impede full implementation and the broader goal of fostering

transnational collaboration.

Under the first cycle of the EEA strategic framework,

work supporting the promotion of

a European dimension of education and training through the work on citizenship

education, learning about the EU, its values and democracy also intensified

(e.g.

through WG Equality and Values and the Jean Monnet Actions - Learning EU initiatives).

Platforms like the European School Education Platform which provides the Toolkit for

Schools, the Digital Education Hub, EPALE communities for adult learning and VET, and

the EEA portal contributed to

creating a common European knowledge space for

educators and policymakers.

Frameworks like the European Quality Framework on

ECEC, Key Competences for Lifelong Learning, DigComp and GreenComp advanced

shared standards,

contributing to

building a European approach to education.

Finally,

initiatives such as the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies strengthened collaboration and

professional development across borders.

The EEA strategic framework has also proven instrumental in

responding to crises,

such

as COVID-19 and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, where a

coordinated EU

response

helped limit disruption and ensure continuity in education and training.

Lessons learnt

▪

European cooperation in education and training is particularly strong under the SP focused on

(i) reinforcing European higher education; and (ii) making lifelong learning and mobility a

reality. Work towards these priorities goes beyond cooperation and includes

transnational

measures.

Expanding such efforts to other areas, such as school education, digital skills and

green competences, would embed an even stronger European dimension throughout the EEA.

This is especially relevant when fostering common approaches to skills development.

▪

The EEA’s ability to ensure effective coordinated response to crises like the COVID-19

pandemic and Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine illustrates its

potential to act as a

unifying force

for addressing common challenges faced by European education systems. Any

further reforms of the EEA governance should aim to safeguard and reinforce the EEA

strategic framework’s flexibility and agility to boost preparedness and resilience.

See evaluations of individual Council Recommendations such as that on automatic recognition, or selected EU-level

projects and calls such as the EIT HEI initiative, as well as the RRF or Erasmus+ evaluations.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

5.7. EEA priorities, action strands and monitoring

Based on the above findings of this evaluation, table 7 sets out a structure that could inform

the Council’s review and guide work on EEA priorities (themes to focus on), action strands

(flagship strategic EEA initiatives and EU-level projects and calls) and target/indicator

domains for monitoring progress.

kom (2025) 0340 - Ingen titel

Table 7. EEA priorities, action strands and monitoring

1. Quality,

equity,

inclusion

Priority themes

Basic skills & top

performance; Quality

and inclusiveness

(diversity, gender,

well-being at school)

Strategic initiatives

(to be proposed or implementation)

Flagship projects / calls

Girls and women’s participation in STEM

studies and careers (also under SP5)

Relevant M&E target/indicator areas

NDERACHIEVEMENT

TOP PERFORMANCE

in literacy, mathematics and science

QUITY

(learners from a disadvantaged

socio-economic background with good

achievement in at least one domain)

STEM enrolment by sex

NTERNATIONAL ATTRACTIVENESS

(inward

degree mobile tertiary graduates from

outside the EU)

Learning mobility indicators (outward credit

and degree mobile tertiary graduates)

Action Plan on Basic Skills

with Basic Skills Guarantee;

Pathways to School success, ECEC quality framework

2. Mobility

Learning mobility &

inclusiveness

Europe on the Move

EU Talent Magnet framework

EU Talent Pool & Talent Partnerships; M.

Sklodowska-Curie Action ‘Choose Europe’

pilot project

Education

profession

(teachers

and

trainers)

European

higher

education

Teacher shortages;

Working conditions;

Attractiveness of the

profession; ITE, CPD

Reducing obstacles to

cooperation;

Inclusiveness and

accessibility

STEM; AI; Digital

skills; Enhanced links

between learning for

sustainability and

digital skills, gender

and digital equity

Teaching and learning

through, about and for

democracy; European

dimension of teaching

and promotion of EU

values

EU Teachers Agenda

with European competence

framework for academic staff

Erasmus+ Teacher Academies; European

Innovative Teaching award; Erasmus+ pilot on

European School Alliances

Teaching profession indicator area (online

Monitor Toolbox)

European degree;

Action plan on accessibility of higher

education; European Quality Assurance and Recognition

System; Attractive & sustainable careers in higher

education, European Strategy for Universities

European Universities alliances

EIT HEI initiative

Tertiary attainment

Enrolment in STEM at tertiary level

See also learning mobility indicators under

mobility above.

IGITAL SKILLS

(underachievement)

Enrolment in

STEM

(VET & tertiary), ICT

(PhD)

Learning for sustainability indicators (online

Monitor Toolbox)

5. Green

and digital

Citizenship

education

Lifelong learning

mindset; Skills &

qualifications;

recognition

Roadmap on the future of digital education and skills;

Girls and women’s participation in STEM

STEM education strategic plan;

STEM competence

studies and careers (Girls Go STEM and STEM

framework, European Degree for engineers, Council

Futures and Fellowships); STEM education

Recommendation on AI in education; Council

centres; STEM skills foundries, STEM Tech

Recommendations on digital (with DigComp) and on

Talent Induction, European Advanced Digital

learning for the green transition and sustainable

Skills Competitions, International Partnerships

development (with GreenComp)

on STEM; Education for Climate Coalition

Competence framework for active and democratic

Jean Monnet actions for Schools and VET;

citizenship education,

adapted to the EU; Guidelines to

Erasmus+ Teacher Academies; Erasmus+

improve the supply and quality of democratic citizenship

School / Culture Collaborations for Civic

education; Strategic guide for EU VET policymakers and

Engagement and Critical Citizenship Education

providers to effectively promote citizenship competences in

project; EU citizenship module for Erasmus;

initial VET; Guiding principles on protecting fundamental

Eurydice study: Citizenship education at school

academic values

ORIZONTAL PRIORITY

IFELONG LEARNING

SKILLS DEVELOPMENT

European framework for the automatic recognition of

European Digital Credentials for learning;

study qualifications and learning periods abroad at

Erasmus+ pilots on university-business

school, VET & HE levels; European Qualifications

partnerships and on a European VET diploma;

Framework;

Individual learning accounts; Micro-

European Centres of Vocational Excellence

credentials;

Skills Portability Initiative;

VET strategy

Skills Academies; Pact for Skills

IVIC KNOWLEDGE

(adequate performance

in civic knowledge)

ECEC participation; early school leaving;

[VET];

tertiary attainment;

adult

participation in learning