Mid-Term Evaluation of EuroPass Training (1.05 Mb)

Mid-term Evaluation of the Decision ofthe Council 1999/51/EC on thepromotion of European Pathways forwork-linked training, includingapprenticeship (“EUROPASS-Training”)

Contract number 2002-0851/001-001 FOPEUROPA

A Final Report to the Directorate General Education and Cultureof the European Commission

ECOTECResearch & Consulting Limited

Priestley House28-34 Albert StreetBirmingham B4 7UDUnited Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)121 616 3600Fax: +44 (0)121 616 3699Web: www.ecotec.com

Mid-term Evaluation of the Decision of theCouncil 1999/51/EC on the promotion ofEuropean Pathways for work-linked training,including apprenticeship (“EUROPASS-Training”)


A Final Report to the Directorate General Education and Culture of theEuropean Commission

July 2003

ECOTEC Research and Consulting Limited

Priestley House28-34 Albert StreetBirminghamB4 7UD UKTel: +44 (0)121 616 3600Fax: +44 (0)121 616 3699Website: www.ecotec.com

6-8 Marshalsea RoadLondonSE1 1HL UKTel: +44 (0)20 7089 5550Fax: +44 (0)20 7089 5559

13b Avenue de TervurenB-1040 BruxellesBelgiqueTel: +32 (2)743 8949Fax: +32 (2)743 7111

Modesto Lafuente 63 – 6aE-28003 MadridEspañaTel: +34 91 535 0640Fax: +34 91 533 3663

31-32 Park RowLeedsLS1 5JD UKTel: +44 (0)113 244 9845Fax: +44 (0)113 244 9844

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................ i

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 11.1 The EUROPASS Training initiative and its evaluation schedule .................................. 1

1.2 Evaluation design ........................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Methodology................................................................................................................... 3

1.4 Conditions affecting the evaluation study ...................................................................... 3

1.5 Structure of the report..................................................................................................... 4

2.0 THE POLICY CONTEXT.................................................................................................. 52.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Transparency of qualifications and competencies and mobility .................................... 6

2.3 Processes in the transparency of qualifications and competencies ................................ 7

3.0 EUROPASS TRAINING: INITIATIVE OBJECTIVES .............................................. 133.1 Challenges to which EUROPASS Training responds .................................................. 13

3.2 EUROPASS Training objectives.................................................................................. 13

4.0 MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURES .................................. 154.1 Territorial dimension .................................................................................................... 15

4.2 Management in practice ............................................................................................... 19

4.3 Partnership building...................................................................................................... 22

5.0 THE EUROPASS TRAINING INITIATIVE ................................................................. 245.1 Funding......................................................................................................................... 24

5.2 EUROPASS Training dissemination and awareness ................................................... 24

5.3 Participation.................................................................................................................. 27

5.4 Survey of participant organisations .............................................................................. 39

6.0 NATIONAL CONTACT POINTS’ VIEWS ABOUT EUROPASS.............................. 636.1 Understanding of the initiative ..................................................................................... 63

6.2 EUROPASS Training Impact....................................................................................... 67

6.3 National Contact Points on sustainability and reform.................................................. 75

7.0 EXPERTS’ VIEWS ABOUT EUROPASS...................................................................... 837.1 The EUROPASS Training Initiative ............................................................................ 83

7.2 EUROPASS Training and National Training Policies................................................. 84

7.3 EUROPASS Training and Other Community Initiatives............................................. 84

7.4 Future Trends................................................................................................................ 84

8.0 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................. 868.1 Appropriateness............................................................................................................ 86

8.2 Management and implementation ................................................................................ 88

8.3 Impact ........................................................................................................................... 90

8.4 The need for further development ................................................................................ 95

9.0 POLICY OPTIONS: TOWARDS SOLUTIONS ........................................................... 969.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 96

9.2 Policy option one: Leave EUROPASS Training unchanged and improve theunderstanding of the current initiative by all key stakeholders .................................... 96

9.3 Policy option two: Simplify the situation of the set of transparency tools, includingEUROPASS Training................................................................................................... 98

9.4 Policy option three: Change the EUROPASS Training document and the way in whichit is filled in, keep the focus of the initiative ................................................................ 98

Annex One: Case Studies Annex Two: Tender Specifications Annex Three: Supplementary Tables Annex Four: ReferencesAnnex Five: Methodological Tools

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 : EUROPASS Training's Operational objectives and operational tools........................ iiTable 2: Views of participant organisations and NCPs on the impact of EUROPASS

Training in its global objectives ............................................................................... ivTable 3: Management structures for EUROPASS Training by country................................ 16Table 4: Number of approved applications for EUROPASS Training documents per country

until October 2002. .................................................................................................. 28Table 5: Number of awarded EUROPASS Training documents by educational level to

which holder aspired................................................................................................ 29Table 6: Number of EUROPASS Training documents by age group ................................... 30Table 7: Proportion of EUROPASS Training documents given (by gender) ........................ 31Table 8: Principal occupational status at the time of application for a EUROPASS Training

document.................................................................................................................. 32Table 9: Top ten economic sectors participating in EUROPASS.......................................... 33Table 10: Length of training periods certified by EUROPASS............................................... 34Table 11: Home country and country of destination of the “estimated” EUROPASS Training

document given between 11/00 and 08/02 .............................................................. 36Table 12: Number of sending organisations by country.......................................................... 37Table 13: Sending organisations: Top ten sectors (all countries) ............................................ 38Table 14: Number of organisations participating in EUROPASS Training by size of company

(Italy, Spain, The Netherlands (1), Luxembourg and Portugal combined) ............. 38Table 15: Sample distribution by country................................................................................ 40Table 16: How would you define your organisation?.............................................................. 41Table 17: What is the size of your organisation –all sites ....................................................... 42Table 18: What is the main economic sector in which your organisation operates? ............... 42Table 19: Does your organisation have any sites abroad?....................................................... 43Table 20: If you have participated as a host organisation, what has/have been the subject(s) of

the training provided in periods certified by EUROPASS? .................................... 44Table 21: Have you read any EUROPASS Training promotional material?........................... 45Table 22: How would you rate the clarity of the publicity materials for EUROPASS? ......... 45Table 23: How did your organisation hear about EUROPASS? ............................................. 46Table 24: How many EUROPASS Training documents has your organisation been involved

in as sending organisation since the launch of the initiative? –including those on-going ........................................................................................................................ 47

Table 25: How many EUROPASS Training documents has your organisation been involvedin as host organisation since the launch of the initiative? –including those on-going................................................................................................................................. 47

Table 26: What work experience had beneficiaries who participated in EUROPASS Trainingin your organisation? ............................................................................................... 48

Table 27: If you have participated as sending organisation, what proportion of EUROPASSTraining holders have carried out more than one work-related training periodabroad?..................................................................................................................... 48

Table 28: How would you rate the information contained in the EUROPASS Trainingdocument?................................................................................................................ 49

Table 29: What do you think that EUROPASS Training should certify? ............................... 49

Table 30: Would an electronic version of the document be beneficial?.................................. 49Table 31: How clear is your understanding of the objectives of EUROPASS........................ 50Table 32: How would you rate the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training in increasing the

number of training periods abroad........................................................................... 51Table 33: How do you think that EUROPASS Training affects trainees’ willingness to

undertake training abroad? ...................................................................................... 51Table 34: For sending organisations only: How do trainees in your organisation react when

told of EUROPASS? ............................................................................................... 52Table 35: Do you think that EUROPASS Training helps to promote vocational training and to

make it more attractive to young people?................................................................ 52Table 36: How would you rate the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training in increasing the

quality of training periods abroad............................................................................ 52Table 37: How would you rate the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training in increasing the

quality and recognition of qualifications gained through periods of training abroad?................................................................................................................................. 53

Table 38: How would you rate the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training in increasing thevisibility of periods of training abroad .................................................................... 54

Table 39: How would you rate your understanding of the equivalence of training levelsbetween the host and sending countries before your experience of EUROPASS? . 54

Table 40: How has your understanding of the equivalence of training levels between the hostand sending countries changed since the involvement in EUROPASS?................. 55

Table 41: To what extent does EUROPASS Training help to develop links between trainingand work experience? .............................................................................................. 55

Table 42: How do you think that the EUROPASS Training document affects the employmentprospects of its holders?........................................................................................... 56

Table 43: Has participation in EUROPASS Training increased the visibility of yourorganisation at European level?............................................................................... 56

Table 44: How was the information from NCPs when requested?.......................................... 56Table 45: Were the main methods of communication adequate with National Contact Points

(NCPs) and partner organisations (POs)?................................................................ 57Table 46: Had your organisation been involved in any other Community programme/initiative

in the fields of education and training before EUROPASS?................................... 57Table 47: Which of the following EU initiatives have you heard of? ..................................... 58Table 48: In your opinion, how complementary is EUROPASS Training to the following ... 59Table 49: Do you find European initiatives relating to the certification and transparency of

qualifications in the field of education and training? .............................................. 60Table 50: How far have the objectives you had when you applied for participation in the

EUROPASS Training initiative been fulfilled?....................................................... 60Table 51: Has your EUROPASS Training experience made it more or less likely that you

look favourably in the future on someone with a EUROPASS? ............................. 61Table 52: What do you perceive as the main problems related to the EUROPASS Training

initiative? –Multiple choice ..................................................................................... 61Table 53: Will your organisation continue to participate in EUROPASS Training in the

future? ...................................................................................................................... 62Table 54: EUROPASS Training Relevance ............................................................................ 65Table 55: Overall results of EUROPASS Training in your country so far by NCP................ 76

Table 56: Continuing relevance of EUROPASS Training in your country so far –by NCP... 76Table 57: Justification of EUROPASS Training’ss focus on vocational training –by NCP ... 77Table 58: How easily could EUROPASS Training be extended to other education and training

areas? ....................................................................................................................... 78Table 59: Number of pathways funded by mobility programmes ........................................... 79Table 60: Complementarity between EUROPASS Training and other European initiatives.. 80Table 61: EUROPASS Training’s Operational objectives and operational tools.................... 87Table 62: Views of participant organisations and NCPs on the impact of EUROPASS

Training on its global objectives.............................................................................. 90

EUROPASS Training Mid-term Evaluation Final Report

ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

ECOTEC Research and Consulting Limited were commissioned by the EuropeanCommission to carry out the mid-term evaluation of the EUROPASS Training initiative, onthe promotion of European pathways for work-linked training, including apprenticeship.

The research aimed to evaluate the initiative’s appropriateness, management andimplementation and impact -including achievement of its objectives.

The main information collection tools used were:

� a survey sent to 899 participant organisations. The survey was replied to by 95organisations. Ninety two questionnaires were suitable for processing,

� nineteen in-depth interviews with National Contact Points for the initiative (NCPs),� a data grid to NCPs covering quantitative aspects of EUROPASS Training at national

level,� three in-depth interviews with national experts,� nineteen case studies exploring best practice examples,� evaluation of available secondary data and� attendance of meetings at DG Education and Culture (DGEAC) with the participation of

educational experts, representatives of various stakeholder groups and DGEAC personnel.

Although a survey of participant individuals was envisaged for this evaluation, this could notbe undertaken. This imposed some constrains to this mid-term evaluation.

Evaluation findings

EUROPASS Training appropriateness

Extent to which operational objectives are consistent with operational tools

A set of operational tools has been set up to fulfil EUROPASS Training operationalobjectives:



ii

Table 1 : EUROPASS Training's Operational objectives and operational toolsOperational objective Operational toolEstablishing implementation mechanisms atnational level in the framework of a co-ordinatedapproach at European level

NCPs established in all participant countries.Commission retains co-ordinating role

Setting up a system for co-ordination ofinformation

Four meetings for exchange of informationorganised by the CommissionInformal contacts between the Commission andNCPS and between NCPs themselves

Promoting the initiative Dissemination materials have been produced anddistributed at European, national and sub-nationallevel

Production and distribution of the “EUROPASSTraining documents”

The Commission produced EUROPASS Trainingdocuments, which are distributed by NCPs

Ensuring the quality of the European pathways NCPs and participant organisations are in chargeof ensuring quality of European pathwayscertified by EUROPASS Training; co-lateralquality assurance through LEONARDO for manypathways

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

All operational objectives have been therefore covered by operational tools. In our opinion,all operational tools established are consistent with the operational objectives set out for it.

EUROPASS Training consistency with the policy developments in the field of lifelonglearning, particularly in relation to transparency and transferability of qualifications and skills

There is currently a political momentum regarding the need to improve transparency tools.Although successful and widely used in some cases, according to our survey to participantorganisations, existing instruments and services supporting transparency of qualifications arenot sufficiently visible and accessible to citizens, who consider the current situation fortransparency tools too complex. Several NCPs and national experts suggested different waysin which these deficiencies could be addressed. In many of these, EUROPASS Trainingwould play a very important role. This emphasises the consistency of EUROPASS Trainingwith policy developments in the area of transparency of qualifications and competences andthe relevance of EUROPASS Training for these future developments.

Relevance of EUROPASS Training’s specific objective

The specific objective for EUROPASS Training is the promotion of periods of transnationalmobility within work-linked training. Sixty percent of the respondents to our survey ofparticipant organisations said that EUROPASS Training should certify work linked training,77% that it should be expanded to certify all skills acquired abroad and 67% that it could beexpanded to certify all training abroad. It is therefore not clear that EUROPASS Trainingspecific objective should continue unchanged, and consideration should be given to extendingthe initiative’s objective to the promotion of periods of transnational mobility withinalternative learning environments.



iii

EUROPASS Training management and implementation

Clarity of the specific and operational objectives

All NCPs reported their understanding of the specific and operational objectives of theinitiative as adequate, and they pointed out that this understanding had been necessary for theproduction of national guidelines. They were less sure about the understanding of theinitiative by its users, especially regarding the initiative’s rationale and operationalframework. Participant organisations, however, reported having a good understanding of theinitiative. Eighty percent of the respondents of our survey of participants declared having aclear or very clear understanding of the objectives of EUROPASS Training.

Territorial dimension

Management of the EUROPASS Training initiative is decentralised to the national level inparticipant countries, with the Commission retaining a co-ordinating role. Some countrieshave decentralised the management structure for the initiative further to sub-national level. Amajority of NCPs considered that this decentralised structure was effective and efficient. Therationale for decentralisation is clear in that the quality control on European pathways canonly be done at national or regional level and the territorial management of the initiativeshould continue unchanged.

Management in practice

There are several actors involved in the management of EUROPASS Training. The EuropeanCommission has a primarily contractual involvement in the initiative, with someresponsibility for European level promotion, development and evaluation, as well as theproduction of the EUROPASS Training documents. The day to day management of theinitiative is the responsibility of National Contact Points, an arrangement that both theCommission and NCPs favour. Stakeholders and social partners may also be involved in themanagement of the initiative through Steering Committees, and they have a more active rolein some countries, like Germany. Sending and host organisations and beneficiaries are rarelyinvolved in the management of EUROPASS Training, other than by submitting applications(sending organisations) and being represented in fora where EUROPASS Training isdiscussed. The management of EUROPASS Training in practice is generally regarded as amerely functional role which NCPs perform alone, albeit with some involvement of a widerrange of actors.

Resources

NCPs often manage EUROPASS Training alongside existing mobility programmes andEUROPASS Training is not considered to be an onerous initiative to manage in terms ofhuman resources or finance given its current volume of activity. If the initiative is to beexpanded and take-up and dissemination increased, resource implications will have to betaken into account.



iv

Efficiency in the use of resources

The budget for the EUROPASS Training initiative was set at 7.3 million ECU for the period 1January 2,000/ 31 December 2004. The initiative has been efficient in its use of resources. Ithas already reached over 34,000 participants, what suggests that cost per awardedEUROPASS Training will be within reasonable margins by the end of 2004.

The EUROPASS Training document has been an efficient transparency mechanism. Eighty-five percent of the organisations surveyed during this evaluation considered the informationcontained in the EUROPASS Training document as useful or very useful. Several potentialimprovements were, nevertheless, highlighted during the evaluation process. In particular, theavailability of an electronic version and further specification of the content of the documentwere deemed necessary by NCPs. Participant organisations supported similar developmentsless strongly.

EUROPASS Training impact

Global objectives

EUROPASS Training aims to fulfil five global objectives. The views of NCPs and participantorganisations on the impact of EUROPASS Training regarding these objectives aresummarised below.

Table 2: Views of participant organisations and NCPs on the impact of EUROPASSTraining in its global objectives

Participant organisations NCPsTo improve the employment prospects of youngpeople

+ +

To encourage the development of effective linksbetween training and work experience

++ + -

To promote the mobility of persons in training + - + -To promote the transparency of vocationalcertificates and

+ ++

To improve the quality and attractiveness ofvocational education and training.

+ + -

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting LtdKey: (++) Very positive impact; (+) positive impact; (+-) no positive impact perceived

EUROPASS Training has had its greatest impact in improving the transparency of trainingperiods abroad. It has filled a vacuum that existed in the pre-2000 situation and bothparticipant organisations and especially NCPs considered that it has been successful in thisrespect. Participant organisations in particular were very positive about the effect ofEUROPASS Training in improving links between training and work experience, and thequality and attractiveness of vocational education and training. Both participant organisationsand NCPs considered that EUROPASS Training improves the employment prospects ofbeneficiaries, although this benefit must be tempered by the lack of knowledge of theinitiative by employers. By contrast, promotion of mobility of persons in training is theobjective that EUROPASS Training has achieved the least. It is considered that EUROPASS



v

Training is an addendum to the benefits of mobility in training, but not an initiative thatwould encourage people in training to undertake a European pathway.

Specific Objective: EUROPASS Training participation

Over 34,000 EUROPASS Training applications had been approved from the initiative launchuntil October 2002, when this mid-term evaluation collected data on participation from NCPs.However, data available from NCPs covered this period only partially, mainly from thebeginning of the initiative up to the end of 2001 or the first half of 2002, which suggests thatthe figure for approved applications might have already exceeded at least 40,000. This is asignificant increase, of almost 80%, from November 2001, suggesting that the initiative isbeing increasingly recognised and used by potential beneficiaries.

Extent to which the outcome and results attain the operational objectives

The outputs of EUROPASS Training in attaining its operational objectives have been varied.The NCP network as implementation mechanism at national level and the mechanisms forproduction and distribution of the EUROPASS Training document have been widelysuccessful. By contrast, the established system for the exchange of information and qualityassurance mechanisms have been criticised by some NCPs during this evaluation. Finally, theinstruments set up for promotion of the initiative have not disseminated EUROPASS Trainingas participants would have expected. Indeed, the survey to participant organisationshighlighted that the main problem EUROPASS Training faces is that it is not well known byemployers.

Complementary objectives:

Account of the specific needs of micro-enterprises, SMEs and the craft sector

EUROPASS Training has been used by micro-enterprises. According to the availableinformation from NCPs around 5% of the EUROPASS Training users would have been self-employed people and a further 10% would be small organisations, between 2 and 49employees. Moreover, our case studies present anecdotal evidence that the informationprovided by the EUROPASS Training document is useful for micro-enterprises, SMEs andthe craft sector.

Equal opportunities

The take up of the initiative has represented a wide range of educational levels, age groups,economic sectors and has kept a gender balance, although no explicit equal opportunitiespolicy has been developed for EUROPASS Training.



vi

Conclusions

The EUROPASS Training initiative has been relatively successful in a variety of aspectsduring its first years and has established the basis for future progress in the area oftransparency of qualifications. EUROPASS Training has, in its brief period of existence,confirmed itself as an important transparency tool, which is valued by its users. EUROPASSTraining is also fulfilling to a large extent the objectives that were set for it at the outset of theinitiative.

Different stakeholders have identified both the continuing relevance but also the need forreform of the initiative. It is seen as an appropriate and relevant tool to achieve the objectivesit was set. However, there are also constraints on EUROPASS Training and shortcomings inrelation to both the document itself and the initiative, in the current policy context.

In fact, the modest character of the initiative in its current form is one of the challenges that ithas for the future. EUROPASS Training is considered by NCPs and participant organisationsto be a useful tool and first step in the certification of skills acquired abroad, but it is alsoclear that these same actors believe that EUROPASS Training should be expanded. Theopinion of the majority of stakeholders is that if the initiative is to achieve its potential,important changes will be needed in the future. This might require changes not only in theformat of the present document, as previous analysis to this mid-term evaluation hassuggested, but also in relation to the rationale of the initiative. In this respect, potentialimprovements of the initiative, opening new possibilities in terms of both the format of theEUROPASS Training document and its content, have been presented during this evaluation.In particular, the need for an electronic version of the document, further specification of itscontents, integrating the initiative better with other transparency tools and extending theinitiative beyond work-linked training to encompass all training undertaken abroad should beconsidered in the short term.



1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 The EUROPASS Training initiative and its evaluation schedule

The European Community initiative “EUROPASS Training” was established by the CouncilDecision 1999/51/EC of 21 December 1998 “on the promotion of European pathways inwork-linked training, including apprenticeship”. This decision falls within the range ofactivities undertaken by the European Community to promote both apprenticeship and themobility of people undergoing training1. It establishes EUROPASS Training as a voluntaryrecord at Community level of the period or periods of training which a person undergoingwork-linked training, including apprenticeship, has followed in a Member state other than thatin which his/her training is based (known as “European pathway(s)”2). The new Communitydocument EUROPASS Training came into effect on 1st January 2000 in the EuropeanCommunity (article 8) and was later extended to the countries of the European EconomicArea. The objective of the EUROPASS Training initiative is twofold3: � to define the content as well as the general and common quality principles underpinning

the European pathways and� to boost the transparency and visibility of these European pathways by means of an

official certificate attesting to the training and/or work experience acquired by thebeneficiary in another country.

Article 9 of the Council Decision obliges the European Commission to submit a report on theimplementation of the initiative evaluating the impact of the Decision on the promotion ofmobility in work-linked training, including apprenticeship, and proposing any furthercorrective measures designed to make it more effective, three years after its adoption. The Commission planned three correlated activities for the initiative. � A mid-term Report to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of

the Decision published in May 20024, which focused on the operational andcomplementary objectives of the initiative.

� A Seminar with the actors concerned – Member state representatives and experts, held inLa Coruña 3-4 June 2002.

1 Viviane Reding in “EUROPASS Training Information booklet”http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/europass/broch_en.pdf (10/10/02)2 Council Decision of 21 December 1998 on the promotion of European pathways in work-linked straining,including apprenticeship 1999/51/EC, Official Journal L17 of 22 January 1999:453 Viviane Reding in “EUROPASS Training Information booklet”http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/europass/broch_en.pdf (10/10/02) More detailed information on theinitiative’s objectives can be found in section 3.14 “Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: Report on the implementation ofthe Decision 1999/51 EC of the Council of 21 December 1998 on the promotion of European pathways in work-linked training, including apprenticeship” Brussels, 02.05.2002 COM(2002) 214 Final.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/europass/broch_en.pdf




2

� This mid-term evaluation, which focus on the efficiency and effectiveness of theimplementation of the Decision, providing lessons and recommendations for themanagement of the initiative.

1.2 Evaluation design EUROPASS Training is a recent initiative in which data collection possibilities have not yetbeen fully explored and taken advantage of. It was agreed from the outset that data collectionand analysis should not only focus on the key political stakeholders for the initiative butshould also enable the evaluation to account for the views of those who actually take part in it.As such, ECOTEC’s mid-term evaluation study design involves a complex set of instrumentsfor data collection: � Nineteen in-depth interviews with National Contact Points � Three in-depth interviews with national experts � Collection of statistical data – with an emphasis on the profile of participants in the

initiative - from National Contact Points � A surveys sent to 899 participating organisations and replied to by 95 organisations (92

replies were suitable for processing) � 19 case studies describing the EUROPASS Training experience of best-practice

participant organisations � Evaluation of available secondary sources on EUROPASS Training and related initiatives

and policy developments � Attendance at meetings at DG Education and Culture with educational experts,

representatives of various stakeholder groups and Commission personnel, which dealtwith EUROPASS Training related developments5.

These tools for data collection were designed to ensure that the study responded to keyquestions related to the appropriateness, management, implementation and impact ofEUROPASS Training, taking the analysis of the views of a comprehensive set of key actorsas a starting point. This will enable the evaluation firstly to consider a broad range of goalsand views on the initiative beyond the Council Decision, secondly to compare differentstakeholders’ expectations, and thirdly to determine how the initiative responds to top-downand bottom-up demands. Given the time and budgetary constraints for the evaluation it has not been possible toexamine the views and motivations of those organisations and individuals who would qualifyfor a EUROPASS Training document but who have decided not to participate in the initiative.

5 A survey to participating individuals was also envisaged for this mid-term evaluation, however, not enoughdata could be gathered so as to present reliable results in this report.



3

The evaluation has, nevertheless, attended to this issue by asking for the views of NationalContact Points on this issue. The mid-term evaluation also seeks to draw out implications from the above information forthe future of the initiative, providing recommendations both on the management of theinitiative and on improving its impact and future role within the wider context of Europeaneducation and training policies. 1.3 Methodology The main objective of this mid-term evaluation is to assess the performance of theEUROPASS Training scheme in relation to the achievement of its objectives6. This will bedone focusing on the following issues as set out in the Terms of Reference: � Appropriateness - the extent to which the operational objectives are consistent with the operational tools- consistency with the policy developments in the field of lifelong learning,- whether EUROPASS Training’s specific objective is still relevant � Management and implementation - the clarity of the specific and operational objectives- territorial dimension- management in practice- resources- efficiency in the use of resources

� Impact

- impact on global objectives- impact on specific objective- the extent to which the outcome and results attain the operational objectives- impact on complementary objectives

1.4 Conditions affecting the evaluation study In order to understand the context, possibilities and limits of this mid-term evaluation, fourpoints have to be highlighted: � The initiative itself is very recent, and in some countries it is still in a preliminary process

of development, which limits the scope and depth of the evaluation. � The available information on the EUROPASS Training initiative not produced for

dissemination purposes is therefore very scarce. The evaluation builds upon the mid-termImplementation Report for the initiative, completing and updating the information offered

6 For a detailed description of the initiative objective’s see section 3



4

and using the report as a basis for analysis. The implementation report, which did notintend to be evaluative, gave a first overview of the implementation of the initiative,informing especially on the different management approaches of the initiative inparticipating countries. The information given in the implementation report, however, islimited, in part due to the novelty of the initiative itself, and it is not targeted on many ofthe dimensions addressed in this report. Much new information has been incorporated toinform and to strengthen both the descriptive and the formative side of the evaluation.

� No complete or standardised data collection systems for the initiative have been

developed, and no time-frame for data collection for this evaluation was set, which makesthe data available for this report not strictly comparable between participating countries.

� The evaluation must form the basis for recommendations as to a successor Community

initiative in this area, as well as recommendations for the management of the currentinitiative in its last years. This will need to take account of not only the efficiency andeffectiveness of the current initiative, but also the appropriateness of its objectives withina changing policy framework. This would ideally be done in a combined evaluation of alltransparency initiatives and their role in the changing policy context rather than in anevaluation of one of those initiatives.

1.5 Structure of the report This final report is structured in nine sections. Section two explains the relevant policycontext for EUROPASS Training. Section three presents the objectives of the EUROPASSTraining initiative. Section four reviews the management and implementation systems for theinitiative. Section five outlines the results of a data grid for quantitative data sent to NCPs anda survey to participant organisations. Section six presents the views of National ContactPoints about EUROPASS Training. Section seven presents the views of national expertsoutside NCPs. Section eight draws together the findings presented in the preceding chaptersand presents ECOTEC’s conclusions for this evaluation. Section nine outlines some policyoptions for the future of the initiative.



5

2.0 THE POLICY CONTEXT

2.1 Introduction European pathways for training refer to any period of vocational training completed by aperson undergoing work-linked training as part of their training in another Member State7,complying with a number of quality criteria. This involves, in particular, forming apartnership between the establishment where the person completes his/her training and thehost body abroad. Within the framework of the partnership, both partners agree on thecontents, objectives, duration, methods and monitoring of the European pathway. The figureof a mentor with precise functions during the training periods is also envisaged. It is in orderto recognise such a European pathway for training and to provide better transparency andgreater visibility to these training periods abroad that a standard Community informationdocument, the “EUROPASS” document, was introduced. The “EUROPASS” document,whose contents and presentation have been defined at Community level, is delivered to itsholder by the body responsible for organising the training at the Member State of origin. Thedocument provides the personal details of the trainee, information on the concerned traininginitiative, which includes the European pathway, and details of training periods abroad (hostpartner, mentor, etc.). It therefore helps to certify training periods in another Member state ina standardised way, giving European training bodies and employers reliable and easilycomparable information and helping its users in their professional advancement. The concept of “European pathway” involves all forms of mobility which are aimed at peoplein work-related training, including apprenticeship, whatever the framework in which thismobility action is integrated. The “EUROPASS” initiative is not a new mobility programmelike LEONARDO, SOCRATES or Marie Curie Fellowships. The European pathwaysrecorded by the “EUROPASS” documentation take place in the framework of any programmeor initiative in the field of education and training, as well as outside any community ornational programme. Because of the differences among the national training systems ofMember States, this measure is largely decentralised.

7 These include in the EUROPASS Training initiative EU and EEA countries. The participation of EFTA/EEAcountries (ISL,N,FL), not expressly envisaged by the text of the Council Decision was possible by amendingProtocol 31 to the EEA Agreement (co-operation in specific fields outside the four freedoms), so that they wouldbe recognised as “Member States” as far as the EUROPASS-Training Decision was concerned (EUROPASSTraining meeting of the representatives of national bodies, Brussels 12 May 2000). Candidate countries are notconcerned by the Decision, although consideration is being given to the opportunity to have them associated inthe framework of their preparation to accession.



6

2.2 Transparency of qualifications and competencies and mobility The free movement of labour within the EU is a key principle enshrined in policy since theTreaty of Rome in 1957 and restated on many occasions since then. The strategies pursued inan attempt to remove this obstacle include8: � Directives enabling people holding qualifications to seek recognition of their diploma in

order to pursue a regulated profession in a Member State other than the one in which theyobtained their qualifications (directives approved from the 1960s to 1999).

� Establishing comparisons between qualifications for some occupations and sectors across

all Member States (1985-1993). � Efforts to improve transparency, aimed at making qualifications more easily understood in

all member states – these include the Council Resolutions of 1992 and 1996 and projectsundertaken within the LEONARDO Programme since 1995.

It is in the lines of the third type of action that EUROPASS Training is located. Recently, theEuropean debate about transparency of qualifications has seen several developments, whichunderpin the importance of an initiative such as EUROPASS Training. The StockholmEuropean Council in March 2001 – following lines established at the end of 2000 in Nice –requested the Commission to prepare an Action Plan for Skills and Mobility. Presented inFebruary 20029, the Action Plan proposes to tackle three main challenges: “insufficientoccupational mobility, low levels of geographical mobility10 and poor access to informationon mobility, and proposes more uniform, transparent and flexible arrangements forrecognising qualifications and diplomas and periods of study”11. The Presidency conclusions to the Barcelona European Council (15 & 16 March 2002)furthered this proposal. They ask for priority action from the Council in “lowering regulatoryand administrative barriers to professional recognition as well as other barriers resulting fromfailure to recognise formal qualifications and non-formal learning and in ensuring genuinemobility for all those involved in education”12. The integration of EUROPASS Trainingwithin developments in all the above areas, its contribution towards improving the quality of

8 We follow “Achieving mobility by improving transparency of vocational qualifications: A proposal for action”European Forum in the field of Transparency of Vocational Qualifications, February 7, 2000.9 A High Level Task Force set up by the Commission to contribute to this task and made up of experts frombusiness, the world of education and social partners had submitted its recommendations on 14th December 2001.10 The importance of geographical mobility in the EU context is reflected in the new Issue of “The socialsituation in the European Union: 2002” (EUROSTAT/European Commission, 2002) which has this as its specialtheme, and where the most current available data on this issue can be found. For a comparison with the USApatterns see “New European Labour Markets, open to All, with access for all” COM (2001) 116 final, Brussels,28.02.01.11 Communication from the Commission to the Council, The European Parliament, the Economic and SocialCommittee and the Committee of the Regions “Commission’s Action Plan for Skills and mobility” COM (2002)72 Brussels, 13.2.2002. See also Barbier et. Al. Digest, Journal of European Social Policy 2002,12(2):167.12 See The Presidency Conclusions Barcelona European Council, SN 100/02 ADD 1.



7

work-linked training and its value for users, are the main focus of the present evaluation,which is not aimed at evaluating mobility as such13. 2.3 Processes in the transparency of qualifications and competencies If mobility gives the context to understand the initiative, the rationale behind the creation of a“EUROPASS Training document” is related to a crucial theme in education policies in the EUsince the 1990s: transparency of qualifications and competencies. 2.3.1 The European Forum on transparency of qualifications Established by CEDEFOP and the European Commission, the European Forum onTransparency of Vocational Qualifications14 was created in 1998, with the aim of promotingmobility of individuals by making qualifications and learning visible. It brings social partnerstogether with national training authorities’ representatives around the issue of transparencyand has developed varied instruments and working areas to develop transparency, like theEuropean Curriculum Vitae or the Certificate Supplement, which are reviewed below. Thework of the Forum created the bases for taking the EUROPASS Training initiative and otherinitiatives forward. 2.3.2 The process towards enhanced co-operation in vocational education and training15

The Council resolution on enhanced co-operation in vocational education and training,adopted on 19 December 2002, gives a mandate to work towards ‘Increasing transparency in vocational education and training through the implementation andrationalisation of information tools and networks, including the integration of existinginstruments such as the European CV, certificate and diploma supplements, the CommonEuropean Framework of reference for languages and the EUROPASS Training into one singleframework.’

On this basis, and building upon the work of the Transparency and Quality Forums, a workinggroup on transparency has been established. The initial mandate of the technical workinggroup on a single transparency framework, taking into account the results of the TransparencyForum and the evaluation of the current EUROPASS Training tool, is the following: � To identify the elements to be included in the integrated framework for transparency of

qualifications and competencies;� To develop an integrated framework which enables citizens to present and promote their

qualifications and competencies in a more coherent, visible and comparable way. Theframework should be user friendly and the relationship between its different elementsshould be clear.

13 See also EUROPASS Training Meeting of representatives of national bodies, Brussels 12 May 2000 p7.14 For more information see www.cedefop.eu.int/transparency/default.asp15 We follow European Commission, DG Education and Culture (2002) ”Increased co-operation in vocationaleducation and training: towards an integrated approach”, unpublished draft.



8

� To indicate how implementation can best be organised and to advise on how existingstructures, notably the National Contact Points for EUROPASS Training, the NationalResource Centres for Guidance and the National Reference Points for VocationalEducation and Training, could be usefully rationalised to support effective follow up. Inaddition, the development of appropriate links with the EURES and NARIC networksshould be examined.

� To report systematically to the co-ordination group and the ACVT, and by May 2003, topresent a report to the Commission outlining a basis for concrete action in this field, inparticular a new legal basis to succeed the existing EUROPASS Training Decision.Commission proposals will be submitted to the ACVT for opinion.

� The working group should be composed of representatives of the Member States,Candidate and EEA countries and Social Partners. The group should be supported byCEDEFOP and ETF and, if needed, be strengthened by other sources of expertise, forexample independent experts, networks etc.

The work of this working group and the political support towards enhanced co-operation invocational education and training will therefore be crucial for the development of theEUROPASS Training initiative into the basis for the above mentioned integrated frameworkfor the transparency of qualifications and competencies. 2.3.3 Integrated framework for the transparency of qualifications and competencies The new integrated framework for transparency will have as its background the work of theTransparency Forum and other Community initiatives that run parallel to EUROPASSTraining and help to understand its rationale and context. Other related EU instruments andinitiatives in related fields include16: 2.3.4 The European CV The European curriculum vitae model was developed by the European Forum onTransparency of vocational qualifications to give a comprehensive standardised overview ofeducation attainments and work experience of an individual.

2.3.5 The certificate supplement The certificate supplement, also developed by the European Forum on Transparency ofqualifications, is based on a European format which describes the qualifications acquired andhelps to demonstrate actual skills and competencies to employers by providing a detaileddescription of each individual’s vocational training background, without aiming to substitutefor the original qualifications of the individual or an automatic system that guaranteesrecognition.

16 Initiatives and instruments should be read in conjunction with parallel processes in the field of Education, suchas the “Bologna process” and the “Bruges Process”, whose experiences can be used as a basis for promotingcloser co-operation within vocational education and training, as pointed out by the Commission COM (2002)7213.2.2002 and previously Communication from the Commission “Making a European Area of LifelongLearning a Reality COM (2001) 678 final, Brussels 21.11.01 p.16.



9

2.3.6 European Credit Transfer System European Credit Transfer System (ECTS), provides a way of measuring and comparinglearning achievements, and transferring them from one institution to another in the field ofhigher education, improving access to information on foreign curricula and providingcommon procedures for academic recognition. ECTS guarantees the reciprocal recognition ofqualifications awarded by its signatory institutions, where one ECTS credit corresponds to aunit of value assigned to a course on the basis of the work involved. Accumulating 60 ECTScredits is equivalent to one year’s academic study17. As stated in the Communication from theCommission “Making a European Area of Lifelong Learning a Reality” (COM (2001)678final) the Commission, in co-operation with the Member States, will (by 2003) develop a“modular” system for the accumulation of qualifications, allowing citizens to combineeducation and training from various institutions and countries. This will build on the ECTSand EUROPASS Training. 2.3.7 The recognition of non-formal learning This initiative of the European Union aims to enhance the visibility of skills and competenciesin the labour market and to improve the recognition of non-formal training. Assessing andrecognising non-formal learning is very closely linked to other achievements of the Forum onTransparency, mainly the certificate supplement and the European CV. 2.3.8 The network of national reference points The network of national reference points gives access to information on national vocationaltraining systems in EU and EEA countries. 2.3.9 Other international initiatives and projects

The Diploma Supplement The Diploma Supplement (DS) is a document attached to a higher education diploma aimingat improving international ‘transparency’ and at facilitating the academic and professionalrecognition of qualifications (diplomas, degrees, certificates etc.). It is designed to provide adescription of the nature, level, context, content and status of the studies that were pursuedand successfully completed by the individual named on the original qualification to which thissupplement is appended. It should be free from any value-judgements, equivalence statementsor suggestions about recognition. It is a flexible non-prescriptive tool which is designed tosave time, money and workload. It is capable of adaptation to local needs. The DS is produced by national institutions according to a template developed by a JointEuropean Commission - Council of Europe - UNESCO working party and is available in the11 official EU languages. The DS is composed of eight sections (information identifying the holder of the qualification,information identifying the qualification, information on the level of the qualification,information on the contents and results gained, information on the function of the

17 “Passport to mobility: Learning differently, learning abroad” European Commission, Belgium, May 2001.



10

qualification, additional information, certification of the Supplement, information on thenational higher education system). Institutions have to apply to the DS the sameauthentication procedures as for the diploma itself. A description of the national higher education system within which the individual named onthe original qualification graduated has to be attached to the DS. This description is providedby the National Academic Recognition Information Centres (NARICs) The Common European Framework of Reference and the European Language Portfolio The Council of Europe’s Common European Framework of Reference: learning, teaching,assessment and its European Languages Portfolio are separate but very closely linkedproducts. In brief terms:

� the Framework is a description of a modern approach to foreign language learning andteaching;

� it is most often used for its Common Reference Scales: a set of scales describing sixdifferent levels of language competence from beginner to near native-speaker, in terms ofpractical ‘can-do’ statements;

� the Portfolio is a document owned by the language learner, in which all his or herlanguage learning experiences and competencies are described. It seeks to have apedagogical function (based on autonomy in the language learning process) as well as apresentational one (clear description of what language skills the learner possesses).

European Computer Driving Licence The European Computer Driving Licence is an internationally recognised standard ofcompetence certifying that the holder has the knowledge and skill needed to use the mostcommon computer applications efficiently and productively. 2.3.10 Other European networks EUROGUIDANCE

EUROGUIDANCE is the network of National Resource Centres for Vocational Guidance andaims at promoting mobility by providing information on education and training opportunitiesin Europe, for both guidance practitioners and citizens at large, and supporting the exchangeof quality information on education and training systems and qualifications in the EuropeanUnion, the European Economic Area and Eastern European Countries. The network (set up in1992-93) currently includes more than 50 centres that are co-financed by the LEONARDOProgramme and by the relevant national authorities. EUROGUIDANCE is the humannetwork behind the PLOTEUS web site on learning opportunities in Europe run by theCommission (www.ploteus.net).



11

European Network Within the framework of Youth for Europe, the European Commission has supported thepiloting of the EURODESK model and its subsequent development into a European Network.EURODESK is a European network for the dissemination of European Information and forthe provision of telephone enquiry answering services at national or regional level for youngpeople and those who work with them. It operates free, public enquiry answering andinformation services throughout the EU on European funding and opportunities for youngpeople, as well as information on contacts and resources. The EURODESK Network now has partners in 23 countries with more than 150 EURODESKsites providing EURODESK information services at national and regional levels. By use of aspecially developed database, all the EURODESK partners can share and exchangeinformation electronically and always have access to a wide range of up-to-date informationfor enquiry answering and dissemination. EURES EURES has a database where job-seekers and employers in the EU/EEA area meet but onlyfor the Information and Communication Technology, Healthcare, Hotel and Catering, andTravel sectors. EURES has not, however, an extensive coverage, with 28,668 CVs and 852employers registered by 14th June 200218. 2.3.11 Conclusion In its conclusions of the Barcelona spring summit (15 & 16 March 2002), the EuropeanCouncil called for further action in the introduction of instruments to ensure transparency ofdiplomas and qualifications both with regards to university degrees and vocational training19,and many of these initiatives and actions will be re-vamped and modified in the coming years.As we see, there are numerous initiatives targeted towards improving the transparency ofqualifications at EU/EEA level. Although successful and widely used in some cases, it isrecognised that existing instruments and services supporting transparency of qualifications arenot sufficiently visible and accessible to ordinary citizens. This is in part because instrumentsand services have suffered from a piecemeal approach, being developed and presented inisolation from each other, not as elements in an overall strategy. These problems of visibilityand coherence can be tackled in several different ways, one of them being based on thepresentation and connection of the appropriate mentioned tools under one single format. Thiscould be, as it has been suggested20, an extended EUROPASS Training document. Thisemphasises the importance that potential developments in the reformulation of the policiesand initiatives described above have for the descriptive and formative evaluation ofEUROPASS Training.

18 For a proposal from the Commission for the modernisation of EURES see COM(2002)72:19-20.19 http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/education_culture/publ/news/07/newsletter_en2.htm20 See the Background Paper, Policy conference June 10th and 11th 2002 “Increased co-operation in Europeanvocational education and training”.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/dgs/education_culture/publ/news/07/newsletter_en2.htm



12

It is in this context that a review of the functioning and accomplishment of objectives ofEUROPASS Training and an evaluation and re-thinking of the EUROPASS Trainingdocument – in relation to both current and future policy needs – is more relevant than everbefore. For this purpose ECOTEC evaluates in this report the perceived current and futureappropriateness of EUROPASS Training. It also reviews the need for reform of theEUROPASS Training initiative as perceived by key stakeholders (the EC, National ContactPoints, stakeholders and experts at national level). Finally, the evaluation assesses the impactof the initiative on beneficiaries, host and sending organisations and other EU policies, and itsmanagement and implementation at European, national and sub-national level. Section threefocuses on the initiative’s objectives in more detail.



13

3.0 EUROPASS TRAINING: INITIATIVE OBJECTIVES

The EUROPASS Training initiative was established to respond to a series of policychallenges and fulfil clear objectives. Both of these are briefly presented in this chapter.

3.1 Challenges to which EUROPASS Training responds The EUROPASS Training document responds to a need for improving the exchange ofexperiences in work-linked training in the European context. It recognises the need for: � Supporting and supplementing the mobility of persons in training � Promoting apprenticeship training in Europe � Developing effective links between training and work experience � Improving employment prospects of young people, providing them with relevant skills to

meet market requirements. From the Council Decision several different levels of EUROPASS Training objectives can beidentified. In the following sub-section we present the global, specific, operational andcomplementary objectives of the initiative. 3.2 EUROPASS Training objectives

3.2.1 Global objectives

There are five global objectives for EUROPASS Training, against which it is possible tomeasure its success in the mid-term evaluation. The global objectives are21: � To improve the employment prospects of young people and contribute to a more effective

social and occupational integration into working life and the labour market � To encourage the development of effective links between training and work experience � To promote the mobility of persons in training � To promote the transparency of vocational training certificates � To improve the quality and attractiveness of vocational education and training

21 The emphasis is ECOTEC’s.



14

3.2.2 Specific objectives The specific objective of EUROPASS Training is to promote periods of transnationalmobility within work-linked training 3.2.3 Operational objectives The operational objectives for EUROPASS Training would enable the initiative to workeffectively. They cover the most indispensable elements for the implementation of theinitiative (such as the production or distribution of EUROPASS Training documents and itspromotion) but also more elaborated elements such as the establishment of co-ordination andexchange of information systems and ensuring the quality of the European pathways, anoperational objective closely related to the appropriate establishment of adequateimplementation mechanisms at national level. Although EUROPASS Training is a Europeaninitiative and it is recognised in 18 countries, the implementation of the initiative is highly de-centralised at national and sometimes regional level –see chapter four below. The initiative’s operational objectives are: � Establishing implementation mechanisms at national level, in the framework of a co-

ordinated approach at European level � Setting up a system for co-ordination and exchange of information � Promoting of the initiative � Production and distribution of the “European Training” documents � Ensuring the quality of the European pathways

3.2.4 Complementary objectives The Council Decision also specifies complementary objectives for EUROPASS Training.This evaluation assesses the extent to which these objectives have been mainstreamed withinthe initiative. The complementary objectives for EUROPASS Training are: � To address the specific needs of micro-enterprises, SMES and the craft sector. � To ensure equal opportunities in relation to participation in European pathways and take

appropriate measures to that end � To ensure overall consistency between the implementation of this decision and other

Community Programmes



15

4.0 MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURES The Implementation Framework for the EUROPASS Training initiative has beencomprehensively described in a recent report from the Commission to the EuropeanParliament and the Council22. This section of the report therefore focuses on evaluating themanagement of the initiative (in terms of efficiency and effectiveness), rather than describingthe arrangements in depth. However, it is necessary to include some descriptive elements, inorder to place the evaluation in context. 4.1 Territorial dimension EUROPASS Training operates through a decentralised structure. In this section we examinethe nature of this decentralisation at two levels: from Community to Member State level; andthen within member states to sub-national levels. 4.1.1 Organisation of management at member state level

In this subsection we review the nature of the decentralisation of EUROPASS Training fromCommunity to Member State level. Firstly, we focus in the existing managementarrangements. Secondly, we review the effectiveness of decentralisation to Member Statelevel. We conclude that overall, there are few disadvantages of decentralisation and they areoutweighed by the advantages.

Management arrangements Management of the EUROPASS Training initiative is decentralised to the national level in all18 participant countries, with the European Commission retaining a co-ordination role. Therationale for decentralisation, according to the Commission, is that the quality control onprospective pathways can only be done at national or regional level. As required by the Decision of the Council, each participating country has designated one ormore ‘National Contact Points’ (NCPs) to implement EUROPASS Training at the national orregional level. The appointment of NCPs is a matter for national choice and has predictablyvaried from country to country. Four main approaches have been taken: � operation of the NCP directly by the national ministry of the participating country;� delegation to a public body responsible to the national ministry;� appointment of an external organisation, by negotiation;� appointment of an external organisation by competitive tender. In all cases, NCP status has been granted to existing bodies with an established role ineducation and training. Many are also the national agency for LEONARDO or other EUprogrammes such as Socrates.

22 European Commission (2002) ‘Report on the implementation of the Decision 1999/51/EC of the Council of 21December 1998 on the promotion of European pathways in work-linked training, including apprenticeship’Brussels, 02.05.2002 COM(2002) 214 final.



16

The arrangements for each country are summarised in Table 3. Table 3: Management structures for EUROPASS Training by country Country Nature of NCP Structure Austria Ministry of Economic Affairs and Labour Single NCP Belgium-De Education & training authority Regional NCP Belgium-Fr Employment & training service Regional NCP plus two

‘Operational ContactPoints’

Belgium-Nl Employment & training service Regional NCP Denmark Specialised agency for transnational

programmes Single NCP

Finland Education & training authority Single NCP France Specialised agency for transnational

programmes NCP plus regional contactpoints

Germany Specialised agency for transnationalprogrammes

Several NCPs

Greece Education & training authority Single NCP Iceland Umbrella organisation of training institutions Single NCP Ireland Employment & training service Single NCP Italy Specialised agency for transnational


Liechtenstein Education & training authority Single NCP Luxembourg Education & training authority Single NCP Netherlands Umbrella organisation of training institutions Single NCP Norway Specialised agency for transnational


Portugal Specialised agency for transnationalprogrammes

Single NCP

Spain Specialised agency for transnationalprogrammes

Single NCP

Sweden Specialised agency for transnationalprogrammes

Single NCP

UK Specialised agency for transnationalprogrammes

Single NCP

Source: Adapted from European Commission (2002) ‘Report on the implementation of the Decision 1999/51/EC ofthe Council of 21 December 1998 on the promotion of European pathways in work-linked training, includingapprenticeship’ Brussels, 02.05.2002 COM(2002) 214 final



17

Effectiveness of decentralisation to member state level All NCPs except one believed that it was most efficient and effective to decentralise themanagement of EUROPASS Training from the European to the national level. NCPs report anumber of advantages of decentralisation that are clear and tangible. They are primarily that: � education and training systems operate at the national level and differ widely from country

to country;� national level implementation can reach potential participants more effectively than

European-level implementation;� promotional materials can be customised to the national context;� closer contact can be maintained with sending organisations;� greater complementarity can be achieved with other mobility programmes;� most NCPs have not had to recruit large numbers of new staff, but have been able to

implement EUROPASS Training alongside existing activity. The one NCP that argued against decentralisation felt that it prevented consistency inimplementation, with each country ‘acting in its own way’. Overall, however, there are few disadvantages of decentralisation and they are outweighed bythe advantages. Centralisation of the management at the European level would makeEUROPASS Training remote from its potential users and lose important synergies with othermobility programmes and with national education and training systems. The main potentialbenefit of centralisation – a more consistent approach to implementation across Europe –could be achieved within the current implementation framework by clearer quality controlover the issuing of documents. 4.1.2 Arrangements at sub-national level

In this subsection we review the nature of the decentralisation of EUROPASS Training atsub-national level. Again, management arrangements are reviewed first. Secondly, we reviewthe effectiveness of sub-national decentralisation.

Management arrangements Decentralisation to the regional level takes place in a number of member states includingBelgium, France, Germany and Spain. Belgium has three NCPs, representing the French, Dutch and German-speaking communitiesrespectively. Each NCP operates independently of the others and reports directly to theEuropean Commission. Within the Belgian Francophone Community, one organisation(FOREM) acts as the NCP, but two other organisations also act as ‘operational contactpoints’. All three organisations receive requests for ‘EUROPASS Training’s documents andsupply them to participants. In both the Dutch and German-speaking communities, a singleorganisation fulfils all roles of the NCP (VDAB and IAWM respectively). In France, a single NCP oversees a decentralised regional implementation structure.Applications are received electronically by the NCP, but forwarded to the appropriate regionalcontact point (RCP) for checking and issuing. This structure is based on the regional



18

representation of the national Ministries for Agriculture, Education and Employment, with arepresentative of each organisation responsible for issuing documents in each region. Thissystem is similar to that used in Spain where the ‘Comunidades Autónomas’ manage the day-to-day operation of the initiative, overseen by the central NCP. Germany also has a decentralised structure but one that is not based on geography. TheFederal Government oversees the process, but has appointed an overall co-ordinator, plus anadditional nine NCPs, making ten in all. These NCPs all operate nationally, but servedifferent target groups, such as higher education students, vocational schools or industrialsectors. Each NCP is responsible for issuing EUROPASS Training documents.

Effectiveness of sub-national decentralisation From a comparison of the material from interviews with NCPs with de-centralised andcentralised sub-national arrangements potential benefits to decentralisation can be discerned,but these must be weighed against the disadvantages to determine the overall effectiveness. The main potential benefits are: � potential closer contact with potential participants and better understanding of their needs,

leading to customised promotion of the initiative and on-going support;� the potential to include more partners;� a fit with sub-national political structures (which is partly linked to the first bullet point). There is a range of potential disadvantages to decentralisation reported by NCPs whichinclude: � inconsistent national approach, e.g. to promotion;� weaker quality control over the issuing of documents and the quality of pathways;� relatively high administration costs, especially given that the average grant to all countries

in 2001 was just €60,000;� potential confusion on the part of participants, for example over whom to apply to. Clearly, not all of these disadvantages will pertain in any one member state at any one time,but they represent the types of problems encountered. France probably provides the best example of decentralisation, and indeed was examined bysome other member states as a model of good practice (e.g. Spain). The regional contact pointstructure for EUROPASS Training mirrors the French decentralised governance structure inthe area of vocational training. There are clear territorial responsibilities for the three regionalcontact points in each region. In many cases, the regional contact points cultivate synergiesbetween the three Ministries represented. At the same time, the more complex regionalstructure may increase the management overhead compared to the relatively small budget andnumbers of beneficiaries, although this issue has not been examined in detail and depends onconcrete arrangements. All of the small countries (except Belgium where the management structure provides a fitwith the wider political structure) have just a single NCP and intend to continue as such. One



19

NCP reported: “Ours is a small country and we know and work with all the sendingorganisations.” 4.2 Management in practice

This section reviews the management in practice of EUROPASS Training. Firstly, we clarifythe roles and responsibilities of the various actors involved. Secondly, implementation timescales are reviewed. Thirdly, financial and human resources for the initiative are examined.Finally, we identify a number of success factors and key problems encountered in theimplementation of the initiative so far.

4.2.1 Roles and responsibilities of the various actors At the European level, the role of the Commission in the management of EUROPASSTraining has consisted of: � overall co-ordination;� production of the EUROPASS Training documents;� managing the stock of EUROPASS Training documents;� provision of information, including promotional materials, at Community level;� management of the budgetary line; and� overall evaluation. The involvement of the Commission is, then, primarily contractual, with some responsibilityfor European level promotion and evaluation, as well as the production of the EUROPASSTraining documents. Since the launch of EUROPASS Training, four meetings bringing together all the NCPs havebeen organised by the Commission in Brussels. One major opportunity to exchange viewsand discuss a number of issues was the seminar held in La Coruña 3-4 June 2002 within theframework of the Spanish Presidency programme, gathering representatives of NCPs, ofrelevant national authorities and of social partners, as well as individual experts. This seminarwas the first opportunity for representatives of the NCPs, national authorities and socialpartners to discuss the “EUROPASS”, and discuss progress made by the initiative so far andexplore what improvements could be made to it (e.g. the electronic format and integrationwith other transparency tools). The most important conclusion from the Seminar was that,after the initial phase of the implementation of the initiative in its first two years, it should bemodified in the new policy context to achieve its full potential. NCPs also report that theymaintain regular informal contact with the Commission and that the Commission generallyresponds promptly and helpfully to ad hoc requests and questions. Day-to-day managementof the initiative is the responsibility of NCPs, an arrangement that both the Commission andNCPs favour. At national level, where stakeholders/social partners are involved in the management ofEUROPASS Training it usually takes place through representation on steering committees. Itis rare that stakeholders have a direct role in the management of the initiative, with Germanybeing a notable exception. NCPs (whether Government Ministries or other bodies) generallyregard the management of EUROPASS Training as a fairly functional role, which they aloneperform, albeit with some reporting to a wider range of interested actors. Many NCPs have



20

existing links with social partners, often through other programmes, and have not seen theneed to duplicate arrangements within EUROPASS Training alone. Some examples of the ways in which stakeholders are represented in the management ofEUROPASS Training include: � Luxembourg: social partners represented via LEONARDO National Committee;� Netherlands: trade unions represented at the political level;� Germany: initial ‘round table’ for social partners at the outset of EUROPASS Training;� Sweden: Vocational Training Reference Group of social partners advises the NCP. Sending organisations are rarely involved in managing EUROPASS Training other than bysubmitting applications and overseeing the training of their own beneficiaries. Some may beinvolved through established channels for national programmes or other EU programmes,such as representation on LEONARDO Steering Committees, or other similar bodies. Forexample, the relatively small number of providers23 in Iceland already have well-establishedlinks to the EUROPASS Training NCP (MENNT) through national programmes, and workclosely with it. Beneficiaries generally have little or no role in the management of EUROPASS Training. Insome member states students are represented in forums where EUROPASS Training isdiscussed, e.g. in Denmark. None of the NCPs reported contact with the host organisations in their country, other thanwith sending organisations that also hosted EUROPASS Training beneficiaries. Some NCPsreported that host organisations that were not sending organisations often did not knowanything about EUROPASS Training and that this was a key reason for the poor quality ofreporting on students’ experiences in the document. NCPs also do not collect informationabout host organisations, which represents an important gap in knowledge about EUROPASSTraining. 4.2.2 Time-scales for implementation The majority of NCPs report that the timescale for implementation was reasonable and thatthey were ready for operation as soon as they received the EUROPASS Training document.Indeed, some had held launch events in advance of receiving the documents. At least four(Austria, Germany, Iceland, Sweden) report that implementation was delayed by the latereceipt of the EUROPASS Training documents from the European Commission. One other(Luxembourg) reported that implementation was delayed slightly to fit into the academic year.In Spain the establishment of the NCP was delayed until 2002 because of the restructuring ofnational ministries after the general election.

23 In relation to more populous countries



21

4.2.3 Financial and human resources Current arrangements The management of EUROPASS Training has tended to be treated as an additional role forcurrent staff, or as part of their current responsibilities within NCPs. Generally, the smallercountries have not had a member of staff solely dedicated to EUROPASS Training, largelydue to the small absolute size of the budget. For example, in Liechtenstein the managementof EUROPASS Training accounts for just 8% of the time of two members of staff. Incontrast, the UK has a dedicated project manager, and in Spain there is also one individualdedicated full-time to EUROPASS Training. NCPs typically have an overall project manager, supported by an administrative assistant,with a wider pool of staff for specialist roles such as finance, marketing, ICT etc. Someexamples include: � Sweden: five people part-time on EUROPASS Training covering project management,

finance, marketing and information;� Finland: four people part-time: co-ordinator; project planner; two secretaries; plus

contacts at the National Board of Education, the Finnish LEONARDO Centre and theFinnish Centre for International Mobility, these last two primarily concerned withpromotion.

Adequacy of financial and human resources All NCPs (except Germany and Liechtenstein) report that the level of human resourcesavailable for management is adequate. In most cases, EUROPASS Training is managedalongside existing programmes such as LEONARDO and does not make onerous demands ofstaff. The German NCP, however, reported that the level of human resources was ‘very deficient’and that there were no dedicated staff across the ten NCPs. This is perhaps a reflection of theextensive network of NCPs in that country and the large number of passes distributed. Thelevel in Liechtenstein was also described as ‘deficient’, perhaps reflecting the small size of theorganisation responsible, compared to the national ministries in some of the other countries. All NCPs, except Italy, reported that the financial resources available for management wereabout adequate, with Italy reporting that they were ‘deficient’. While this is encouraging, itmust be noted that the number of applications has been fairly modest to date. If the number ofapplications continues to rise (as seems likely) the adequacy of resources may need to be re-assessed. 4.2.4 Success factors and problems in management in practice Key success factors and examples of good practice in the management of EUROPASSTraining, as reported by NCPs, include: � the underwriting of the NCP by national government, prior to grant agreements being

received from the Commission (e.g. Finland);� a ‘Piloting Committee’ to ensure political support for the initiative (e.g. Italy);



22

� using social partners to promote the initiative (e.g. Sweden);� national guidance to applicants and revisions to the application form, requiring additional

important information (e.g. Finland); and� using a management database (e.g. Norway). The key problems in management, as reported by the NCPs, include: � lack of control over the process once documents have been issued. This is the case, for

example, over the quality of information supplied by hosts in the EUROPASS Trainingdocument and, importantly, over use of the document for additional pathways;

� low response rate of senders to post-training follow-up surveys;� inconsistent quality criteria for pathways between countries; and� the lack of data about beneficiaries and the pathways they have undertaken. Some NCPs

were unable to supply any information about the numbers of beneficiaries and thepathways taken, other than a global figure for documents distributed, which did notnecessarily reflect the number of pathways actually undertaken. These numbers are notnecessarily equal since some NCPs distribute EUROPASS Training documents toparticipant organisations as requested, and organisations can request more documents thanthose immediately needed. Also, some pathways expected to be undertaken for whichEUROPASS Training documents were requested cannot take eventually place.

It will be noted that a number of these problems relate to the role of sending and hostorganisations in the EUROPASS Training process. In this regard it is important to bear inmind that since participation in EUROPASS Training is voluntary, with no funding attached,it is believed to be difficult to impose stringent information, reporting or quality requirementson sending organisations without discouraging significant numbers from participating. Arrangements for evaluating EUROPASS Training differ markedly from country to country,(although all have audit arrangements in place, usually through existing internal systems).For example, one NCP is planning to rely on the LEONARDO evaluation, while another hasonly gathered quantitative information. Sweden and Finland have introduced questionnairesfor sending organisations, although both report difficulties in achieving a good response rate.

4.3 Partnership building There are several levels in which partnership could be developed between the actors involvedin EUROPASS Training: � Partnership between the European Commission and NCPs;� Partnership between NCPs;� Partnership between NCPs and participating organisations;� Partnership between participant organisations themselves. The last form of partnership is a formal requirement set in the Decision for Europeanpathways to be recognised as such. The first and the third forms of partnership are anoperational requirement - Commission and NCPs necessarily co-operate, and participantorganisations can only be involved in the scheme through NCPs (or their regionalcounterparts). Partnerships between NCPs so far have not been a key feature of EUROPASSTraining. Although there have been some contacts between them, these were chiefly at the



23

beginning of the initiative, and only limited attempts for sharing good practices have beenexplored afterwards. That said, all NCPs had participated in events organised by theCommission and had found them useful for sharing good practice, getting advice and buildinginformal contacts, although a smaller number of NCPs took the contrary view. These face-to-face meetings were leading to further contact in between meetings. For example, theNetherlands NCP reported that it was networking with Ireland and Belgium, with exchangevisits planned. 4.3.1 Recommended improvements There are a number of areas where current management arrangements are leading todisbenefits. At this stage in the evaluation, we would like to identify two areas whereimprovements would be beneficial: � The standardisation of data collection. An agreement between the Commission and NCPs

should be sought on the relevant data to be collected for monitoring and evaluatingEUROPASS Training. This would enable these functions to be more effectively carriedout (the quality and consistency of data across countries would be improved) and wouldalso be more cost-efficient. The agreement would provide a set of core data to be used innational and European evaluation(s). Efforts from NCPs could then be focused oncollecting these core data, as opposed to the current situation where different data isrequired from different evaluators in relatively short periods of time. To quote oneexample, Denmark has undertaken a national evaluation in 2002, and has also had toprovide slightly different data for the Commission implementation report in addition tothis mid-term evaluation.

� The more effective implementation of quality control criteria for pathways and the

checking of these pathways. This could include some additional development of qualityassurance mechanisms, including giving each EUROPASS Training document a uniquereference number, which relates to the pathway of a named individual, as already done bysome NCPs.



24

5.0 THE EUROPASS TRAINING INITIATIVE This chapter presents information in a number of different aspects of the EUROPASSTraining initiative, gathered from NCPs and a survey of participant organisations 24. The firstsection briefly describes funding for the initiative. Sections two and three of the chapterpresent information collected from NCPs on dissemination and awareness and participation.The final section of the chapter reviews the results of the evaluation’s survey of participantorganisations. This final section focuses in particular on the participant organisation’s viewsabout the current EUROPASS Training document, the current EUROPASS Training initiativeand the future of both. 5.1 Funding

A total budget of 7.3 million EURO has been allocated for the period January 2000 toDecember 2004 for EUROPASS Training. There is therefore a need to be realistic about theimpact that can be expected from it. The funding profile of the initiative is such that it hasaffected the possibilities for dissemination of the initiative (see above). As some NCPspointed out, it also makes that the EUROPASS Training is not given the same attention by theCommission and national civil servants as Community programmes (e.g. LEONARDO),which have to be more closely scrutinised by policy-makers given the resources they attract. 5.2 EUROPASS Training dissemination and awareness In this section we firstly review the existing EUROPASS Training promotional materials andthe effectiveness of national publicity campaigns for the initiative, on which participation isdependent to an important extent. 5.2.1 Promotional Materials National Contact Points have used a variety of promotional materials for EUROPASSTraining, produced by the European Commission, national and sub-national organisations.Most countries combined the EC materials with nationally produced materials, but Belgiumand Luxembourg also produced materials at sub-national level. During the launch phase, the European Commission produced two promotional materials thatmost countries used. These were: � An information leaflet and� Brochure. In the Spring of 2002 the European Commission produced a video promoting Leonardo daVinci and EUROPASS Training, where real cases are shown. Available first in English,French, German and Spanish and later also in all the other EU languages, it is beingdistributed to NCPs, to other related European, national and local bodies and to broadcasters.

24 Data on host organisations that are not sending organisations is not available since NCPs do not keep recordsfor them.



25

At national level a great variety of instruments were used, including: � National stickers (e.g. Finland),� Information folders (e.g. France, Finland, Greece, Italy),� Flyers (e.g. Germany, Liechtenstein),� Leaflets (e.g. Finland, Denmark, Portugal –under production-, Sweden, UK),� Information brochures –in the language of the country- ( e.g. Italy, Iceland, Germany, Greece,

Norway, Sweden, Austria),� Booklets (e.g. Finland),� Posters (e.g. Greece, Norway, Finland, Ireland, UK, Germany),� Stationary (e.g. Germany, UK),� Hand-outs on how to fill the EUROPASS Training (e.g. Germany, Sweden),� Articles (e.g. Luxembourg, Germany),� Cassettes on young people in vocational training in Europe (e.g. France),� Videos tapes on the young people on vocational training in Europe (e.g. Spain),� CD ROM on the national management system for EUTROPASS (e.g. Spain),� CD ROM with information and guidance on how to fill in the EUROPASS Training (e.g.

Austria),� Dissemination events (all countries).� Commercials in small radio stations (e.g. Germany)� Commercials on Television and Cinema, (e.g. Norway, Sweden), which have been very

effective in the opinion of the NCPs.� Brochures (e.g. Belgium Fr.) and� Assorted materials (including pens, key-rings, clocks, watches, radios in e.g. Belgium Fr.) In most countries the NCP also visited potential target organisations. This normally entailedvisits to educational institutions, LEONARDO meetings at which mention was made ofEUROPASS Training and, on a smaller number of occasions, visits to social partners. Fort his evaluation, NCPs were asked to rank these promotional materials for EUROPASSTraining in terms of: � number of items received from the Commission or produced nationally and� usefulness of the item. Six countries ranked all promotional materials produced at European, national or sub-nationallevel as sufficient in number and good in quality. The only product ranked as being of poorquality was the EC information leaflet but only on one occasion. In general there was a verypositive view of the promotional materials from the Commission. However, several countriesargued that these materials were, at points, difficult to understand. As such, they were veryuseful especially at the beginning of the initiative, when no alternative materials wereavailable. Later, national promotional materials “filled the gaps” of the EC promotionalmaterials by providing easily understandable information to potential users. Nationalmaterials, moreover, had the advantage of being targeted to particular national contexts (e.g.clarifying who is eligible for participation in the initiative).



26

All countries combine these instruments with on-line information on the initiative. In fact,web-sites and ICT play an important role in the implementation of the initiative in severalcountries like Belgium Flanders, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Norway, Spain, Swedenand The U.K. Some countries also offer the possibility of on-line application (Denmark,Luxembourg, Norway, Ireland, Belgium Flanders, France, Italy) or of downloading theapplication form (Sweden, U.K.). On-line applications, however, have not been as extensivelyused as expected (e.g. in Norway) or have not been used by any users at the time of interviewwith the NCP (Ireland). Some NCPs are planning to offer this facility in the future Belgium,France, UK). France offers a good example of how ICT and web-sites are useful implementation tools forEUROPASS Training. The French site presents the Council Decision and its main objectivesand also offers a search option for finding documents and links on Vocational training inFrance and Europe. All major European education and training initiatives are, if notdescribed, listed in the links section. A news section updates information on those initiatives,and presents EUROPASS Training in its wider policy context. At the operational level, thesite offers information on eligibility, the possibility to apply on-line and a password protecteduser area. In Italy, the NCP’s web-site offers another good example of the role of ICT in theimplementation of EUROPASS Training, with similar information to that offered in theFrench site. The Italian site has a detailed section on the policy context for EUROPASSTraining, defines eligibility conditions, and can be used to apply on-line. There is a sectionalso provides practical tips to candidates and a news section In Austria a web-site has been developed (www.europass.at) to help with the management ofthe initiative and gives added value to EUROPASS Training. The main added value is thatquestions are asked to potential users, in order to establish if they can participate in theinitiative. Also, the web-site acts as a monitoring and evaluation tool, as the users fill in dataon their actual stay. From November onwards, EUROPASS Training will be filled in on theweb-site, with the data entered in a database. In order to do that, the user will have to enter acode, which makes sure that the information cannot be abused. The database can also be usedfor applications, for example in the way that potential employers can be given access to datathat is relevant to them. Also, the host organisation fills in the pass online. The information isthen printed from the database and stuck in EUROPASS Training. The German web-site is not a fully fledged operational tool and does not offer the possibilityto apply on-line, but it also acts as an implementation tool, and offers information on how thedocument should be filled in. An interesting feature of the German web-site included thepresence of a notice board section where trainees can give feedback on their experiences andthe production of a EUROPASS Training newsletter. In other countries, like Finland or Spain, the EUROPASS Training site is used to provide ageneral presentation of the initiative and to mainstream it (e.g. the Finnish site is maintainedby the National Board of Education and it is linked to its homepage), not as a coreimplementation tool for the initiative.



27

5.2.2 Effectiveness of national publicity campaigns The assessment of the effectiveness of the publicity campaign for the initiative variesaccording to the targets that NCPs set for it. Those countries that intended a very focusedpublicity campaign with clearly identified and very limited target groups (e.g. educationalproviders, LEONARDO participants) expressed more positive views about the success of thecampaign. Those countries which intended a publicity campaign for the general public, tryingto reach a wider group (including schools, employers and individuals) have ranked theeffectiveness of the publicity campaign lower, and highlighted the available funding for thepublicity campaign as an important limitation. Austria, Norway and Denmark are examples ofpublicity campaigns targeted towards a broad audience which have nevertheless provedsuccessful. In these three cases the strong networks of the organisation in charge ofEUROPASS Training and the innovative, multi-channel publicity campaigns deployed wereidentified as key factors for success. 5.3 Participation The purpose of this section is to provide quantitative data on the participant individuals andorganisations in the initiative. Data presented in this section has been collected by NCPs. Thisdata vary in several aspects and it is not strictly comparable. Firstly, data have on occasionsbeen adapted to the evaluation categories from different categories used at national level,since there are no guidelines on data collection for the initiative at European level as yet.Secondly, data also vary in the period to which it refers -see Annex two. Data is sketchy atsome points, according to the availability of information from NCPs. It is however, the bestavailable picture on EUROPASS Training at this point in time. We provide information onparticipant individuals first. 5.3.1 Individual participants

Below we present data on: � the number of applications approved per country,� the educational level of participants,� the distribution of participants by age group,� the distribution of participants by gender,� the economic sectors in which training certified by EUROPASS Training has taken place,

the length of the training periods certified and the country of destination of participants.

In particular, it is important to highlight that data confirm that there has been a significantincrease in the number of EUROPASS Training applications approved since November 2001,when information was collected for EUROPASS Training the implementation report.

Total number of applicants and participants The total number of approved applications for the periods given in the countries for whichdata are available equals 34,620 with only 76 rejected applications accounted for, most ofthem in Finland25. Those applications rejected normally entailed periods of training outside

25 Number of rejections by NCP are as follows: Be Fr (20), Fi (47), It (2), No (5).



28

the EU/EEA (the most common reason in Finland) or periods that did not fulfil otherEUROPASS Training criteria (e.g. lack of a tutor). There is a great difference in the number of participants by country, with Germany accountingfor over 50 % of the documents. Other relatively high participation countries are France, theUK, Italy, The Netherlands, Greece, Austria and Finland. Iceland and Liechtenstein –muchsmaller countries-, at the other end of the spectrum, had approved fewer than one hundreddocuments.

Table 4: Number of approved applications for EUROPASS Training documents percountry until October 2002. Number of applications

Country Approved Percent AT 980 2.8 BE (De) 28 0.1 BE (Fr) 108 0.3 BE (Nl) 322 0.9 DE 17,936 51.8 DK 300 0.9 ES 188 0.5 FI (1) 876 2.5 FL 71 0.2 FR 4,456 12.9 GR 1,100 3.2 IE 138 0.4 IS 58 0.2 IT 2,416 7.0 LU 168 0.5 NL 1,026 3.0 NO 313 0.9 PT 210 0.6 SE 667 1.9 UK 3,259 9.4 Total 34,620 100.0 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting(1) NCP= Number of approved applications according to the information received from Finnish providers of education.

Since 2000, the National Board of Education has sent 2500 EUROPASS Training documents to providers of education.

This number of approved applications represents an increase of almost 80% over the 19,302European pathways recorded by “EUROPASS” documents in the participating countries byNovember 2001, as accounted for in the EUROPASS Training implementation report. Participants by educational level Of the 11,767 participants on which data by educational level were available, participationwas concentrated on ISCED levels 3 to 6 or equivalent –this is, upper secondary education totertiary education-. The Netherlands, France and Sweden were the countries offering more



29

substantial levels of participation for levels 1 and 2 –primary education and lower secondaryeducation26. Table 5: Number of awarded EUROPASS Training documents by educational level towhich holder aspired Educational Level

Country L1 L2 L3 L4 L5&6 TOTAL AT(1) 0 0 784 98 98 980 BE (De) * * * * * * BE (Fr) 0 15 18 75 0 108 BE (Nl) * * * * * * DE 27 * * * * * * DK 0 116 128 0 56 300 ES 0 0 0 188 0 188 FI 0 0 767 8 54 829 FL 0 0 6 30 16 52 FR 468 0 1,795 1,648 545 4,456 GR * * * * * * IE * * * * * * IS 0 0 50 8 0 58 IT 0 95 1,694 209 418 2,416 LU 0 0 168 0 0 168 NL 0 800 0 226 0 1,026 NO 0 0 206 93 14 313 PT 0 0 162 27 17 206 SE * 604 63 0 667 UK * * * * * * TOTAL 468 1,026 6,382 2,673 1,218 11,767 Percent 4.0 8.7 52.2 22.7 10.4 100.0 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting * = information not available (1) Based on percentages given (10% L5&6, 10% L4 and 80% L3)

26 More detailed information on ISCED levels can be found in the methodological tools Annex (Data Grid forNational Contact Points)

27 740 of the German participants were on levels 5&6



30

Participants by age group Participation in the initiative is concentrated in the younger age groups. Most trainees are 15to 25 year olds. Given the available data it is difficult to ascertain whether the age group 15 to20 or the group 21 to 25 prevails. Table 6: Number of EUROPASS Training documents by age group Age Group

Country 15-20 21-25 26-35 36-45 46 + TOTAL AT(*) * Most * * * * BE (De) * * * * * * BE (Fr) 23 80 5 0 0 108 BE(Nl) 5 252 50 5 10 322 DE (*) * Most Most * * * DK(1) 154 74 57 15 0 300 ES * * * * * * FI 424 281 35 53 2 795 FL 6 46 19 0 0 71 FR(2) 2,297 2,035 211 0 0 4,543 GR * * * * * * IE 58 65 9 1 0 133 IS 29 25 4 0 0 58 IT 1,479 430 502 5 0 2,416 LU 168 0 0 0 0 168 NL * * * * * * NO 93 156 18 0 0 267 PT 128 38 8 1 0 175 SE 398 195 16 10 12 631 UK 1,033 1,212 185 32 24 2,486 TOTAL 6295 4889 1119 122 48 12,473 Percent 50.5 39.2 9.0 1.0 0.3 100.0 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting (*) = Data not available (1) Approximate figures from <18= 22; 18-21= 132; 22-25= 74; 26-29= 42; >=30= 30 (2)Approximate figures. Data from the NCP is as follows: 425EUROPASS Training 16-18year olds; 2673 EUROPASS Training 19-21 year olds; 1144 EUROPASS Training 22-25 year olds; 211 26 years or more.

Participants by gender Nine out of the sixteen countries where information on the gender of participants is availablehad had more male than female participants, with the remaining seven having more femalestaking part in EUROPASS Training. Overall there is not great difference between the numberof male and female participants -56% of participants being females and 44% males.



31

Table 7: Proportion of EUROPASS Training documents given (by gender) Gender

Country Female Male Number Percentage Number Percentage AT(*) * * * * BE (De) (12) 43% (16) 57% BE (Fr) (56) 44% (72) 56% BE (Nl) (176) 55% (146) 45% DE (9,865) 55% (8,071) 45% DK (138) 46% (162) 54% ES (92) 49% (96) 51% FI (637) 69% (286) 31% FL (31) 44% (40) 56% FR (2,584) 58% (1,871) 42% GR * * * * IE (28) 20% (110) 80% IS (16) 28% (42) 72% IT (1473) 61% (943) 39% LU (67) 40% (101) 60% NL * * * * NO (172) 55% (141) 45% PT (72) 41% (103) 59% SE (380) 57% (287) 43% UK (1,610) 56% (1,264) 44% EUR-18 (17,409) 56% (13,751) 44% Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting * = Information not available Participants by occupational status From the available data for this section (referring to 10,911 EUROPASS Training documents,or about a third of the total number of all documents issued) most EUROPASS Trainingapplicants are students outside university (e.g. students in vocational training schools).However, according to our data over a quarter of the participants are university students, apercentage above what might be expected in principle. University students have a set of otherimportant instruments available to ensure the transparency of their qualifications, (e.g. theEuropean credit transfer system) but still see a value in obtaining the EUROPASS Trainingdocument. This section, however, lacks information from an important number of NCPs,which, if incorporated, would change the picture dramatically (e.g. there are over 17,000EUROPASS Training documents in Germany for non-University students not accounted forin this section). The non-student population –including employed people and people not inpaid employment or in education - accounted for less than 5% of EUROPASS Trainingapplicants. Although in the majority of countries there is still potential for EUROPASS Training to bemarketed to more occupational groups, in some countries, like Spain or Belgium Fr, only non-university students have taken part in the initiative, which shows that there is even higher



32

potential for EUROPASS Training to be marketed to other occupational groups in thesecountries28. Table 8: Principal occupational status at the time of application for a EUROPASSTraining document Occupational Status

Country In paidemployment

Student (non-University)

Student(University)

Not in paidemployment not

studying

TOTAL

AT * Most * * * BE (De) 0 28 0 0 28 BE (Fr) 0 108 0 0 128 BE (Nl) * * * * * DE * * * * * DK * * * * * ES 0 188 0 0 188 FI 38 790 1 0 829 FL 6 20 45 0 71 FR 1 2,782 1,558 115 4,456 GR * * * * * IE * * * * * IS 3 47 8 0 58 IT 16 1,597 627 176 2,416 LU 0 168 0 0 168 NL (1) 102 924 0 0 1,026 NO * * 14 * 14 PT 6 137 0 0 143 SE * 642 * 25 667 UK * * * * * TOTAL 172 7,431 2,253 316 10,172 Percent 1.7 73.1 22.1 3.1 100.0 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting * = Information not available(1) From approximately figures of: 10% in paid employment and 90% students (non-University)

28 This is already being addressed in Spain jointly by the NCP and INEM (The Spanish National Institute forEmployment).



33

Participants by sector EUROPASS Training documents have certified training in all economic sectors covered inthis study, showing that EUROPASS Training can be attractive to people working in a varietyof professions. The top ten economic sectors participating in EUROPASS Training are givenin Table 9. The sectors “Hotels and restaurants”, “education” and “real estate, renting andbusiness activities” lead the participation in the initiative. Table 9: Top ten economic sectors participating in EUROPASS Economic Sector Number of EUROPASS Training

documents Hotels and restaurants 1,367 Education 1,103 Real state, renting and business activities 779 Manufacturing 611 Health and social work 490 Transport, storage and communications 433 Other community, social and personal service 345 Agriculture, hunting and forestry 326 Construction 324 Electricity, gas and water supply 247Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting

Length of the training periods The training periods certified by EUROPASS Training have tended to be of short duration,between one and three months. However, in countries like France over 10% of theEUROPASS Training documents awarded registered a training period lasting for more thanone year. In Germany, the highest participating country, over 12% of the EUROPASSTraining recorded training periods had a duration of less than three weeks, whereas less than1% recorded training periods of a year or more.



34

Table 10: Length of training periods certified by EUROPASS Length of training period 1-2

weeks 3-4

weeks 2-3

months 4-5

months 6-7

months 8-9

months 10-11

months 12

monthsor more

TOTAL

AT * Most Most * * * * * * BE(De)

0 17 0 0 11 0 0 0 28

BE (Fr) 44 12 49 1 0 0 0 0 106 BE (Nl) 0 108 199 15 0 0 0 0 322 DE 1,546 4,762 3,294 2,159 314 103 113 118 12,409 DK (1) 3 38 38 38 38 38 38 64 295 ES 6 67 98 16 0 0 0 1 188 FI * * * * * * * * * FL 0 6 26 27 12 0 0 0 71 FR (2) 1,156 463 463 463 463 463 463 521 4,455 GR * * * * * * * * * IE 0 92 21 14 4 6 0 1 138 IS * * * * * * * * * IT 13 85 141 99 73 8 2 1 422 LU 38 60 70 0 0 0 0 0 168 NL * * * * * * * * * NO 0 87 120 106 0 0 0 0 313 PT 11 114 1 29 20 0 0 0 175 SE 88 334 169 11 4 0 0 5 611 UK * * * * * * * * * Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting (*) = Information not available (1) = Number of 228 periods from 3-4 weeks to10-11 months given by NCP and distributed equally by period in the table. (2) = Number of 2,778 periods from 3-4 weeks to10-11 months given by NCP and distributed equally by period in the table. Participants by country of destination This section presents the distribution of EUROPASS Training documents by country of originand country of destination. Whereas by country of origin Germany, France, UK and Italy arethe leading countries, the distribution is more even in terms of countries of destination. Thesouthern European countries and the UK are the preferred destination of EUROPASSTraining applicants for their European pathway. The UK is the most popular country ofdestination with over 7,000 pathways being developed in this country, followed by Spain(4,897), France (3,861), Italy (2,710) and Portugal (2,273). Smaller countries likeLiechtenstein (host of 3 pathways recorded by EUROPASS Training, all from France),Iceland (24 EUROPASS Training as host country) and Luxembourg (93 EUROPASSTraining as host country) were the countries of destination least used by EUROPASSTraining applicants. There was a very significant flow of EUROPASS Training applicantsbetween France and Germany, with more than 1,000 documents being issued in each countrywith the other country as host. The most important record of pathways through EUROPASS



35

Training (almost 4,000 or almost 15%) had Germany as sending country and the UK as hostcountry. It must be remembered that normally only the first pathway is recorded by NCPs andtherefore these figures might be altered if all European pathways recorded in EUROPASSTraining documents were taken into account, something that is not possible at the moment.However, since most EUROPASS Training applicants undertake only one European pathwaythe figures given can be taken as a satisfactory proxi.



36

Table 11: Home country and country of destination of the “estimated” EUROPASS Training document given between 11/00 and 08/02

Host Sending

AT BE DE DK ES GR FR FI FL IT IE IS LU NO NL PT SE UK TOTAL

AT - * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BE (all) 3 - 56 0 90 0 79 11 0 17 16 0 0 9 86 14 13 58 452 DE 538 359 - 359 2695 179 2332 897 0 1794 538 0 0 359 1256 1973 897 3946 18,122 DK 2 6 60 - 8 5 21 13 0 2 24 3 0 12 7 42 17 78 300 ES 0 0 24 0 - 0 18 7 0 19 15 0 0 0 2 1 27 75 188 GR * * * * * - * * * * * * * * * * * * * FR 41 103 1068 44 871 28 - 56 3 304 333 2 78 8 64 55 83 1303 4,444 FI 30 12 117 27 117 45 60 - 0 42 23 12 0 16 30 29 60 171 791 FL x 0 x 0 x 0 x 0 - x x 0 0 0 0 0 0 X * IT 48 39 308 12 397 38 456 68 0 - 172 1 10 17 39 78 38 698 2,419 IE (2) 8 0 35 16 0 0 11 0 0 47 - 0 0 0 0 0 15 2 134 IS 3 1 1 27 2 0 0 0 0 16 0 - 0 0 0 0 2 6 58 LU 9 7 52 0 0 1 91 0 0 0 3 0 - 1 0 0 4 0 168 NO 4 8 82 11 21 12 43 0 0 16 8 0 0 - 17 2 6 84 314 NL 0 162 198 52 21 0 39 7 0 16 41 0 3 3 - 43 26 415 1,026 PT 1 7 2 0 33 20 21 20 0 32 0 0 2 1 3 - 2 31 175 SE (3) 16 6 76 15 59 2 44 38 0 69 97 2 0 20 31 2 0 155 632 UK 34 27 459 10 583 20 646 148 0 336 42 4 0 29 94 34 138 - 2,604 TOTAL 737 737 2,538 573 4,897 350 3,861 1,265 3 2,710 1,312 24 93 475 1,629 2,273 1,328 7,022 31,827

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting * = Data not available from NCP x = country of destination of some participants, but figures are not know. (1) The German NCP offered percentages instead of numbers for each country. Figure in the cell is the result of applying the percentage given to the total number of EUROPASS Trainingdocuments awarded in the country. Final figure equals 101% of the actual number of documents. (2) For Ireland; 4 people went to Malta. (3) Sweden: data for 35 people is missing



37

5.3.2 Sending organisations This section presents the profile of sending organisations participating in EUROPASSTraining. In particular it presents information on the economic sectors of organisations actingas sending organisations in the initiative, the size of sending organisations and their level ofinvolvement with mobility programmes. Firstly, we present the number of organisations29 bycountry in the table below. Table 12: Number of sending organisations by country Number of sending organisations

AT * BE (Nl) 15 BE (De) * BE (Fr) * DE * DK 102 ES 20 FI 64 FL * FR * GR * IE 7 IS 4 IT 70 LU 5 NL 62 NO 108 PT 13 SE 80 UK * TOTAL 550 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting *= Information not available Economic sector By far the most common economic sector participating in EUROPASS Training is education,which is in line with the already noted trend for most EUROPASS Training participants to bestudents. After education, manufacturing and construction ranked second and third, both withover 100 organisations in all countries. Hotels and restaurants, however, ranked only seventh,which compares to first place ranking in terms of numbers of participants and which thereforesuggests, notwithstanding present data limitations, that organisations in this sector are fewerbut making a more intensive use of the document than in other sectors.

29 But only with a limited total of 460, very much below the numbers for participant organisations given in thisreport.



38

Table 13: Sending organisations: Top ten sectors (all countries) Economic Sector Number of organisations Education 521 Manufacturing 158 Construction 149 Health and social work 109 Agriculture, hunting, and forestry 81 Transport, storage andcommunications

74

Hotels and restaurants 61 Electricity, gas and water supply 60 Fishing 54 Other community, social andpersonal service activities

28

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Size of participant organisations

Information in relation to size is sketchy. However, available information (from Italy, Spain,The Netherlands and Luxembourg) suggests that the EUROPASS Training document is usedby organisations of all sizes. It is interesting to note that EUROPASS Training has attractedself-employed workers, with almost 5% of organisations for which data is available beingcomposed of a single worker. The greater number of participant organisations is in companieswith 100 employees or more. Table 14: Number of organisations participating in EUROPASS Training by size ofcompany (Italy, Spain, The Netherlands (1), Luxembourg and Portugal combined) Size of company Number of organisations 1 12 2-49 26 50-99 4 100-249 96 250-499 6 500-999 74 1000 + 35 TOTAL 253

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting (1) Figures for The Netherlands based on 62 participating organisations, 50% 500-999 employees, 50% 1000+



39

Previous participation in mobility programmes For those countries for which data is available it can be seen that the EUROPASS Traininginitiative is very much dependent on European mobility programmes, particularlyLEONARDO. Twenty out of twenty EUROPASS Training sending organisations in Spain,two out of two in Liechtenste in, 106 out of 108 in Norway and 12 out of 13 in Portugal hadalso participated in the LEONARDO programme. That was the case for approximately 80%of the sending organisations in Germany too. The relation between the LEONARDOprogramme and EUROPASS Training has some positive implications to EUROPASSTraining. It means, for instance, that on top of the EUROPASS Training quality assurancemechanisms for the European pathways certified by it, these pathways have also been subjectto the stringent LEONARDO quality assurance mechanisms in an important number ofoccasions. In Denmark and Sweden, on the other hand, there was an important difference between thenumber of total EUROPASS Training sending organisations and the number of sendingorganisations taking part in mobility programmes, which indicates that in these countries theinitiative has reached a wider audience than in other countries. 5.4 Survey of participant organisations This section presents the results of a survey of organisations that participated in the initiative.It presents the most comprehensive available picture of the profile of participant organisationsand of their opinions about EUROPASS Training. Contact details for participantorganisations were obtained from National Contact Points. The European Commission sentthe relevant questionnaires to participating organisations. These were, as reported by theCommission: 570 sending and host organisations from various countries, plus the following numbers ofsending organisations by Member State: Sweden 80 Italy 66 Germany 61 Norway 50 Austria 34 Denmark 27 Belgium (Flemish) 11



40

5.4.1 Sample 95 questionnaires were returned to ECOTEC, 92 of them suitable for processing. They weredistributed by country as follows: Table 15: Sample distribution by country Country Frequency Percentage Austria 9 9.8 Belgium 5 5.4 Denmark 8 8.7 Finland 2 2.2 Germany 6 6.5 Italy 28 30.4 Norway 5 5.4 Spain 3 3.3 Sweden 17 18.5 UK 9 9.8 Total 92 100 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

Of these organisations, six are currently participating as host organisations only, 36 assending organisations only and 25 as both. A further four organisations had participated ashosts in the past and eight as sending organisations. Nine organisations had participated asboth host and sending organisations, but were not currently participating in the initiative. From the data currently available we believe that it is unlikely that more than 1200organisations have participated in the initiative. Available data from NCPs showed a total of550 sending organisations participating in EUROPASS Training from 11 countries –sectionfive above. Most host organisations, as reported by NCPs and corroborated in our survey, alsoparticipate in the initiative as sending organisations. From the results of our survey, it isunlikely that the number of participant organisations would increase by more than 10% oncehost organisations are taken into account. The number of participant organisations would thenbe 605 for these 11 countries. However no data were available for a further 7 countries, including some low-participationcountries (such as Belgium and Liechtenstein) but also some highparticipation countries likethe UK, France and Germany. It is difficult therefore to estimate the number of organisationsactually participating in the initiative. This is especially the case since there is no correlationbetween the number of participant organisations and participating individuals by country, e.g.Italy has only 70 sending organisations whereas Norway has 108 whilst the number of Italianparticipants is over sevenfold that of Norway. If we assume that it is unlikely that more than double the number of organisations computedin the 11 countries for which data is available actually compose the number of participatingorganisations, that would boost the number to 1210. The sample of 92 cases which we haveobtained, if random, would then have a margin of error of 8.25%, at a 90% confidence levelfor a population of 1210. Any further breakdowns in data analysis (e.g. by country) wouldalter these figures and would have to be treated with caution. Such breakdowns are notpresented in this report.



41

5.4.2 Basic characteristics of participant organisations This subsection gives the key characteristics for participant organisations in EUROPASSTraining. From the information available the average organisation is a training institution with500 to 2000 employees, it does not have any sites abroad and has students/trainees inlanguage learning. Private sector organisations, small and medium size organisations, verylarge international organisations and those operating or providing training in nationally orsub-nationally based sectors (other than education) have not featured prominently in theinitiative on the basis of our sample. Type of organisation The majority of participant organisations in EUROPASS Training are trainingorganisations30. 41 respondents considered their organisation as being of such type. Sevenorganisations were universities, five private organisations, three professional organisationsand three public authorities. 21 organisations chose to define themselves outside of thecategories given in the questionnaire, giving a number of different definitions for themselves. Table 16: How would you define your organisation? Frequency Percent

Training Organisation 41 44.6 University 7 7.6 Private Sector organisation 5 5.4 Professional organisation 3 3.3 Public authority 3 3.3 Research Centre or institute 1 1.1 Public consortium 1 1.1 Chamber of commerce/ industry/ agriculture 1 1.1 Employer organisation 1 1.1 Trade Union 0 0 European Organisation 0 0 Other 21 22.8 Don’t know/ No answer 8 8.7 Total 92 100.0


Size of participant organisations Most participant organisations are medium size and large organisations, having between 501and 2000 employees. Only a minority of organisations had less than 50 employees or morethan 20,001.

30 This chapter gives information for valid answers only.



42

Table 17: What is the size of your organisation –all sites Frequency Percent

1-20 13 14.1 21-50 5 5.4 51-200 18 19.6 201-500 17 18.5 501-2000 26 28.3 2001-5000 8 8.7 5001 + 2 2.2 Don’t know/No answer 3 3.3 Total 92 100.0


Economic sector and sites abroad The majority of participant organisations are educational institutions (56 out of 90 computedanswers). Table 18: What is the main economic sector in which your organisation operates? Frequency Percent

Education 56 62.2 Agriculture, hunting and forestry 4 4.4 Financial intermediation 3 3.3 Public Administration and defence 3 3.3 Health and social work 3 3.3 Manufacturing 2 2.2 Hotels and restaurants 2 2.2 Real State/renting/business activities 1 1.1 Other Community, social and personal

service activities 1 1.1

Wholesale and retail trade/ repair of motorvehicles

1 1.1

Private households/employed persons 1 1.1 Fishing 1 1.1 Mining and quarrying 1 1.1 Transport, storage and communication 0 0 Electricity, gas water supply 0 0 Construction 0 0 Extra-territorial organisations/bodies 0 0 Don’t know/No answer 11 12.2 Total 90 97.8




43

Only 13 of the 79 organisations for which data is available had a site abroad. Most of themhad sites in the EU. 75 organisations (or 84.3% of the respondents) did not have any sitesabroad. EUROPASS Training is therefore not being used by organisations with sites in morethan one country, which might have alternative methods to certify training periods abroad, butby organisations that have to find a partner in the country of destination for thestudent/trainee. Table 19: Does your organisation have any sites abroad? Frequency Percent EU 8 9.0 EEA 0 0 Candidate countries 1 1.1 Other 4 4.5 No 75 84.3 Don’t know/no answer 1 1.1 Total 89 100Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

Training subject In these first years of the initiative there has been a good spread of participation by trainingsector. There is, nevertheless, prevalence of those sectors that are internationally orientated,like languages (12%), hotels and restaurants (7%) and marketing (7%), as well as the moregeneral “education”. It is also possible that organisations mostly dealing with internationallyoriented subjects have been more often willing to return the questionnaire. A comparison withthe economic sectors indicated for the individual European pathways (cf. Table 9 above) isnot feasible, as sectors and subjects do not match.



44

Table 20: If you have participated as a host organisation, what has/have been thesubject(s) of the training provided in periods certified by EUROPASS? Frequency Percent Languages 20 12.7 Education 17 10.8 Hotels and restaurants 11 7.0 Marketing 11 7.0 Manufacturing 10 6.4 Accounts and finance 8 5.1 Health and social work 8 5.1 Human resources 7 4.4 Data processing 6 3.9 Other community and social service activities 5 3.2 General management 5 3.2 Construction 4 2.5 Safety 4 2.5 Wholesale and retail trade/ repair of motorvehicles/ personal and household goods

3 1.9

Public administration and defence 3 1.9 Transport, storage and communication 3 1.9 Electricity, gas and water supply 2 1.3 Real state/renting/business activities 2 1.3 Agriculture, hunting and Forestry 2 1.3 Mining and quarrying 2 1.3 Fishing 0 0 Other 7 4.5 Don’t know/No answer 17 10.8 Total 157 100Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

5.4.3 Involvement in EUROPASS Most participant organisations have read some type of EUROPASS Training promotionalmaterial. The proportion that has not read any materials but participates in EUROPASSTraining is mainly composed of LEONARDO participants that knew about EUROPASSTraining through discussions with their LEONARDO National Agency. Of those participants that had read some promotional materials, nearly 65% were familiarwith the EUROPASS Training information brochure –European or national-, 50% with theNational Contact Point internet site, 46% with the information leaflet –European or national-,30% with the European Commission EUROPASS Training site, and only 10% with othersites. This shows firstly that the information brochures produced have been a successfuldissemination tool, which has reached a wide audience. Secondly, it shows that internet web-sites have not completely replaced other methods of dissemination.



45

Table 21: Have you read any EUROPASS Training promotional material? Frequency Percent Percent No 17 18.7 Yes 74 81.3 Brochure 48 64.9 Internet NCP sites 37 50.0 Leaflet 34 46.0 Internet, EC site 22 29.7 Internet other 8 10.8 Don’t know/ No answer 1 1.4 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

The study also enquired about the clarity of promotional materials. In this dimension,promotional materials ranked well. 57% of the respondents thought that the clarity ofpromotional materials was very good or good, 26% thought it was average and only 17%ranked it below average. Table 22: How would you rate the clarity of the publicity materials for EUROPASS? Frequency Percent

Very good 8 8.8 Good 35 38.5 Average 19 20.8 Poor 12 13.2 Very poor 1 1.1 No opinion 9 9.9 Don’t know/No answer 7 7.7 Total 91 100

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd The average value for the clarity of produced promotional materials would be average/good(an average mark of 3.5 out of 5). Materials for the promotion of EUROPASS Training were produced at European, nationaland sub-national level. How participants accessed these materials is described below.



46

Table 23: How did your organisation hear about EUROPASS? Frequency Percent National level information and publicity(including LEONARDO and EUROPASSTraining national agencies)

69 59.5

Through European level information andpublicity

17 14.7

Educational institutions 9 7.7 Fairs and exhibitions 5 4.3 Professional networks 4 3.5 Media 2 1.7 e-mail groups 0 0 Other 8 6.9 Don’t know/No answer 2 1.7 Total 116 100 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Most EUROPASS Training participant organisations first knew about EUROPASS Trainingthrough national level information and publicity. Given the composition of participantorganisations this is likely to have occurred mainly through LEONARDO National Agencies.European material also reached a relatively important quota of those organisations, just below15%. All other arenas for dissemination accounted for less than 10% of participantorganisations. Only 2% of the respondents had heard about EUROPASS Training through themedia. 5.4.4 Participation This section presents information on the use of EUROPASS Training by participantorganisations and individuals. Data is given for the 78 sending and the 40 host organisationsthat had information on participation available. Most participant organisations have been involved in a more than five EUROPASS Trainingdocuments. Twenty nine percent had been involved in 1 to 5 of those pathways. Mostorganisations are multiple EUROPASS Training applicants and around half of them havebeen involved in more than 10 documents. Individual participants tend to undertake only oneEuropean pathway and have little professional experience. It is not possible to evaluate the take up rate for EUROPASS Training in participantorganisations, since no data on students/trainees undertaking European pathways in theseorganisations outside the EUROPASS Training framework are available.



47

Number of EUROPASS Training documents issued by participating organisations Participating organisations have normally applied for a limited number of documents. Over10% of sending organisations have been involved in more than 50 European pathwayscertified by EUROPASS Training. Table 24: How many EUROPASS Training documents has your organisation beeninvolved in as sending organisation since the launch of the initiative? –including thoseon-going Frequency Percent 1-5 23 29.5 6-10 15 19.2 11-20 17 21.8 21-50 14 18.0 51 + 9 11.5 Total 78 100 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Participating organisations keep a better record of those EUROPASS Training documents inwhich they act as sending organisations than those in which they act as host organisations.Whereas 85% of the organisations acting as sending organisations could give an approximatefigure of the number of documents in which they were sending organisations, over half ofthose acting as host organisations could not give an equivalent figure. Available data suggestthat there are similar trends for both in relation to the number of documents in which theyhave been involved. Table 25: How many EUROPASS Training documents has your organisation beeninvolved in as host organisation since the launch of the initiative? –including those on-going Frequency Percent 1-5 15 37.5 6-10 5 12.5 11-20 14 35.0 21-50 4 10.0 51 + 2 5.0 Total 40 100 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

Participating individuals Available data suggests that EUROPASS Training is being chiefly used by people withoutworking experience. Less than 1% of the issued documents certified the European pathway ofsomeone with more than 3 years working experience.



48

Table 26: What work experience had beneficiaries who participated in EUROPASSTraining in your organisation? Frequency Percent Those with less than 3 years working experience 30 32.6 Those with more than 3 years workingexperience

1 1.1

Not applicable (e.g. educational institution) 57 61.9 Don’t know/no answer 4 4.4 Total 92 100 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd

Forty-three percent of the organisations that answered our questionnaire did not know whatproportion of the holders from their institution had undertaken more than one work-relatedtraining period abroad. From the available responses, most individuals only undertake onetraining period abroad –since they normally cannot obtain funding for a second period-, asalso reported by NCPs. This would question the necessity of having space to record threetraining periods abroad in the EUROPASS Training document, as highlighted by some of theinterviewees for our case studies –see Annex three. Table 27: If you have participated as sending organisation, what proportion ofEUROPASS Training holders have carried out more than one work-related trainingperiod abroad? Frequency Percent 0-25% 47 51.1 26-50% 0 0 51-75% 0 0 75% more 5 5.4 Don’t know/No answer 40 43.5 Total 92 100 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd 5.4.5 The EUROPASS Training document A fundamental element of the EUROPASS Training initiative is the EUROPASS Trainingdocument, where the European pathway is recorded. ECOTEC collected information aboutthree different aspects relating to the EUROPASS Training document: � usefulness of the content of the EUROPASS Training document,� what the document should certify and� whether an electronic format would be beneficial to the initiative.

Results show that participant organisations find the EUROPASS Training document useful,but would like to see it extended to certify all skills acquired abroad.

Seventy percent of the respondents thought that the information contained in the EUROPASSTraining document is useful or very useful. This is a good rating for the document’s content.As explained in more detail in chapter six, this could probably be further improved if thedocument had more space for the description of the training period abroad in question 17.



49

Table 28: How would you rate the information contained in the EUROPASS Trainingdocument? Frequency Percent

Very useful 13 14.4 Useful 63 70.0 Not useful 9 10.0 Don’t know/No answer 5 5.6 Total 90 100

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Respondents also reported that EUROPASS Training could be expanded beyond certifyingwork-linked training periods abroad. There is great support for extending EUROPASSTraining to certify all skills acquired abroad, with nearly 80% of the respondents supportingthis approach. Nearly 70% of our respondents supported that all training abroad should becertified. Table 29: What do you think that EUROPASS Training should certify? Frequency Percentage

Skills acquired abroad 71 77.2 All training done abroad 62 67.4 Work linked training 56 60.9 Informal training 22 24.0 Formal training 19 20.7 Non work-linked training 13 14.1 Don’t know/no answer 1 1.1 Total number of answers 92

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd The responses are less clear regarding the use of an electronic format for the document.Whereas the vast majority of NCPs and several interviewees for our case studies argued thatan electronic version of the document would be a substantial improvement, a third of therespondents to our survey did not consider that an electronic version of the document wouldbe beneficial. Nonetheless, 56% thought otherwise, with a non-response/don’t know rate of10%. Table 30: Would an electronic version of the document be beneficial? Frequency Percent

Yes 52 56.5 No 31 33.7 Don’t know/No answer 9 9.8 Total 92 100




50

5.4.6 The EUROPASS Training initiative This section presents the views of participant organisations about the degree to whichEUROPASS Training has achieved its objectives. We firstly asked respondents about theclarity of their understanding of the objectives that EUROPASS Training aims to achieve.Secondly, we enquired about how effective had EUROPASS Training been in achieving thefollowing objectives: � increasing the number of training periods abroad� increasing the quality of training periods abroad� increasing the quality of and recognition accorded to qualifications obtained through

training periods abroad� increasing the visibility of training periods abroad� improving the participant’s understanding of the equivalence of training levels between

host and sending countries –related to transparency,� improving links between vocational and work experience,� improving employability of its holders and� improving the visibility of participating organisations. For the first four questions the non-response rate was around 18%, in line with–if a littlehigher than - the average of organisations not clear about EUROPASS Training’s objectives -see below. The “don’t know/ no opinion” category was consistently around 5.5%. To accountfor this, the percentages given for all other answers could be increased by around 29% toobtain their “corrected percentage” (CP) –their average in respect to substantive answers. The results presented in this section have to be treated carefully. They offer the views of thoseorganisations that have participated or are participating in the EUROPASS Training initiative.Since the use of EUROPASS Training is voluntary, and these organisations choose to takepart in the initiative, they are likely to have positive opinions about EUROPASS Training.

EUROPASS Training objectives Most respondents were clear about the objectives of EUROPASS Training. Over 80% of theorganisations consulted were clear or very clear about them. Table 31: How clear is your understanding of the objectives of EUROPASS Frequency Percent

Very clear 19 20.7 Clear 56 60.9 Not very clear 11 12.0 Very unclear 2 2.2 Don’t know/No answer 4 4.3 Total 92 100.0




51

Only 14.2% of the organisations stated that they were not very clear or were very unclearabout what EUROPASS Training aimed to achieve. They are, therefore, familiar with thecontext of the initiative and in a good position to answer our second set of questions, wherewe enquired about the efficiency of EUROPASS Training in achieving its objectives. Number of training periods abroad and promotion of vocational training Almost 40% (51%CP) of our respondents thought EUROPASS Training had no effect onincreasing the number of training periods abroad and 5.4% thought that it was an ineffectivetool for increasing the number of periods of training abroad. This is the modal category forthis question, what is consistent with the views from NCPs. Twenty-seven percent (35%CP)of respondents consider that EUROPASS Training is an effective tool for increasing thenumber of people undertaking training periods abroad. Just over four percent of therespondents considered that EUROPASS Training was very effective in this respect. Table 32: How would you rate the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training in increasingthe number of training periods abroad Frequency Percent Cumulative

Number of training periods abroad Very effective 4 4.3 4.3 Effective 25 27.3 31.6 No effect 36 39.2 70.8 Ineffective 5 5.4 76.2 Very ineffective 0 0 76.2 No opinion/don’t know 5 5.4 81.6 No answer 17 18.4 100.0 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd However, a significant proportion of participant organisations also reported that EUROPASSTraining increased students’/trainees’ willingness to undertake training periods abroad. Table 33: How do you think that EUROPASS Training affects trainees’ willingness toundertake training abroad? Frequency Percent Cumulative

Percent Increases a lot 22 23.9 23.9 Increases a little 33 35.9 59.8 It does not affect it 28 30.4 90.2 Don’t know/No answer 9 9.8 100 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd According to participant organisations, trainees in most organisations do indeed reactpositively when told about EUROPASS Training (see Table 34). The minority that did notreact positively about the initiative did so because of lengthy/unclear application proceduresor unawareness of the possible benefits of the initiative.



52

Table 34: For sending organisations only: How do trainees in your organisation reactwhen told of EUROPASS? Frequency Percent Cumulative

Percent Positively 57 62.0 62.0 Indifferently 20 21.7 83.7 Negatively 2 2.2 85.9 Don’t know/No answer 13 14.1 100.0 Total 92 100.0


In general terms, even if the initiative did not increase the number of training periods abroad,it made vocational training more attractive to young people, according to our respondents. Table 35: Do you think that EUROPASS Training helps to promote vocational trainingand to make it more attractive to young people? Frequency Percent

Yes 58 63.0 No 27 29.3 Don’t know/No answer 7 7.6 Total 92 100.0


Increasing the quality of training periods abroad Most respondents thought that EUROPASS Training was an effective tool to increase thequality of training periods abroad. Forty two percent (55%CP) of the respondents thought thatEUROPASS Training was an effective tool and over 50% (68%CP) reported it was effectiveor very effective in this respect. These results are remarkably similar to those obtained fromNCPs, where also 52% of the respondents considered that EUROPASS Training increases thequality of training periods abroad. Table 36: How would you rate the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training in increasingthe quality of training periods abroad Frequency Percent Cumulative

The quality of training periods abroad Very effective 9 9.8 9.8 Effective 39 42.4 52.2 No effect 16 17.4 69.6 Ineffective 6 6.5 76.1 Very ineffective 0 0 76.1 No opinion/don’t know 4 4.3 80.4 No answer 18 19.6 100.0 Total 92 100.0




53

EUROPASS Training is not primarily concerned with the European pathway itself, but withthe certification of this. However, there are certain quality criteria to be respected in allEuropean pathways to be certified by EUROPASS Training (e.g. participation of mentorsduring the pathway) which make EUROPASS Training have an effect in the pathway itself aswell as being a tool to certify it. Improving the quality of the certification of training periods abroad EUROPASS Training rates even higher, as would be expected, in terms of improving thequality and recognition of qualifications gained through periods of training abroad. Almost60% (76%CP) of the participant organisations thought that EUROPASS Training increasesthe quality of the certification of periods of training abroad. This is somewhat lower than thefigure for NCPs which considered that EUROPASS Training had been effective in improvingthe recognition of qualifications abroad (84%), but still shows a strong support to theefficiency of the initiative in this dimension. Less than 6% (8%CP) of respondents considered that EUROPASS Training was not aneffective tool in this dimension. These figures show that EUROPASS Training is seen as asignificant improvement over the situation pre-2000, where no framework for the certificationof training periods abroad was in existence. Secondly, it points out that either there was only asmall number of organisations offering such a type of certification, or most of them considerEUROPASS Training a more appropriate tool than the ones used by them until the existenceof EUROPASS Training. Table 37: How would you rate the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training in increasingthe quality and recognition of qualifications gained through periods of training abroad? Frequency Percent Cumulative

Quality and recognition ofqualifications gained through periods oftraining abroad

Very effective 16 17.4 17.4 Effective 38 41.4 58.8 No effect 12 13.0 71.8 Ineffective 5 5.4 77.2 Very ineffective 0 0 77.2 No opinion/don’t know 5 5.4 82.6 No answer 16 17.4 100.0 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Increasing the visibility of training periods abroad There is a very similar pattern in the answers to the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training inincreasing the visibility of training periods abroad, with almost 60% (78%CP) of therespondents seeing EUROPASS Training as an effective or very effective tool for this. Again,this is lower that the average given by NCPs. Only 3.3% of the participant organisationsreported that EUROPASS Training is an ineffective tool in this respect.



54

Table 38: How would you rate the effectiveness of EUROPASS Training in increasingthe visibility of periods of training abroad Frequency Percent Cumulative

Visibility of periods of training abroad Very effective 18 19.6 19.6 Effective 37 40.2 59.8 No effect 12 13.0 72.8 Ineffective 3 3.3 76.1 Very ineffective 0 0 76.1 No opinion/don’t know 5 5.4 81.5 No answer 17 18.5 100.0 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Equivalence of training levels between host and sending countries Most respondents (around 74%) considered themselves as highly or moderately familiar withthe equivalence of training levels before taking part in EUROPASS Training. Only 14.1% hada low understanding of the equivalence of training levels between host and sending countries,and around 4% had a very low understanding of this. Given the nature of participantorganisations this is hardly surprising: they are mainly vocational training institutions andthey often have previous European experience (e.g. through LEONARDO). Table 39: How would you rate your understanding of the equivalence of training levelsbetween the host and sending countries before your experience of EUROPASS? Frequency Percent Cumulative

High 24 26.1 26.1 Moderate 44 47.8 73.9 Low 13 14.1 88 Very low 4 4.3 92.3 Don’t know/No answer 7 7.7 100.0 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Even so, about half of the respondents considered that involvement in EUROPASS Traininghad improved their understanding of the equivalence of training levels between host andsending countries slightly or significantly. Less than 45% thought their involvement had notchanged this understanding.



55

Table 40: How has your understanding of the equivalence of training levels between thehost and sending countries changed since the involvement in EUROPASS? Frequency Percent Cumulative

It has improved significantly 13 14.1 14.1 It has improved slightly 31 33.7 47.8 It has not changed 41 44.6 92.4 It has decreased 0 0 92.4 Don’t know/No answer 7 7.6 100.0 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Links between vocational training and work experience According to our respondents, EUROPASS Training helps to develop links between trainingand work experience. Over 50% of the respondents reported that it helps a lot to developthose links, and less than 10% reported that it did not help. Table 41: To what extent does EUROPASS Training help to develop links betweentraining and work experience? Frequency Percent Cumulative

It helps a lot 47 51.1 51.1 It helps a little 31 33.7 84.8 It does not help 9 9.8 94.6 Don’t know/ No answer 5 5.4 100.0 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Employability of EUROPASS Training holders One of the key issues in which no abundant data was available until this mid-term evaluationwas the effect of the EUROPASS Training document on the employability of its holders. Theviews of participant organisations are positive about this point: 26% of the respondentsreported that EUROPASS Training increases the employment prospects of its holders a lot,almost 55% reported that it increases them slightly and only 13% thought it does not improvethe employability of its holders. Only 5% of the respondents did not know or gave no answer,what would suggest that participant organisations have had contacts with EUROPASSTraining holders on this issue.



56

Table 42: How do you think that the EUROPASS Training document affects theemployment prospects of its holders? Frequency Percent Cumulative

Improves them a lot 24 26.4 26.4 Improves them slightly 50 54.9 81.3 Does not affect them 12 13.2 94.5 Don’t know/ No answer 5 5.5 100.0 Total 91 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Visibility of participating organisations Most respondents also reported that EUROPASS Training had brought benefits to theirorganisations, by making them more visible at European level. EUROPASS Training wouldtherefore not only benefit its holders but also the organisations where they are based. This issupported by further evidence in our case studies. Table 43: Has participation in EUROPASS Training increased the visibility of yourorganisation at European level? Frequency Percent Cumulative

Percent Yes, highly 8 8.7 8.7 Yes, moderately 44 47.8 56.5 No 31 33.7 90.2 Don’t know/No answer 9 9.8 100.0 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Communication with key actors Communication between participant organisations and National Contact points has been clear,with nearly 80% of our respondents reporting that NCPs’ information had been very clear andaccessible, or clear and accessible.

Table 44: How was the information from NCPs when requested? Frequency Percent

Very clear and accessible 26 28.3 Clear and accessible 46 50.0 Difficult to grasp 8 8.7 Very difficult to grasp 3 3.3 Don’t know/No answer 9 9.8 Total 92 100.0




57

Methods of communication with both NCPs and partner organisations have been satisfactoryto participating organisations. This key aspect of the management of the initiative has beensuccessfully implemented in these first years of the initiative.

Table 45: Were the main methods of communication adequate with National ContactPoints (NCPs) and partner organisations (POs)? Frequency Percent

NCPs Yes 67 72.8 NCPs No 9 9.8 NCPs Don’t know/No answer 16 17.4 Total 92 100 Pos Yes 65 70.7 Pos No 13 14.1 Pos Don’t know/No answer 14 15.2 Total 92 100

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd 5.4.7 EUROPASS Training and other Community initiatives/programmes Most respondents’ organisations had already participated in other Community initiatives/programmes prior to their involvement in EUROPASS Training. Only 16% of ourrespondents had not participated in Community initiatives/programmes prior to EUROPASSTraining. The bulk of participant organisations had already participated/were participating inLEONARDO, as mentioned above, although a large proportion of organisations had alsoparticipated in SOCRATES. Table 46: Had your organisation been involved in any other Communityprogramme/initiative in the fields of education and training before EUROPASS? Frequency Percent No 14 16.1 Yes 73 83.9 LEONARDO 68 SOCRATES 46 EURES 3 EUROGUIDANCE 0 Other 6 Don’t know/No answer 5 Total 87 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Most participant organisations were familiar with mobility programmes. They were lessfamiliar with other European initiatives including transparency tools. Within the transparencytools, ECTS was the most widely known. There is scope for greater publicity of transparencytools and their role even within the organisations participant in EUROPASS Training, whoare already largely familiar with European programmes. As highlighted above in this report,



58

this not only holds true for transparency tools other than EUROPASS Training, but also forEUROPASS Training itself. Table 47: Which of the following EU initiatives have you heard of? Frequency

LEONARDO da VINCI 87 SOCRATES 82 YOUTH 41 EQUAL 31 ECTS 17 EURES CV search 12 European CV format 11 Diploma and certificate supplements 10 EUROGUIDANCE 9 Marie Curie Fellowships 5 Other 4 Don’t know/ No answer 1

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd The results below show the complementarity between EUROPASS Training and othertransparency tools. They should be interpreted with caution. The number of respondents to thecomplementarity of EUROPASS Training and the European CV format and the supplementsis above that given in the previous question for organisations which have heard about thoseinitiatives. This might be due to a number of reasons, including casual reading of thequestions. Some respondents might have also tried to guess the content of different initiativesfrom its name and give an answer on this basis. It is also possible that they searched forinformation on the different initiatives after responding the previous question31. The numberof non-opinions or non-answers is still high for all tools covered in the question, always above50%. The most complementary tool to EUROPASS Training according to our respondents were theEuropean Credits on non-formal and informal learning. Of the 38 respondents to thisquestion, half described both initiatives as very complementary, 17 as complementary andonly two as not complementary. No respondent found them as duplicating. Results for theother initiatives are not substantially different from this pattern. Even the European DiplomaSupplement, the tool reported as less complementary with EUROPASS Training reported 15responses as “very complementary”, 8 as “complementary” and only 5 as “notcomplementary”. Detail answers for all the tools covered are given in the table below.

31 All types of questionnaires for the survey, on-line and of course electronic/paper-based could be filled indifferent sessions.



59

Table 48: In your opinion, how complementary is EUROPASS Training to the following Frequency Percent

European Credits on non-formal andinformal learning

Very complementary 19 20.7 Relatively complementary 17 18.5 Not complementary 2 2.2 Duplicating 0 0 No opinion/don’t know 27 29.3 No answer 27 29.3 Total 92 100 Certificate supplements Very complementary 18 19.5 Relatively complementary 12 13.0 Not complementary 2 2.2 Duplicating 0 0 No opinion/don’t know 34 37.0 No answer 26 28.3 Total 92 100 European CV format Very complementary 18 19.5 Relatively complementary 12 13.0 Not complementary 3 3.3 Duplicating 0 0 No opinion/don’t know 33 35.9 No answer 26 28.3 Total 92 100 ECTS Very complementary 15 16.3 Relatively complementary 12 13.0 Not complementary 4 4.4 Duplicating 0 0 No opinion/don’t know 35 38.0 No answer 26 28.3 Total 92 100 European Diploma Supplement Very complementary 14 15.2 Relatively complementary 8 8.8 Not complementary 5 5.4 Duplicating 0 0 No opinion/don’t know 38 41.3 No answer 27 29.3 Total 92 100




60

A majority of respondents considered that in general transparency tools are complex.Although a significant number of organisations considered that the current framework wasmanageable about a fifth of the respondent organisations expressed the view that it was toocomplex to follow. Table 49: Do you find European initiatives relating to the certification and transparencyof qualifications in the field of education and training? Frequency Percent

Clear 9 10.2 Mostly clear with some difficult aspects 34 38.7 Complex but manageable 25 28.4 Too complex to follow 16 18.2 Don’t know/No answer 4 4.5 Total 88 100

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Therefore, overall, those respondents who knew about the different initiatives found themvery complementary. However, there was a very significant number of organisationsunfamiliar with transparency tools, because they perceive the current transparency frameworkas being too complex to follow. 5.4.8 Outputs A majority of participants in the initiative have fulfilled most of the objectives they had whenthey applied for participation in the initiative. Around 10% of the participants stated that theyhad not fulfilled any of the objectives they had. Table 50: How far have the objectives you had when you applied for participation in theEUROPASS Training initiative been fulfilled? Frequency Percent Cumulative

Percent All fulfilled 25 27.2 27.2 Most fulfilled 46 50.0 77.2 None fulfilled 9 9.8 87.0 Don’t know/ No answer 12 13.0 100 Total 92 100.0


Moreover, participation in the initiative has generally made our interviewees more likely tolook favourably on someone who holds a EUROPASS Training document in the future.



61

Table 51: Has your EUROPASS Training experience made it more or less likely thatyou look favourably in the future on someone with a EUROPASS? Frequency Percent Cumulative

Percent More likely 71 77.2 77.2 Less likely 5 5.4 82.6 Don’t know/No answer 16 17.4 100.0 Total 92 100.0

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd 5.4.9 Challenges The above discussion has given a positive image of the EUROPASS Training initiative fromparticipating organisations. However, the initiative still has problems to overcome. The greatest challenge for EUROPASS Training is to make itself known, especially toemployers. This ranked much higher as a problem for EUROPASS Training that anylinguistic barriers, any problems related to the document (its format, its content, itsapplication process) or its value/attractiveness to employees or employers. A key messagefrom the table below is that EUROPASS Training, even in its current form, would be avaluable instrument for students/trainees and employers. But it is fundamental that thedocument is known so that it can offer its benefits to all actors.

Table 52: What do you perceive as the main problems related to the EUROPASSTraining initiative? –Multiple choice Frequency

Not well known by employers 70 Not recognised certification 35 Linguistic problems 22 Time consuming application 19 Not appropriate format 18 Not enough emphasis on skills acquired 17 Not attractive to employers 15 Not attractive to employees 7 Other 14 Don’t know/No answer 2


5.4.10 The future The positive views attached to the initiative by participant organisations are reflected in thefact that the great majority of them will continue to use EUROPASS Training in the future.Only 2% of respondents said that they would not participate.



62

Table 53: Will your organisation continue to participate in EUROPASS Training in thefuture? Frequency Percent Cumulative

Percent Yes 69 75.0 75.0 No 2 2.2 77.2 Don’t know/No answer 21 22.8 100.0 Total 92 100.0


Three quarters of the participant organisations reported that they would continue participatingin EUROPASS Training in the future.



63

6.0 NATIONAL CONTACT POINTS’ VIEWS ABOUT EUROPASS In this chapter we describe the views that National Contact Points expressed about theinitiative. We firstly review their general views on the initiative, with a particular focus on theunderstanding of the initiative by key actors, and its appropriateness and relevance. Secondly,we review their views about the impact of EUROPASS Training on participant individualsand organisations, its own objectives and other Community objectives. Thirdly, we presentNCPs’ opinions on sustainability and reform. NCPs have a positive opinion about EUROPASS Training and they consider it to be a greatadvance over the pre-2000 situation, and defended the continuation of the initiative. However,they also pointed out several areas for improvement, in particular in relation to the format andcontent of the EUROPASS Training document. 6.1 Understanding of the initiative

This subsection aims to clarify the level of understanding of the initiative by key actors asperceived by NCPs. Firstly, we review the views of NCPs about the level of understanding ofthe objectives EUROPASS Training by key actors -NCPs, participating organisations andbeneficiaries. This needs to be clarified before we can focus on the appropriateness of theinitiative itself. 6.1.1 Understanding of the initiative by key actors

National Contact Points All NCPs perceived their understanding of the specific and operational objectives of theinitiative as adequate, and it was pointed out that this understanding was used in theproduction of national guidelines in several countries, to complement EC materials.

Participating organisations and individuals A key activity for all NCPs has been to make the EUROPASS Training initiative understoodby these target groups. According to NCPs there are, however, still important issues to beaddressed. One of these issues is reported to be an asymmetric understanding of EUROPASS Trainingby users. Whereas many Chambers of Commerce, educational institutions, trainingorganisations and regional councils in some countries show a good understanding of theinitiative, employers and a proportion of the individual beneficiaries do not. This is in partdue to the low level of financial resources for the initiative, in part a consequence of thegreater contact with the initiative of those participant organisations which have beenresponsible for application procedures. Since NCPs had a low budget for EUROPASSTraining in general and its promotion in particular, they often had to target thoseorganisations which where easier for them to reach, (i.e. educational institutions andinstitutions which already participate in other European programmes such as LEONARDO) inorder to be effective in their use of limited resources. This approach meant some targetgroups were not covered.



64

The key problems in understanding the initiative were as follows: � The rationale of the document is not clear, especially the use to which the document can

be put after obtaining it. � The advantages of the document are not clear, especially since dissemination campaigns

have not reached private sector employers and there is no funding attached toEUROPASS Training. In some countries (e.g. Iceland, Luxembourg, The Netherlands,Ireland) it was reported that even when the rationale of the document is understood theadvantages of using it are frequently not.

� The institutional arrangements that serve as a framework for the initiative are not clear.

More guidance is needed about how organisations should co-operate. � The EUROPASS Training document itself is not clear enough for users and this also

affects the understanding of the initiative by key actors themselves, since the document isthe most tangible manifestation of the initiative for them. A majority of NCPs pointed outthat the current format of the document, (e.g. with space for 3 different languages and 3different pathways -whereas most people only undertake one) is confusing for users.

6.1.2 Appropriateness and relevance of EUROPASS This section reviews the appropriateness and relevance of, firstly, the EUROPASS Traininginitiative and secondly that of the EUROPASS Training document, as reported by NCPs. EUROPASS Training Initiative To judge the appropriateness of the EUROPASS Training objectives is a complex exercise,given the number and nature of objectives for the initiative. It is also difficult because of thedifferent actors involved and their different perceptions of EUROPASS Training objectives. Our interviews with NCPs have made clear that different national traditions influence the wayin which actors think about, organise and use EUROPASS Training. However, there is ashared view that the objectives behind the initiative are still relevant and that EUROPASSTraining is a valuable instrument to take these objectives forward. It is important to note thatall interviewed NCPs thought that EUROPASS Training should continue in the future –seebelow in this chapter. They considered that the initiative had made valuable contributions and was a significantimprovement over the pre-2000 situation in relation to the transparency of vocationalqualifications, when no European recognised means of recording periods of training abroadwere available. Those NCPs that reported an increasing relevance for EUROPASS Training mentioned itslinks with EC priorities as improving:

� transparency of qualifications� the quality of training (EUROPASS Training as a “quality label”),� certification of informal learning



65

� transnational mobility and� links with private sector demands such as the growing demand for international

experience of applicants from industry. Those NCPs that considered that EUROPASS Training needed to be modified focused on theneed for:

� directing more resources to the initiative� opening it to areas other than work-linked training, so that it can be more widely

known and recognised and� standardising the assessment of the eligibility of applicants mentioned in 3.2.1

NCPs were also asked to rank the relevance of EUROPASS Training in the light of changingNational and European policy contexts in the field of Education and Training. Table 54: EUROPASS Training Relevance Relevance of EUROPASS Training Frequency

Very relevant 4 Relevant 6 Partially relevant 8 Not relevant 1 Total 19

All but one NCP thought that EUROPASS Training was relevant to some extent. Most NCPsconsidered it to be partially relevant. Over half of the NCPs (10) considered EUROPASSTraining as “relevant” or “very relevant”. Many NCPs, however, made clear that it wasnecessary to reform the initiative to preserve its relevance. If EUROPASS Training had beenan important progression over the pre-2000 situation, it has to develop in order to continuebeing relevant for users and to improve the transparency of qualifications in participatingcountries. In the remaining of this section we analyse the appropriateness of the EUROPASSTraining document. The document The appropriateness of the EUROPASS Training initiative in practice is closely related to theEUROPASS Training document. This section focuses on the clarity and transparency of thedocument as perceived by NCPs and the role of the document in the European pathways. Clarity and transparency Although a minority of NCPs defined the clarity and transparency of the document as itsstrengths, both aspects attracted criticisms from the majority of NCPs. The most importantpoints of criticism are listed below: � The current format offers not enough space for a clear and adequate description of the

period of training abroad.



66

� The current document is hand written, which makes reading unnecessarily difficult andundermines its official character in the eyes of employers and other users.

� Some NCPs (Iceland, Denmark) did not see a need for the EUROPASS Trainingdocument to allow for three European pathways. Most beneficiaries in all countries onlyparticipate in one European pathway, and having space for three was seen as confusing,giving the impression that part of the document was incomplete. Moreover, it createsproblems relating to quality assurance, since, once the first pathway is approved, the NCPloses all contact with the document and its holder, who could potentially fill the otherpathways freely.

� Crucial questions such as question 17 in the document which concerns “the content of theEuropean pathway”, are completed in a very variable way. This is in part due to thedifferences in the training focus of the different economic sectors recorded in theEUROPASS Training document, but it is also due to the lack of succinct but preciseguidelines for organisations to complete the questions. It is now left unclear in the opinionof some NCPs whether question 17 refers to the time-framework of the training, theactivities that trainees undertook or to an assessment of his/her performance.

� The language in which the document is written is not user-friendly (criticisms includedthe view that it was written in “EUROSPEAK” or “EUROCRAT terminology”). Althoughexplanations are provided in the annex and user’s guides, the document was considered tobe difficult to understand and too abstract.

� There are translation issues to be addressed. Translations in the document can be, andoften are inaccurate. Responsibilities for the translation are not clearly defined. This canbe a problem particularly for quality assurance for periods of training recorded inespecially difficult (e.g. Greek) or non-widely used languages in which inaccuracies couldnot be easily detected in the country of provenance of the student/trainee. Moreover, thehost organisation is now required to sign a blank page in which the translation of its textwill be inserted, which many are reluctant to do, as pointed out by the Greek NCP.

� The document is not numbered, which makes statistical monitoring by NCPs moredifficult, contributing to the poor state of information management for the initiative. Thisis especially the case since NCPs have control only over the first pathway. After theyreceive the document for their first pathway, it depends on the good will of the“EUROPASS” holders if they let the NCP know about further pathways32.

The four first points were consistently repeated by most NCPs, with calls for specific andurgent action to solve them.

32 There are varied national approaches related to this point. The French system enables a check to be kept onsubsequent pathways too; if the sending body is different, the trainee will get a new passport, while furtherpathways from the same body will be recorded in the same document. In other countries, like Italy, a new“EUROPASS” document is issued for each pathway.



67

Some countries, like France, highlighted that the EUROPASS Training document is only afirst step in moving towards the directions indicated by the Bruges process in terms oftransparency and transferability and it could be developed further. The role of the EUROPASS Training document in the European pathway In the opinion of most NCPs EUROPASS Training helps host bodies to define the objectivesof the European pathway, forcing them to think about the training programme, itsdevelopment and the mentor for the period, as they have to write a report in the document.According to the main principles of EUROPASS Training there should always be anagreement between the sending and host organisations on the objectives of the pathway.However, as the agreement is a separate document, it may occur that the person who fills inthe EUROPASS Training has not seen the agreement. For a minority of NCPs, EUROPASS Training does not influence the objectives of thetraining period, which are determined by the National training programmes and EUprogrammes such as LEONARDO or the interests of the sending and host organisations.EUROPASS Training in this context would be more a means for recording training and skillsnot a means to determine the content of training periods. In other countries, like France, there are already more detailed and in-depth nationalregulations regarding the organisation of the pathways beyond those established in theEUROPASS Training document. 6.2 EUROPASS Training Impact

A key question for this evaluation of the initiative is its impact. Some of the limitations of thissection must, however, be borne in mind. This section is based on the views of NCPs.National Contact Points do not normally have direct contact with individual beneficiaries andthe representativeness of the anecdotal information they can provide should not be assumed.They are, however, in a good position to assess the impact of the initiative on differentnational and European objectives. This information complements the information aboutimpact given in chapter five. 6.2.1 Beneficiaries

Beneficiaries have different reasons to take part in EUROPASS Training. NCPs consideredthat they saw a set of complementary advantages in terms of personal development, improvedemployability and other benefits. The end of the section presents some challenges to beovercome in order to increase the initiative’s impact on participants and key reasons for non-participation identified by NCPs.

Motivation to participate NCPs were not in a position to give hard evidence of the impact of the initiative onbeneficiaries. For NCPs the most important reason for individuals to participate in theinitiative is its low cost in terms of time and effort. Since they have already decided to goabroad to undertake their European pathway, they see EUROPASS Training as an additionalbenefit, a concrete output for their experience abroad and a document that they expect will:



68

� have a positive impact on their employability if used in job applications� have a positive impact on further study applications (e.g. application for a place at

university, when students can document their period of training abroad.)� obtain personal satisfaction, which comes with the certification and recognition of their

experience. In particular countries other reasons for participation were pointed out. For instance, someItalian universities recognise EUROPASS Training as a “credit” towards the degree of thestudent. A significant number of NCPs pointed out that students and trainees who do undertake aperiod of training abroad do not consider EUROPASS Training valuable enough so as tomotivate them to undertake a European pathway. Their motivation for undertaking aEuropean pathway is other than obtaining the document. The EUROPASS Training documentis considered by beneficiaries as the side-product of the period of training abroad, and not anaim in itself. Employment prospects No NCP had had sufficiently continuous and direct contact with beneficiaries so as to providehard evidence on how the EUROPASS Training document affects the employment prospectsof its holders. Some NCPs added that it was too early to know -in several countries, manyEUROPASS Training users are students who are still in education. However, some countries,like Sweden, do have information from surveys to participants that suggested a positiveimpact of EUROPASS Training on the employment prospects of its holders. From anecdotal evidence NCPs offered diverse views on the advantages in the labour marketthat EUROPASS Training offers to users. A majority of NCPs reported a positive impact on beneficiaries’ employment prospects: � EUROPASS Training serves to prove that the training period abroad has taken place, and

demonstrates that its holder has mobility, linguistic ability and international experience� EUROPASS Training shows that students have completed a training period of quality

abroad� EUROPASS Training clearly certifies the training experience gained by the beneficiary,

helping to identify his/her strengths and level of preparation� It enhances the confidence of holders when looking for a job in their country and also in

other European countries. A second set of NCPs highlighted that: � The training period abroad – as opposed to the EUROPASS Training document -, is of

advantage in the labour market.� Some EUROPASS Training holders have found jobs in countries other than their sending

country for the period certified in EUROPASS Training, but this was seen again as morerelated to the training period abroad than to the EUROPASS Training itself.



69

A third set of NCPs argued that the EUROPASS Training document had barriers to overcomebefore it can improve the employment prospects of its users: � Employers are not aware of EUROPASS Training. When employers are not familiar with

the initiative it is difficult for job applicants to introduce the document to them and showthem its advantages.

� There is currently no link between ground level companies and the European Commissionto add credibility to the document. The document is not endorsed by companies oremployers’ organisations and lacks the authority to be persuasive to employers.

Other benefits Improved employment prospects are not the only benefit that EUROPASS Training offers tobeneficiaries. Those NCPs that detailed other benefits focused on: � Enhanced autonomy, self-esteem and personal confidence of the individual� Improved attitude towards mobility� Better motivation for continuing studies� Better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of national training systems� Pride in getting the EUROPASS Training certification (personal satisfaction). It is nevertheless difficult to attribute some of these benefits to EUROPASS Training ratherthan to the European pathway.

Challenges

NCPs identified the following range of challenges that beneficiaries face in relation toEUROPASS Training: � EUROPASS Training is not an EC programme and participation in it does not have any

funding attached� The document needs to be improved� Host organisations are not aware of EUROPASS Training, which on occasions comes to

them as an unexplained addition to a LEONARDO training contract and this is reflectedin variable quality from host organisations in filling in the document.

It is the first problem that would require a more important change in the approach andmanagement of the initiative. The other two problems can be addressed in a more incrementalway by implementing the recommendation on the improvement of the document given aboveand continuing with the dissemination campaign for the initiative. Non-participation It is important to know the difficulties of those involved in EUROPASS Training in order todetermine how to make the initiative more attractive to them, once they have decided toparticipate in it. However it is also important to know why people who would qualify forEUROPASS Training do not make use of it. After all, the initiative is there to be made use of,and its success is to an important extent dependent on the level of participation that itachieves. Ideally this question would be addressed through a separate study. Although the



70

information presented in this sub-section is therefore only partial, it describes the reasons fornon-participation of individuals as perceived by NCPs. The majority of NCPs (13 out of 18 respondents) thought that lack of knowledge of theinitiative was the main reason for individuals who would qualify for EUROPASS Trainingnot to make use of it. This points to the need for further dissemination of the initiative directlyto individuals, but also points to the need to engage potential participant organisations in thedissemination process (a second tier for dissemination). It is of little use that organisations arefamiliar with the initiative if they do not disseminate this to potential individual beneficiaries. Eight NCPs stated that another key reason for non-participation is the unawareness of thebenefits of the initiative by individuals and five related it to lack of interest in the initiative –see section 11 on policy options on how to address these issues. There is also a need toexplain in more detail how application procedures work. Five NCPs thought that lengthy application procedures -or the belief that applicationprocedures could be lengthy, even if that is not the case- could be deterring potentialbeneficiaries. Two NCPs stated that unclear application procedures – in relation to who isresponsible for applying- are deterring potential beneficiaries to get involved in EUROPASSTraining. Lack of support in the application by sending organisation, especially important sinceindividuals cannot apply for EUROPASS Training directly, was mentioned on four occasions.As one NCP put it: “The choice is really for the sender organisation. If they decide to apply,beneficiaries get the EUROPASS Training. If they do not, potential beneficiaries do notobtain it”. Two NCPs argued that some form of empowerment for individuals in theapplication process could, therefore, be beneficial for the initiative and improve participationlevels. Other mentioned reasons for non-participation included the character of the documentitself and the lack of a EUROPASS Training grant. 6.2.2 Participant Organisations In this section we present information on the other key actor in the EUROPASS Traininginitiative: the participating organisation. The information presented refers to sendingorganisations, for as explained above, NCPs do not have any contact with host organisationsin their countries. In this section, we firstly review the key motivations of participantorganisations in making use of EUROPASS Training. Secondly, we present the sectors thathave made more extensive use of the initiative. Thirdly, we examine reasons for non-participation.



71

Motivation to participate There are two key motivating factors for EUROPASS Training participating organisations,according to NCPs, to wit, those based on the benefits for the participating organisation itself,and those based on themes related to participating individuals33.

� Factors related to the sending organisation include:� EUROPASS Training has very little or no cost for organisations� EUROPASS Training is internationally recognised� EUROPASS Training gives more information on the candidate, especially when there is

an assessment in EUROPASS Training, which they normally expect.� EUROPASS Training gives opportunities for international networking� The description of the training done can update the technical knowledge of the sending

organisation and benchmark it with other countries� It improves the European focus of the organisation’s training programmes� It can be used for certain purposes as a substitute for other LEONARDO documentation� Factors related to the student/trainee include:� Some organisations participate in response to the demand they have from students/trainees� The participant organisations aim to produce better qualified students/trainees through

their participation in EUROPASS Training. The strengths of EUROPASS Training for participant organisations as perceived by NCPs aretherefore related to its contribution towards the standardisation and recognition of periods oftraining abroad. It is a European document as opposed to national and company documents,which gives the opportunity for working and developing links at European level with otherorganisations, and for improving comparability of training. It is also a standardised document,which gives the same type of information on all its users. More importantly, these benefits areEUROPASS Training’s added value beyond its relation to other European programmes andthe European pathway. Key sectors In terms of the sectors that have made more extensive use of EUROPASS Training, therelation to the European pathway is also very important. Those sectors in which the Europeanpathway is more useful are those that also reflect a higher participation rate in EUROPASSTraining. This chiefly includes those in which language skills are an asset in the workplace orthose in which it is possible to learn abroad new techniques and technological processes. The first group of key sectors, in which language skills are a distinctive asset would include34

hotels, restaurants and catering, tourism, sales (import/export), secretarial training, translationand business administration. The second group to which new technological developmentsused abroad are of interest includes manufacturing, technology and transport, metalmachinery and electronics. It is more difficult to conceptualise however why a third group of

33 Note that these factors relate specifically to EUROPASS Training and not European pathways, although it canoften be difficult to distinguish between the two.

34 We have preferred to refer here to the sector as given during the interviews with NCPs, not adapting it to thedata grid categories.



72

sectors includes agriculture, education and health and social services show relatively highparticipation shares in the initiative. There was not detailed information on sectors of poor participation. Those mentionedincluded glass, paper and ceramics and media. Non-participation Out of the 15 NCPs that answered the question on reasons for non-participation amongstorganisations which could take part in EUROPASS Training, 13 stated that lack of knowledgeof the initiative was an important factor. Ten organisations referred to their unawareness ofthe benefits of the initiative or their scepticism about them, eight organisations to the lack ofinterest by its personnel, and seven to the lack of interest of the potential sendingorganisation. Given these figures, further dissemination would be required, but there wouldalso be a need for giving individuals the possibility of applying directly for EUROPASSTraining, since almost half of the NCPs thought that organisations which would qualify forEUROPASS Training do not apply because they do not have, as organisations, interest in theinitiative – whereas some of their trainees or students who might have an interest, depend ontheir organisation for the application. The shortcomings of the document already mentioned in previous sections, were quoted byfour NCPs. These shortcomings are especially damaging to the use of the document in thosecountries where companies (normally large companies) and educational/training institutionshave already developed their own certification systems for periods of training abroad, whichhave a more compete and structured content, targeted to their specific needs. Other factors for organisations not to participate according to NCPs include: the belief that itwill entail a lengthy application process (four NCPs); lack of support in the applicationprocess; unclear procedures in the application process (two); and lack of funding (two). 6.2.3 EUROPASS Training objectives This section presents the views of NCPs about EUROPASS Training objectives. Firstly, wereview the opinion of NCPs about the strengths of these objectives. Secondly, we detail theextent to which EUROPASS Training has achieved its objectives. NCPs embraced EUROPASS Training objectives. Three main strengths for EUROPASSTraining objectives (one substantial and two in their operationalisation) are: � EUROPASS Training objectives are in tune with National Objectives: for example,

France and the Belgian French Community NCP highlighted the importance of theoperational objective of quality, which was seen to be in tune with national standards.

� EUROPASS Training objectives are open: The only information available to NCPs at the

outset of the initiative was the Council Decision, which enabled NCPs to develop theirown working methods and targets, which more detailed regulation would have made moredifficult.



73

� EUROPASS Training objectives are flexible: Nordic countries (Finland, Norway,Denmark) highlighted the fact that as the implementation of the initiative is largelydecentralised, different NCPs may in practice emphasise different objectives, according tothe variation of national education and training systems and traditions.

This remaining of this section explores the extent to which EUROPASS Training hasaccomplished its key objectives: � stimulating training periods abroad,� improving the quality, the recognition,� the visibility, and the transparency of training periods abroad,� acting as a tool for supporting the mobility of people in training and promoting vocational

training and� making it more attractive to young people.

There are two dimensions on which to value accomplishment of these objectives. One is byreferring to the number of objectives to which EUROPASS Training has made a positivecontribution to. The second is by referring to the intensity of the impact of EUROPASSTraining on those objectives in which is has made a positive contribution. In general theassessment by NCPs on the effects of EUROPASS Training in relation to its objectives,measured as the number of objectives to which it has contributed positively, is favourable.Most of the researched EUROPASS Training objectives were seen as having beenaccomplished to some extent through the initiative in its current form. However, most NCPsclarified that the impact, if present, was in most cases not intense. We review individualobjectives below.

Stimulating training periods abroad Stimulating more training periods abroad is the objective that ranked lowest amongst thoseinvestigated. Only three NCPs considered that EUROPASS Training had been an effectivetool to achieving this objective, whereas 13 did not considered this to be the case (three NCPsdid not answer/ did not know). Those NCPs that defended the effectiveness of EUROPASSTraining in relation to this objective argued that the non-accreditation of training periodsabroad was a very important obstacle to mobility. However, most NCPs felt that people wouldhave undertaken the European pathway without EUROPASS Training, which therefore hadnot had an effect in stimulating training periods abroad, especially since there is no moneyattached to the initiative. Improving the quality of training periods abroad There was a more positive view of the impact of EUROPASS Training on this secondobjective. Ten NCPs argued that EUROPASS Training was an effective tool for improvingthe quality of training periods abroad through its quality criteria, which helped relevant actorsto plan the training period, with some NCPs stating that this was a very important function forEUROPASS Training. Seven NCPs did not see EUROPASS Training as an effective tool forthis, due of its limitations or because countries already had more stringent quality assurancemechanisms for training periods abroad (e.g. Denmark). Two NCPs did not answer/ did notknow.



74

Improving the recognition of training periods abroad EUROPASS Training was seen as an effective tool for achieving this objective by 16 NCPs,in two senses. Firstly, in terms of the subject specific qualification that the student/trainee isaiming for, since EUROPASS Training periods are normally recognised as part of theircurrent training programme, certified at national level. Secondly, in terms of the personal andsocial recognition of the training undertaken. A number of NCPs, however, argued that theeffectiveness of the initiative could be increased by providing an assessment of theperformance of the trainee during the training period abroad. Only one NCP considered thatEUROPASS Training had not been an effective tool for recognition, when compared withnational qualifications. Two NCPs did not know/ did not answer. Increasing the visibility of periods of training abroad NCPs’ answers place this objective as the second most successfully achieved throughEUROPASS Training. Fourteen NCPs agreed that EUROPASS Training had been effective inincreasing the visibility of periods of training abroad, an important objective that can beachieved by having a uniform document recognised throughout the EU/EEA. Only two NCPsdisagreed, focusing on the limited role of EUROPASS Training vis-á-vis LEONARDO.Three NCPs did not know/ did not answer. Increasing transparency of periods of training abroad This is one of the most salient objectives of EUROPASS Training, which is defined as atransparency tool. 13 NCPs considered that EUROPASS Training had increased thetransparency of periods of training abroad, highlighting the singular character of thedocument (there are no other documents of similar characteristics). NCPs also clarified thatthis could be improved by improving the document. Three NCPs argued that the documentwas not sufficiently familiar to the public so as to have an effect on transparency yet. ThreeNCPs did not know or did not answer. Supporting mobility of people in training Eight NCPs did not think that EUROPASS Training had been effective in supporting themobility of people in training, whereas a similar number of NCPs (seven) thought it had beeneffective. Four NCPs did not know/did not answer. Improving links between training and work experience Nine NCPs believed that EUROPASS Training had been effective regarding the improvementof links between training and work experience. Eight did not endorse this view, and two didnot know did not answer. Those countries that saw a limited role for EUROPASS Trainingimproving links between training and work experience included the majority of countries witha “dual system” for vocational training, a system which already offers very good linksbetween training and work experience.



75

Promoting vocational training Six NCPs thought that EUROPASS Training had had a positive impact in promotingvocational training. A difference was drawn between people in short vocational trainingprogrammes and people in long vocational training programmes. Short vocational trainingprogrammes were more attractive to trainees when the possibility to obtain a EUROPASSTraining document was available. For those on long programmes, however, the mainqualification was sufficiently attractive and the relative importance of EUROPASS Trainingdiminished. Ten countries did not see EUROPASS Training as an effective instrument topromote vocational training. This is partly because EUROPASS Training is only known byusers when they are already embarked on a training programme, and partly because this isconsidered to be too broad a problem for EUROPASS Training to have an impact on itsalleviation. 6.2.4 Other Community objectives NCPs were also asked about the impact of EUROPASS Training on other Communityobjectives related to the initiative such as equal opportunities, social inclusion, employmentand competitiveness and the promotion of lifelong learning. In general NCPs did not regardEUROPASS Training as an instrument that was having a significant effect on any of theseobjectives, and only a minority of them referred to employment and competitiveness – themost closely related to the initiative - as being impacted to some extent by EUROPASSTraining. The general tendency throughout these objectives was for countries with higher participationrates to report a higher success rate for EUROPASS Training in fulfilling these objectives. 6.3 National Contact Points on sustainability and reform This section reviews several questions related to the sustainability of the EUROPASSTraining initiative. Firstly, we review the overall results of EUROPASS Training so far in theopinion of NCPs. Secondly, we explore its continuing relevance in the light of changingnational and European policy contexts. Thirdly, the appropriateness of its focus on work-linked training is examined. Finally, its level of integration with other EU initiatives isdescribed. 6.3.1 Overall results

As the table below shows, the opinion of NCPs about EUROPASS Training results is veryfavourable to the initiative. 84% of the NCPs valued its overall results from average to verygood. No NCP valued the results as very poor and only two valued the initiative as poor,giving an average valuation across all NCPs of 3.38 points out of five.



76

Table 55: Overall results of EUROPASS Training in your country so far by NCP. Result Number of NCPs 5 Very good 3 4 Good 3 3 Average 10 2 Poor 2 1 Very poor 0 Don’t know / no answer 1 Total 19 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd For most NCPs EUROPASS Training represented a great advance over the pre-2000situation, when no recognised international record was available for the European pathways.Whilst it was also perceived that not all target groups had yet been reached, those who hadbeen reached and who were using EUROPASS Training were satisfied with the scheme, andresults, if not quantitatively impressive, had been qualitatively positive. Given the value that most NCPs attached to the initiative it is not surprising that itscontinuation was defended. When asked about whether EUROPASS Training should continuein the future or not, all NCPs stated that EUROPASS Training should continue, althoughsome changes were suggested . Most of the changes proposed covered aspects we havealready commented on, such as the content and format of the document, but new aspects werealso raised. These new aspects included more efficient monitoring and assessment of thoseinvolved in the initiative, the extension of EUROPASS Training to informal learning, theachievement of a higher profile for the scheme and the implementation of positivediscrimination towards people with lower levels of educational attainment. 6.3.2 Continuing relevance

When asked about the continuing relevance of the scheme in the light of changing nationaland European education and training contexts, it is important to highlight that no NCPconsidered that the initiative had become irrelevant three years after the approval of theCouncil Decision. Over half of the NCPs considered EUROPASS Training partially relevantand eight saw it as relevant or very relevant. Table 56: Continuing relevance of EUROPASS Training in your country so far –byNCP Relevance Number of NCPs 4 Very relevant 4 3 Relevant 4 2 Partially relevant 11 1 Not relevant 0 Don’t know / no answer 0 Total 19 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd



77

The emphasis of EUROPASS Training on the certification of skills and its relation totransnational mobility were quoted as continuously relevant objectives. However it was also mentioned that EUROPASS Training should evolve and be widened toachieve its full potential, incorporating new groups of beneficiaries (not only people in work-linked training), and all forms of learning (including informal learning) and being given moreresources for this expansion. EUROPASS Training also needs more time to establish itself asa recognised initiative, which is familiar to employers, training organisations and individualsand as such is capable of giving its beneficiaries and training organisations more value. 6.3.3 Focus on Vocational Training Two interrelated questions were asked to NCPs regarding the focus of EUROPASS Trainingon work-linked training. Firstly, NCPs were asked how far EUROPASS Training’ss focus onvocational training was justified. However, since it would be of little use to know that thisfocus is not justified if the characteristics of the initiative do not allow for transfer to otherareas, NCPs were also asked how easily EUROPASS Training could be transferred to othereducation and training areas. Table 57: Justification of EUROPASS Training focus on vocational training –by NCP Number of NCPs Justified 13 Not justified 4 Don’t know / no answer 2 Total 19 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Most NCPs (13) considered that EUROPASS Training’ss focus on vocational training isjustified. Although a minority of these NCPs clarified that EUROPASS Training should notbe kept exclusive for vocational training, a significant proportion of them (6) considered thatEUROPASS Training’ss focus on vocational training was not only justified, but should bepreserved by maintaining the initiative for this type of training only. These NCPs argued thatin spite of the high numbers in vocational training this area was not given enough attention,contrary to formal education, which benefits from programmes such as SOCRATES andYOUTH and other initiatives. A vocational training centred EUROPASS Training serves toalleviate this imbalance and gives status to vocational training. Four NCPs considered that EUROPASS Training’ss focus on vocational training was notjustified. Overall, there is, therefore, an equilibrium in the number of opinions in favour ofkeeping EUROPASS Training exclusive to vocational training and those in favour ofextending the initiative. The second question for this sub-section referred to the feasibility of extending EUROPASSTraining. We asked NCPs how easily EUROPASS Training could be extended to othereducation and training areas.



78

Table 58: How easily could EUROPASS Training be extended to other education andtraining areas? Number of NCPs Easily 11 Not easily 3 Don’t know / no answer 5 Total 19 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting A majority of NCPs thought that EUROPASS Training could be easily extended to otherareas. Two NCPs highlighted the potential of EUROPASS Training as a certification tool forinformal learning. Of those three NCPs stating that it would not be easily extendable to otherareas, two argued that this was the case due to the deficient format of the document. Therelatively high proportion of ‘don’t know / no answer’ responses is due to the fact that severalNCPs which did not see a value in extending EUROPASS Training beyond vocationaltraining did not consider it appropriate to answer this question. 6.3.4 Level of integration with other EU initiatives

In this section we address the relationship between EUROPASS Training and other EUinitiatives and programmes in related fields. Firstly, we focus on the relationship with other EU programmes, with reference to: � LEONARDO da Vinci,� SOCRATES and� YOUTH. Secondly we review the complementarity of EUROPASS Training with a set of relatedinitiatives: � European CV format� Certificate Supplements� European Diploma Supplement� European portfolio for language skills� European credits on non-formal and informal training� European Computer Driving Licence� EURES� European Credit Transfer System� Other initiatives that the respondents would like to address. Finally, we asked NCPs if EUROPASS Training should be revised to enable it to support / becentral to the other developments mentioned above and how this could be done, particularly ifintegrating some of the above mentioned initiatives within EUROPASS Training or viceversa.



79

6.3.5 Relationship of EUROPASS Training to EU programmes According to two NCPs, EUROPASS Training is well integrated with other programmes suchas LEONARDO, SOCRATES and YOUTH. A similar minority of NCPs considered thatthere was no integration between EUROPASS Training and these programmes, since theydeal with two different functions: mobility and recognition of qualifications. The majority of NCPs, however, argued that the level of integration with SOCRATES andYOUTH was different to that with LEONARDO. In most countries, a significant proportionof EUROPASS Training users also participate in LEONARDO–see the table below. This isespecially the case in those countries where participation levels have been higher, likeAustria, Germany, Italy, Spain and The Netherlands. Table 59: Number of pathways funded by mobility programmes Country Pathways funded by mobility programmes LEONARDO SOCRATES OTHER

EU/EEA OTHER NATIONAL

OTHER SOURCES

TOTAL

AT Most * Most * * * Be (De) 28 * * * * * Be (Fr) * * * * * * Be (Nl) * * * * * * De 80% * * * * * Dk 237 9 0 68 4 318 E 164 0 24 0 0 188 Fin 148 24 0 100 138 410 Fl 57 0 0 0 14 71 Fr * * * * * * Gr * * * * * * Ie 44 0 0 0 0 44 Is 50 0 0 0 8 58 It 2082 45 81 203 8 2,419 Lu * * * * * * Nl (1) 615 * * 205 205 * No 280 12 2 60 275 629 Pt * * * * * * Se 419 6 0 18 224 667 UK * * * * * * Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd (*) Information not available in the returned data grid. (1)Approximate figures from percentages given by NCP The relationship between EUROPASS Training and LEONARDO to date has been one ofdependence of the first on the second. In many countries, EUROPASS Training is alsomanaged by the same agency in charge of LEONARDO. This makes their complementarycharacter more evident. For example, EUROPASS Training is mentioned in the qualitycriteria and guidelines for LEONARDO. The Norwegian NCP, also in charge of Leonardo,pointed out that they will be in a very good position to explain the benefits of the initiative toLEONARDO applicants.



80

6.3.6 EUROPASS Training and other international initiatives and projects According to NCPs the European C.V. format is the most complementary initiative withEUROPASS Training. Almost half of the NCPs saw the two initiatives as related andcomplementary. The CV is a record also for skills and work history. However, CVs do notcontain detailed information on training pathways, so that there is an added value toemployers and beneficiaries who might not otherwise have any other reliable informationabout the EUROPASS Training holder’s training period abroad. The European Credit Transfer System was also seen as related to EUROPASS Training.However, synergies are less strong since the ECTS has – according to NCPs - similarfunctions to EUROPASS Training. Other projects and initiatives such as EURES or theEuropean Credits for non-formal and informal learning are also seen as related by over half ofthe NCPs answering the question. The Diploma Supplement, European portfolio for languageskills, the Certificate Supplement and the European Computer Driving Licence were seen tobe complementary to EUROPASS Training by half or less of those NCPs answering thequestion. The French NCP also pointed out that the complementarity should be clarified for users(individual beneficiaries and organisations – prospective employers, educational institutions,etc.), since these initiatives offer different types of information. Some of them depend on self-assessment (C.V., language portfolio) whereas others depend on standardised externalevaluation (e.g. ECTS). The current EUROPASS Training would sit somewhere in-betweenthese two levels. Table 60: Complementarity between EUROPASS Training and other Europeaninitiatives Programme/Initiative

Complementary Not complementary No answer / don’tknow

European CV 9 1 9 European CreditTransfer System

5 3 11

EURES 4 2 13 European credits fornon-formal andinformal learning

4 3 12

Diploma Supplement 3 3 13 European portfoliofor language skills

3 4 12

CertificateSupplement

2 2 15

European ComputerDriving Licence

1 5 13

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd Six NCPs did not answer any of the sub-headings of this question because they were notsufficiently familiar with the programmes/ initiatives mentioned. There are two fundamentalreasons for this according to NCPs:



81

� There is insufficient co-operation between the agencies in charge of these initiatives� There is insufficient information from the Commission on this complex set of instruments

and projects and their rationale. This points the need for clarifying the present framework for transparency at European level,which is too complex and confusing for experts and potential users alike, and is restrainingwhat otherwise are regarded as useful tools, from achieving their full potential and use. 6.3.7 Reform: the future of EUROPASS Training When asked if EUROPASS Training should be revised to enable it to support / be central tosome of the developments mentioned above, six NCPs out of 19 did not answer since theywere not familiar with the initiatives. Only three NCPs (out of the13 NCPs answering the question) answered negatively. Theyargued that EUROPASS Training should be kept independent, for two reasons. Firstly,because otherwise the initiative would be at risk of becoming too large and broad. Secondly,for practical reasons, since its strengthening would meet high resistance from Member States. All other NCPs (10 of the 13 NCPs answering the question) considered that EUROPASSTraining should be revised to improve its synergies with the initiatives and projectsmentioned above. NCPs focused on four different developments in the reform of EUROPASSTraining: Organisational changes The rationale for organisational change is based on the already mentioned lack of co-ordination of organisations in charge of the various projects and initiatives in the field ofeducation and the transparency of qualifications. It was suggested that the various projectsand initiatives should be put “under one roof”, so that the organisation in charge of theirmanagement can have an informed global view and strategy and can obtain full use of all theinstruments. Integration within national qualification systems EUROPASS Training should also be integrated within national qualifications. Nationalqualifications could detail the educational level achieved by the individual and also refer tohis/her EUROPASS Training as the instrument where details of any periods of transnationalmobility during his/her studies are detailed. This would raise the profile of EUROPASSTraining and would make it more widely known. Extension of EUROPASS Training content Four of the 13 NCPs reporting that EUROPASS Training should be reformed to support/ becentral to other developments argued that EUROPASS Training should be extended to othereducation and training areas, as its current focus is too limited. They thought that it should beextended to certify any learning experience abroad, including informal learning. This wouldsimplify the framework for users and would make the document clearer and more widelyrecognised. The current framework for transparency was thought to be unclear and confusing.



82

Towards a European Portfolio of Skills Finally five NCPs (out of 13 reporting on reform) considered that there should be a commonportfolio for recording skills, which could be called either a “Portfolio of EuropeanSkills/Competencies” or “EUROPASS” – its catchy name is considered to be a clear strengthof the initiative. It was felt that if the initiatives were to be integrated, EUROPASS Trainingoffered the best elements to be the basis for it. This would be a life-long document or“passport” for each person, capable of being updated, in which all the initiatives mentionedabove would fit. One NCP suggested that conceived in this way EUROPASS Training couldbe an attachment to the European CV, containing details of all the relevant training and workexperience of individuals and on all EUROPEAN pathways undertaken.



83

7.0 EXPERTS’ VIEWS ABOUT EUROPASS As part of this evaluation we asked all interviewed NCPs for contact details for experts in theEUROPASS Training initiative. Four NCPs provided us with five contact details for nationalexperts. Three of them agreed to be interviewed35. Their views on the EUROPASS Traininginitiative, its relation to national and European training policies and its future developmentprovide the basis for this section. 7.1 The EUROPASS Training Initiative Interviews with experts confirmed that knowledge of EUROPASS Training varies fromcountry to country and the key role of NCPs in this variation. In the opinion of nationalexperts, it is vital for a successful implementation of the initiative that NCPs are organisationsinvolved in mainstream education and training, with easy access to potential EUROPASSTraining users, such as Further Education colleges. According to our British expert, the lackof day-to-day involvement of the British NCP with mainstream education explains why in theUK EUROPASS Training is not widely known amongst education and training providers andtends to be understood only by those already involved in mobility programmes such asLeonardo, whereas in other countries like Finland the initiative is well-known amongstschools and other training providers. Part of the reason for the low uptake of the scheme is due not to the lack of dissemination ofthe initiative but to the lack of clarity and comprehensiveness in the EUROPASS Trainingdocument. Our interviewees reported that the document would benefit from the addition ofmore detailed qualitative information, including an assessment of the trainee’s skills,competencies and performance during training abroad. According to the interviewed experts,at a practical level, the use of a paper-based system is thought to present a greater risk of thebeneficiary loosing the document, whilst the scheme is perceived by sending and hostorganisations as excessively bureaucratic, with little obvious value. Where EUROPASS Training has been successful it has tended to be in tertiary sectors such astourism, leisure and recreation, internationally-orientated sectors. However, there is littleknowledge regarding the participation of the key SME and craft sectors. Given that thescheme has yet to achieve ‘high value’ with employers generally, respondents considered thatthe use of the document by SMEs and crafts would most likely be limited. Respondents areconvinced that EUROPASS Training needs to be made more attractive to SMEs andemployers in general, and that this should be done through wider dissemination of the schemeand its objectives. Respondents also believe that this should be accompanied by efforts tointegrate EUROPASS Training into existing formal qualification frameworks.

35 Lisa Morris, from the Association of Colleges International Network, (UK); Olafur G. Kristiansson, Ministryof Education, (Iceland); Leena-Maija Talikka, CIMO (Finland).



84

7.2 EUROPASS Training and National Training Policies According to respondents, the recognition by EUROPASS Training of a need to validatelearning abroad means that it is highly appropriate to national lifelong learning agendas.However, lack of knowledge amongst students and employers means that the scheme is notwell integrated into national labour markets and, as such, has been given little or noconsideration in national education and training policies. In part this is a due to the lack offormal connections with national education and training systems. In its current form, therefore, EUROPASS Training is regarded as a first step towards therecognition of training periods abroad, and would require both a greater emphasis on learningin non-formal environments and more detailed guidelines in order that the scheme can beaccredited and embedded within national training systems.

7.3 EUROPASS Training and Other Community Initiatives EUROPASS Training experts shared the opinion of NPCs that EUROPASS Training has notincreased the number of training periods spent abroad since it has no funding attached to it,but it is a valuable first step in recognising that mobility should be validated as part of thelifelong learning process. EUROPASS Training represents a useful tool for bringingeducation and working life closer together and increasing the visibility of, and value placedupon, mobility amongst employers. However, until EUROPASS Training is more widelyunderstood, the scheme’s potential to contribute to European Community objectives of EqualOpportunities, Social Inclusion, Employment and Competitiveness and Lifelong Learning willnot be affected in any tangible way by EUROPASS Training. The degree of integration between EUROPASS Training, European mobility programmes andother European level tools for the transparency and transferability of qualifications (e.g.European CV format, European portfolio for language skills) is also limited. This isprincipally because EUROPASS Training is regarded as a stand-alone document. Theconsensus of opinion amongst respondents is, therefore, that formal integration can only beachieved if EUROPASS Training is further developed and linked to national accreditationframeworks.

7.4 Future Trends Respondents believe that EUROPASS Training should continue but in a revised form. Inparticular, the document should be in line with national education and training structures, anddesigned so as to ensure proper integration with other European tools for the transparency andtransferability of qualifications. The document should also record more details about specificskills and competencies developed whilst on placement. This would require the widerinvolvement of employers to ensure that the programme addressed their needs more fully. One national expert suggested that EUROPASS Training was the result of a top-down ratherthan bottom-up approach. EUROPASS Training was more “a solution looking for a problem”than the solution to an existing problem. For this expert, EUROPASS Training, had a limitedpotential for widespread use: there was no demand for it. There are two different limitationshindering a widespread use of EUROPASS:



85

� The role of training periods abroad in national education and training systems� The nature of the EUROPASS Training document itself.

We examine both in turn in the remaining of this chapter.

7.4.1 The role of training periods abroad in national education and training systems Only a minority of European citizens undertakes periods of training abroad. For EUROPASSTraining to acquire higher value, national authorities should put it into context and makemobility a mainstreamed process, which education and training institutions as well asemployers could not ignore. This would entail making European pathways compulsory or,within a voluntary approach, increasing the investment in explaining better how toincorporate training periods abroad into national systems. 7.4.2 The nature of the EUROPASS Training document itself The EUROPASS Training document is of limited use when applying for jobs in the sendingcountry. Employers in this country are familiar with the main qualification the student/traineeobtains – and within which the European pathway certified in EUROPASS Training isundertaken- and that is the key reference to them. EUROPASS Training is of little addedvalue to this. However, even when students/trainees apply for jobs in other countries theinformation contained in EUROPASS Training is again of limited use since it providesinformation only on the European pathway undertaken, and not on the education and trainingundertaken in the sending country. Therefore, the use of and demand for EUROPASS Training are both low. EUROPASSTraining could change its very nature to become a tool for recording and certifying lifelonglearning. It would complement existing certificates, giving information on the duration ofdifferent studies/training periods and their content. Other suggestions surrounding the format of EUROPASS Training are that it should contain aphotograph of the beneficiary – as it is already possible for Swedish promoters36- and thatelectronic versions of the document should be available to process online.

36 Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council: “report on the implementation ofthe Decision 1999/51/EC of the Council of 21 December 1998 on the promotion of European pathways in work-linked training, including apprenticeship”.



86

8.0 CONCLUSION This report has presented an evaluation of the EUROPASS Training initiative frominformation collected from participant organisations, EUROPASS Training National ContactPoints, the European Commission, national experts and relevant literature. Its core aim hasbeen to evaluate the degree to which the EUROPASS Training initiative has proved anappropriate and effective instrument to achieve its objectives. This report has also presentedevidence on the management and implementation structures for EUROPASS Training inparticipant countries, focusing on the territorial organisation of the initiative, and its practicalmanagement and partnership dynamics. The main objective of this mid-term evaluation has been to assess the performance of theEUROPASS Training scheme in relation to three dimensions: � Appropriateness� Management and implementation� Impact –including impact in relation to the initiative’s objectives: global, specific,

operational, complementary.

We review these three aspects in turn.

8.1 Appropriateness

The EUROPASS Training initiative is considered appropriate by most stakeholders. Inparticular, EUROPASS Training operational tools are regarded as consistent with theinitiative’s objectives and the initiative is very relevant to the current policy context andlifelong learning agenda. There is also strong support to EUROPASS Training promotingtransnational periods of work linked training. However, according to our survey to participantorganisations, consideration should be given to extending EUROPASS Training to otherforms of learning than work-linked training, especially to certify all skills acquired abroad.

8.1.1 The extent to which operational objectives are consistent with the operational toolsbeing developed, and whether this could be improved

A crucial aspect in the evaluation of the initiative is whether operational tools have been setup which are consistent with the operational objectives and permit their realisation. Theoperational tools established to fulfil EUROPASS Training’s operational objectives aredetailed in the following table.



87

Table 61: EUROPASS Training’s Operational objectives and operational toolsOperational objective Operational toolEstablishing implementation mechanisms atnational level in the framework of a co-ordinatedapproach at European level

NCPs established in all participant countries.Commission retains co-ordinating role

Setting up a system for co-ordination ofinformation

Four meetings for exchange of informationorganised by the CommissionInformal contacts between the Commission andNCPS and between NCPs themselves

Promoting the initiative Dissemination materials have been produced anddistributed at European, national and sub-nationallevel

Production and distribution of the “EuropeanTraining documents”

The Commission produced EUROPASS Trainingdocuments, which are distributed by NCPs

Ensuring the quality of the European pathways NCPs and participant organisations are in chargeof ensuring quality of European pathwayscertified by EUROPASS Training; co-lateralquality assurance through LEONARDO for manypathways


There are therefore operational tools in place to respond to each operational objective ofEUROPASS Training. In our opinion, the operational tools established are consistent with theoperational objectives for the initiative.

However, EUROPASS Training experience up to date shows that there is scope to refinesome of these operational tools. In particular, according to some NCPs, the informationsystems between NCPs about the initiative are not continuous and should be strengthened.The survey to participant organisations showed a high degree of satisfaction with the methodsof communication of these organisations with NCPs and between themselves.

Dissemination activities should also be strengthened, in particular to make EUROPASSTraining more widely known amongst employers. The evaluation’s survey to participantorganisations showed that this was, in fact, the main problem for EUROPASS Training.

8.1.2 The extent to which the “EUROPASS” initiative is consistent with the policydevelopments in the field of lifelong learning, particularly in relation to transparencyand transferability of qualifications and skills, and an effective integration could beachieved

EUROPASS Training is highly consistent with policy developments in the field of lifelonglearning and transparency. Existing instruments and services supporting transparency ofqualifications, although successful and widely used in some cases, are not sufficiently visibleand accessible to ordinary citizens, who consider the current framework for transparency toolstoo complex, according to our survey to participant organisations.

Several NCPs and national experts suggested different ways in which these deficiencies couldbe addressed. In many of these, EUROPASS Training played a very important role. Thisemphasises not only the consistency of EUROPASS Training with policy developments in the



88

area of transparency but also the relevance of EUROPASS Training for its futuredevelopment. Those participant organisations familiar with the current framework consideredthat EUROPASS Training and other transparency documents are complementary tools.

8.1.3 Whether EUROPASS Training’s specific objective – promoting periods oftransnational mobility within work-linked training- is still relevant, in particular itsscope to work-linked training

The specific objective for EUROPASS Training is the promotion of periods of transnationalmobility within work-linked training.

Sixty percent of the respondents to our survey to participant organisations reported thatEUROPASS Training should certify work linked training, compared to 77% reporting thatEUROPASS Training could be expanded to certify all skills acquired abroad and 67%reporting that it could be expanded to certify all training abroad.

It is therefore not clear to us that EUROPASS Training specific objective should continueunchanged. Consideration should be given to extending the initiative’s objective to thepromotion of periods of transnational mobility within alternative learning environments.

8.2 Management and implementation

8.2.1 Clarity of the specific and operational objectives

NCPs reported an asymmetric understanding of the initiative by the different actors involved.All NCPs reported their understanding of the specific and operational objectives of theinitiative as adequate, and they pointed out that this understanding had been necessary for theproduction of national guidelines. They were less sure about the understanding of theinitiative by its users - especially regarding the initiative’s rationale and operationalframework.

Participant organisations, however, reported having a good understanding of the objectives ofthe initiative. Eighty percent of the respondents of our survey to participants declared havinga clear or very clear understanding of the objectives of EUROPASS Training.

European and national dissemination tools (information brochures, booklets, etc.) have beenimportant in making EUROPASS Training accessible to its users, although they could benefitfrom using clearer language.

8.2.2 Territorial dimension

Management of the EUROPASS Training initiative is decentralised to the national level inparticipant countries, with the Commission retaining a co-ordinating role. Some countrieshave decentralised the management structure for the initiative further at sub-national level. Amajority of NCPs considered that this decentralised structure was effective and efficient. Therationale for decentralisation is clear in that the quality control on European pathways canonly be done at national or regional level and the territorial management of the initiativeshould therefore continue unchanged.



89

The main potential benefit of centralisation – a consistent approach to implementation acrossEurope- can be achieved within the current implementation framework by establishing clearquality control over the issuing of the documents.

8.2.3 Management in practice

There are several actors involved in the management of EUROPASS Training. The EuropeanCommission has a primarily contractual involvement in the initiative, with someresponsibility for European level promotion, development and evaluation, as well as theproduction of the EUROPASS Training documents. The day to day management of theinitiative is the responsibility of National Contact Points, an arrangement that both theCommission and NCPs favour. Stakeholders and social partners may also be involved in themanagement of the initiative through Steering Committees, and they have a more active rolein some countries, like Germany. Sending and host organisations and beneficiaries are rarelyinvolved in the management of EUROPASS Training, other than by submitting applications(sending organisations) and being represented in fora where EUROPASS Training isdiscussed.

The management of EUROPASS Training in practice is generally regarded as a merelyfunctional role which NCPs perform alone, albeit with some involvement of a wider range ofactors. However, we have found that EUROPASS Training is more widely recognised whenother political actors are engaged in the initiative and social partners promote it too, which ishardly surprising. Management would benefit from the establishment of mechanisms for datacollection and the set of procedures for control of the issuing of documents.

8.2.4 Resources

NCPs often manage EUROPASS Training alongside existing mobility programmes such asLEONARDO. EUROPASS Training is not considered to be an onerous initiative to managein terms of human resources or finance given its current volume of activity. The resourcesdevoted to the initiative by the European Commission and national sources have thereforesufficed except for countries like Germany where the management of the initiative is dividedbetween an extensive network of NCPs.

If the initiative is to be expanded and take-up and dissemination increased, resourceimplications will have to be taken into account.

8.2.5 Efficiency in the use of resources

The budget for the EUROPASS Training initiative was set at 7.3 million ECU for the period 1January 2,000/ 31 December 2004.The initiative has been efficient in its use of resources. Although there are some limitations inavailable data, these suggest that the cost per awarded EUROPASS Training is withinreasonable margins.

The EUROPASS Training document has also been an efficient transparency mechanism.Eighty-five percent of the organisations surveyed during this evaluation considered theinformation contained in EUROPASS Training to be useful or very useful. Several potentialimprovements were, nevertheless, highlighted during the evaluation process. In particular, the



90

availability of an electronic version and further specification of the content of the documentwere deemed necessary by NCPs. Participant organisations supported similar developments,although less strongly.

8.3 Impact

The evaluation has analysed the impact of EUROPASS Training regarding its:

� global objectives� specific objective� operational objectives� complementary objectives

We review these in turn.

8.3.1 Global objectives

EUROPASS Training aims to fulfil five global objectives. The views of NCPs and participantorganisations on the impact of EUROPASS Training regarding these objectives aresummarised below.

Table 62: Views of participant organisations and NCPs on the impact of EUROPASSTraining on its global objectives

Participantorganisations

NCPs

To improve the employment prospects of young people + +To encourage the development of effective links betweentraining and work experience,

++ + -

To promote the mobility of persons in training, + - + -To promote the transparency of vocational certificates and + ++To improve the quality and attractiveness of vocationaleducation and training.

+ + -

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting LtdKey: (++) Very positive impact; (+) positive impact; (+-) no positive impact perceived EUROPASS Training has had its greatest impact in improving the transparency of trainingperiods abroad. It has filled a vacuum that existed in the pre-2000 situation and bothparticipant organisations and especially NCPs considered that it has been successful in thisrespect. Participant organisations in particular were very positive about the effect ofEUROPASS Training in improving links between training and work experience, and thequality and attractiveness of vocational education and training. Both participant organisationsand NCPs considered that EUROPASS Training improves the employment prospects ofbeneficiaries, although this benefit must be tempered by the lack of knowledge of theinitiative by employers. In contrast, promotion of mobility of persons in training is theobjective where EUROPASS Training has had the least impact in the views of NCPs andparticipant organisations. It is considered that EUROPASS Training is an addendum to thebenefits of mobility in training, but not an initiative that would encourage people in training toundertake a European pathway.



91

We give more detail about EUROPASS Training’s performance in relation to its globalobjectives below: � Improving the employment prospects of young people and contribute to a more effective

social and occupational integration into working life and the labour market The EUROPASS Training initiative has only recently been established and manyEUROPASS Training users are still in education or training. However, both NCPs andespecially participant organisations reported that they considered that EUROPASS Trainingimproves the employment prospects of its holders slightly. Further work on dissemination isneeded, as pointed out by several NCPs and consulted national experts, since a lack ofknowledge of the document amongst employers means that the scheme is not well integratedinto national labour markets yet. Several shortcomings in the document were highlighted inthis report which limit the usefulness of the actual EUROPASS Training document –asopposed to the initiative- in the labour market. � Encouraging the development of effective links between training and work experience According to participant organisations, EUROPASS Training has had a great effect inencouraging the development of effective links between training and work experience.Participant organisations were extremely positive about the performance of EUROPASSTraining in this respect, with over 50% of the organisations which responded to our surveyreporting that EUROPASS Training “helps a lot” in developing links between training andwork experience. NCPs’ opinions were far more circumspect. Nine NCPs considered thatEUROPASS Training helps in this respect whereas eight reported EUROPASS Training doesnot.

� Promoting the mobility of persons in training This is the global objective in which EUROPASS Training has performed comparativelyworst. Both, participant organisations and national experts consider that EUROPASS Traininghas little effect on promoting the mobility of people in training. About a quarter of participantorganisations considered that EUROPASS Training “helps a lot” to increase the willingnessof trainees to undertake training abroad. Thirty-five percent considered it “helps a little”, andthirty percent considered it does not affect it. For a majority of NCPs, EUROPASS Trainingin its current form does not fulfil this objective either, although this could be expected sinceduring our conversations with NCPs EUROPASS Training was normally compared in thispoint with Community programmes which actually provide financial support for mobilityexperiences. � Promoting the transparency of vocational training certificates Most participant organisations and NCPs consider EUROPASS Training an important andvaluable transparency tool. However, the current set of European transparency documents, notorganised in a co-ordinated framework, is difficult to grasp for NCPs and participantorganisations, according to our surveys. Only 10% of participant organisations considered thecurrent situation clear, whereas almost 20% considered it too complex to follow and almost30% complex although manageable. This lack of clarity seems to be due to the lack of



92

integration between transparency tools rather than to specific features of the EUROPASSTraining initiative. � To improve the quality and attractiveness of vocational education and training Participant organisations were also positive about the effects of EUROPASS Training inincreasing the quality and attractiveness of vocational education and training. 85% of ourrespondents considered that EUROPASS Training increases the quality and recognition ofqualifications gained through periods of training abroad. NCPs were also positive on thispoint. Indeed, EUROPASS Training’s quality criteria are an improvement over therequirements for training abroad in several countries. The impact of EUROPASS Training onthose countries with more stringent quality criteria for training abroad are more limited. 8.3.2 Specific objectives The specific objective of EUROPASS Training is to promote periods of transnationalmobility within work-linked training. In broad terms it could be said that EUROPASSTraining has achieved its specific objective to a reasonable extent in these first years of theinitiative. Over 34,000 EUROPASS Training applications had been approved from the initiative launchuntil October 2002, when this mid-term evaluation collected data on participation from NCPs.However, data available from NCPs covered this period only partially, mainly from thebeginning of the initiative up to the end of 2001 or the first half of 2002, which suggests thatthe figure for approved applications might have already exceeded at least 40,000. This is asignificant increase, of almost 80%, from November 2001, suggesting that the initiative isbeing increasingly recognised and used by potential beneficiaries. The initiative has established the basis for its future development, especially in a certain“market” of users –organisations with previous experience in European mobility programmes.However, the use made of EUROPASS Training by organisations outside European mobilityprogrammes has been very limited so far. The evaluation of the initiative by its users ispositive already, and EUROPASS Training is seen as a relatively useful transparency tool.These features are derived from two factors: � Firstly a take-up and profile –political and budgetary- that most stakeholders perceived as

low. This suggests that more effort should be put not only into disseminating the initiativeand engaging users with new profiles, but also in explaining the increasing importance oftransparency tools in the European political arena -e.g. the Bruges process.

� Secondly, a perceived lack of development of EUROPASS Training’s potential. Several

ideas for extending the scope of EUROPASS Training are presented in this report. Theyrange from relatively modest changes to making EUROPASS Training a detailed recordof each individuals’ lifelong learning. However, they have one thing in common: theyperceive EUROPASS Training as a “first step”.

Given these factors, a rapid development of the initiative would be beneficial to the initiative,building on the goodwill that has already been developed and before it fades.



93

8.3.3 Operational objectives The fulfilment of operational objectives would ensure that the initiative, as it is currentlydesigned, is implemented. These objectives have largely been fulfilled, although according toseveral actors the initiative needs further dissemination. � Establishing implementation mechanisms at national level, in the framework of a co-

ordinated approach at European level This objective was achieved through the establishment of a network of NCPs in allparticipating countries, at different times. All actors concerned presented satisfactory viewson the implementation mechanisms for the initiative, which has run smoothly. According tosome NCPs, more emphasis will need to be placed in the future on ensuring that EUROPASSTraining quality criteria are met and in establishing more comprehensive mechanisms formonitoring and data collection. � Setting up a system for co-ordination and exchange of information In general terms, co-ordination and exchange of information have not been prominently usedexcept at the very outset of the initiative. There are, nevertheless, examples of on-goingexchange of information amongst NCPs, and dialogue over best practice and implementationmechanisms. Given the current level of activity for the initiative and its current character, thelevel of information exchange is considered adequate by most NCPs. � Promotion of the initiative Several actors considered that EUROPASS Training should be more widely disseminated toencourage take-up by groups who are not already users of Community mobility programmes.It was suggested by one national expert that NCPs should have a role in mainstream nationaleducation policies since this would provide them with access to an infrastructure fordissemination amongst potential users. Both participant organisations and NCPs consideredthat dissemination amongst employers should be increased to increase the impact and use ofthe initiative and the EUROPASS Training document. � Production and distribution of the “European Training” documents There were no reported problems in relation to the production or distribution of documentsfrom the EC to NCPs. Some NCPs highlighted their concerns about the distribution ofdocuments within particular countries (from NCPs to participant organisations and from theseto individual users). � Ensuring the quality of the European pathways Some countries already have quality criteria above those of EUROPASS Training. Theinitiative therefore establishes, at a theoretical level, a minimum common denominator forquality in European countries for European training. Quality assurance mechanisms should beimplemented to avoid any irregularities and also to better monitor the use of the documentafter one pathway has been undertaken and certified. For instance, currently the document canrecord three pathways, but NCPs only control the first one, after which beneficiaries could



94

input new information in the document at their will. Common denominators of the keycomponents of the criteria and guidelines on their application should be agreed betweenparticipating countries. The outputs of EUROPASS Training in attaining its operational objectives have thereforebeen varied. The NCP network as an implementation mechanism at national level and themechanisms for production and distribution of the EUROPASS Training document have beenwidely successful in fulfilling their objectives. The established system for exchange ofinformation and the European pathways’ quality assurance mechanisms set up, however, havenot been appreciated by all NCPs, some of which considered that no real on-goinginformation exchange systems were in place and that, in a limited number of occasions,jeopardy of the quality criteria for EUROPASS Training had occurred, due to weakmonitoring instruments. Finally, the instruments set up for promotion of the initiative havenot disseminated EUROPASS Training as participants would have expected. Indeed, thesurvey to participant organisations highlighted that the main problem EUROPASS Trainingfaces is that it is not well known by employers. 8.3.4 Complementary objectives EUROPASS Training has been slightly less successful in achieving its complementaryobjectives according to NCPs and participating organisations. This can be expected especiallyat the beginning of the initiative. These objectives are: � To address the specific needs of micro-enterprises, SMES and the craft sector. EUROPASS Training has been used by micro-enterprises. According to the availableinformation from NCPs around 5% of the EUROPASS Training users would have been self-employed people and a further 10% would be small organisations, between 2 and 49employees. Our case studies present anecdotal evidence that the information provided by theEUROPASS Training document is useful for micro-enterprises, SMEs and the craft sector. � To ensure equal opportunities in relation to participation in European pathways and take

appropriate measures to that end

The take up of the initiative has represented a wide range of educational levels, age groups,economic sectors and has kept a gender balance. The evaluator has not identified positiveaction in practice towards the Council’s Decision mandate to “facilitate equal opportunities,in particular by raising awareness among all relevant actors”. � To ensure overall consistency between the implementation of this decision and other

Community Programmes Particular attention was given during this report to the analysis of the consistency betweenEUROPASS Training and other Community programmes and initiatives. Answers fromdifferent stakeholders suggest that it is important that EUROPASS Training is part of aclearer European framework for transparency.



95

8.4 The need for further development

The EUROPASS Training initiative has been relatively successful in a variety of aspectsduring its first years and has established the basis for future progress in the area oftransparency of qualifications. EUROPASS Training has, in its brief period of existence,confirmed itself as an important transparency tool, which is valued by its users. EUROPASSTraining is also fulfilling to a large extent the objectives that were set for it at the outset of theinitiative.

Different stakeholders have clarified both the continuing relevance but also the need forreform of the initiative. It is seen as an appropriate and relevant tool to achieve the objectivesit was set. However, there are also constraints on EUROPASS Training and shortcomings inrelation to both the document itself and the initiative, in the current policy context.

In fact, the modest character of the initiative in its current form is one of the challenges that ithas for the future. EUROPASS Training is considered by NPCs and participant organisationsas a useful tool and first step in the certification of skills acquired abroad, but it is also clearthat these same actors believe that EUROPASS Training should be expanded. The opinion ofthe majority of stakeholders is that if the initiative is to achieve its potential, importantchanges will be needed in the future. This might require changes not only in the format of thepresent document, as analysis previous to this mid-term evaluation has suggested, but also inrelation to the rationale of the initiative. In this respect, potential improvements for theinitiative, opening new possibilities in terms of both the format of the EUROPASS Trainingdocument and its content, have been presented during this evaluation. In particular, the needfor an electronic version of the document, further specification of its contents, integrating theinitiative better with other transparency tools and extending the initiative beyond work-linkedtraining to encompass all training undertaken abroad should be considered in the short term.



96

9.0 POLICY OPTIONS: TOWARDS SOLUTIONS

9.1 Introduction From the discussions reviewed above, we can identify at least four policy alternatives forEUROPASS Training addressing four key issues regarding the initiative: � Key issue: The EUROPASS Training initiative is very recent: both the document and the

initiative are relevant and adequate, but time is needed for the initiative to be known andunderstood by policy actors:

Policy Option One: Preserve EUROPASS Training unchanged and improve theunderstanding of the current initiative by all key stakeholders � Key issue: EUROPASS Training is still relevant in the current policy context, but making

users clear about EUROPASS Training would not solve the problem since users areunclear about the whole set of European transparency tools.

Policy option Two: Simplify the situation of the set of transparency tools, includingEUROPASS Training (e.g. electronic database) � Key issue: The EUROPASS Training initiative is still relevant, but shortcomings in the

document should be addressed to make the initiative more attractive to potential users

Policy option Three: Change the EUROPASS Training document, keep the focus of theinitiative. � Key issue: Continuing relevance of the EUROPASS Training initiative in its current form

Policy option Four: Modify the initiative. The four policy options above are not mutually exclusive. For example, work on thetransparency framework is compatible with changes three and four. We review these optionsin more detail below. 9.2 Policy option one: Leave EUROPASS Training unchanged and improve the

understanding of the current initiative by all key stakeholders

It could be argued that the EUROPASS Training initiative has not had the time yet to be fullyrecognised by all stakeholders. In some participant countries like Spain the initiative was onlyoperational in 2002. In most countries EUROPASS Training has not had enough time toposition itself and probably more time would be needed to probe what the initiative in itscurrent form could achieve. In this case, the understanding of the initiative by all stakeholderscould be developed further.



97

9.2.1 The need for greater coherence and standards There is a need for greater coherence in the understanding of the initiative by NCPs, and alsofor greater standardisation in its implementation. Although the openness and flexibility of theinitiative are positive factors which have enabled the initiative to work under minimumfriction with national traditions, it is also a challenge for EUROPASS Training to maintain abalance between these elements and the need for an adequate degree of standardisation,necessary if it is to be recognised, valued and also understood in all participant countries.Countries also pointed out the need for guidelines on target groups, the selection of mentors,the duration of training periods, and on how to fill in the EUROPASS Training document. Although the reduced bureaucracy involved in EUROPASS Training is an advantage forusers, the current lack of standardisation in recording training periods, and also in otheraspects such as choosing mentors, is a clear drawback for users, with some EUROPASSTraining documents recording irrelevant aspects of the European pathways or personalcomments on the trainee. This points towards the need for further guidelines on theimplementation of the initiative targeting all European countries. 9.2.2 Improving the understanding of EUROPASS Training amongst beneficiaries and

participating organisations We encountered four problems amongst beneficiaries and participant organisations inunderstanding the initiative. Two of these problems, related to the institutional arrangementsfor the pathway and their relation to EUROPASS Training and the EUROPASS Trainingdocument, can be addressed by the EC and NCPs, within the established legal procedures.The other two problems mentioned related to the unclear rationale and benefits of theinitiative for users and require creating or changing users’ opinions of the initiative. Theyindicate that the marketing of the initiative, too focused so far in presenting the characteristicsof the initiative as benefits without further explanation (e.g. “it is a European document”)should now shift to incorporate more information on the use and tangible advantages ofEUROPASS Training (“why is a European document useful for participant organisations andusers”). A strong partnership between NCPs and sending organisations is crucial since NCPsdo not often have direct contact with actual or potential beneficiaries. Guidelines should also be produced for beneficiaries and participating organisations. Somecountries like Austria, Germany (for questions 2,6,11,14,15,17 and 20) or Finland havealready developed their own national guidelines to clarify and adapt the requirements of thedocument to their national contexts. However, the implementation of guidelines currently hasto rely ultimately on the EUROPASS Training users as NCPs do not have the authority toinsist on quality issues since it has no contract with participant organisations and it cannotrecall/withdraw EUROPASS Training documents. This could be possible if an electronicversion is available (see below) but is clearly impractical with paper based versions – e.g.when suggesting modifications.



98

9.3 Policy option two: Simplify the situation of the set of transparency tools, includingEUROPASS Training

A second policy option is to focus on simplifying the current situation of transparency tools.There is evidence in this report highlighting the difficulties of potential users in understandingit. Only the best-informed speakers were familiar and could distinguish between differenttransparency tools. Ensuring that useful transparency tools are used is as important as devising and implementingsuch tools. The current situation is too complex for that, and makes potential users confusedabout transparency in general and transparency tools such as EUROPASS Training inparticular. Greater effort should be placed on simplifying the situation, rationalisingorganisational and functional structures. The rationale for organisational change is based on the above-mentioned lack of co-ordinationof organisations in charge of the various projects and initiatives in the field of education andthe transparency of qualifications. It was suggested that the various projects and initiativesshould be put “under one roof”, so that the organisation in charge of their management canhave an informed global view and strategy and can obtain full use of all the instruments. 9.4 Policy option three: Change the EUROPASS Training document and the way in

which it is filled in, keep the focus of the initiative The EUROPASS Training document was the subject during this mid-term evaluation ofabundant criticisms, focused both on the format of the document and its content.Independently of any other actions in relation to the initiative, the EUROPASS Trainingdocument should be modified. 9.4.1 Format The EUROPASS Training document was criticised mainly in the following respects: � It does not provide enough space for a detailed account of the training period abroad � The document is hand written. This was associated with several problems, chiefly:

- The document does not look professional- The document is very time-consuming to fill in

� There is space for too many pathways. Most people undertake one pathway. As thecurrent document has space for three pathways –in three different languages each- mostdocuments appear to be not completely filled in.

� The size of the paper version was also criticised, but whereas some countries advocated an

A4 version others were inclined for a smaller version than that the currently available. Forthe paper version German Belgium and Iceland suggested that question 17 should at leastbe allocated one page.



99

Recommended improvements Electronic version Many of the problems articulated above could be addressed by offering the possibility of anelectronic version of the EUROPASS Training document. Although the paper-based versionshould still be available for those without access to electronic means (Spain suggested that itcould be improved using official stickers for certain fields, such as the name of the applicantor question 17), an electronic version would: � help to give the document a more official character (as argued by the U.K. and Germany)� be faster to fill in (The Netherlands)� leave open the number of pathways to be recorded. Norway is planning to test an electronic version of the document. Electronic versions shouldhave a password protected serial number and paper based versions should have this numbertoo, to ensure that the document is not abused. Ireland also suggested that an electronicversion could be recorded in a password-protected database that could be accessed byemployers. Folder format A number of NCPs (e.g. Italian, Danish) would prefer a folder format for the paperEUROPASS Training, where additional sheets could be added for each additional pathway.This would help to address some of the problems of the current format mentioned above. 9.4.2 Content Problems around the content of the document focused on three issues: Poor responses to EUROPASS Training sections Host organisations fill in the EUROPASS Training document, but they do not necessarilyhave to be familiar with the initiative. As a result EUROPASS Training documents are onoccasions not filled in to an appropriate standard. This is especially frustrating forEUROPASS Training users. They expect a document that certifies conveniently and providesan assessment of their period of training abroad, as opposed to discussing their personalcharacter or other issues. However, this is not often the case. Recommended improvements The document must be made as self-explanatory as possible, especially taking intoconsideration those participant host organisations which do not participate in the initiative assending organisations too and which are therefore less likely to have a good understanding ofthe initiative: The content of the document should be made more explicit: The annex and the body of thequestions (e.g. question 17) should specify what are the “relevant aspects” of the training



100

period which should be referred to (e.g. occupied work position / training undertaken /acquired skills / evaluation method used as suggested by France). Training and benchmarking should be used: France suggested the training of mentors toimprove the quality of the responses. Iceland has made available test versions of someanswers, with examples of what should be written. Denmark referred to the CertificateSupplement, which is working very satisfactorily in that country, as a model to consider whenimproving the recording of the pathway in EUROPASS Training. Managing translation difficulties There should also be guidelines for best practice in the translation of the document, accordingto a majority of NCPs. NCPs have suggested alternative strategies to deal with translationproblems. Recommended improvements Using a more structured document format: Austria has tried to alleviate translation problemsby the use of a more structured form of the EUROPASS Training in its on-line database,where the information to be input is more structured than in the normal EUROPASS Training.The on-line database is organised in pre-fixed categories to be ticked, so that the informationentered can be understood for comparison with a given translation of the given pro-forma. Providing translation assistance at the NCP: Some NCPs (e.g. Norway, Iceland) help userswith translations when required and possible or have a glossary on-line (France). Using a vernacular language: Some of the Nordic countries with languages that are not widelyused outside their countries (i.e. Denmark, Iceland, Sweden), Liechtenstein and Germanyexpressed their interest in exploring the possibility of using English as the working languagefor the documents though on a “where possible” basis (it would not be compulsory). Italysuggested that English, French or German could be used as the three key languages for theinitiative. More user- friendly language: The headings of the EUROPASS Training document can bedifficult to grasp for users. More concrete headings giving clearer instructions on whatinformation is required would be beneficial. Recognition Some NCPs suggested that the EUROPASS Training document was not seen to havesufficient legitimacy to certify periods of training abroad, and as a result its potential useduring job applications was reduced. Recommended improvements It was suggested that it should be mentioned in the first page of the document that theEUROPASS Training format is standardised for all EU and EEA countries and that thesupport from social partners should be sought. Their endorsement of the document would give



101

it a more official character and would give employers more assurance of its value, as it isunclear that the EC has the legitimacy to certify training periods otherwise. 9.4.3 Policy option four: Modify EUROPASS Training to lead the transparency framework

as a record of lifelong learning Finally EUROPASS Training could be developed into a “SUPER-EUROPASS” recording thelifelong learning experiences of individuals. There are several differences between the currentEUROPASS Training and a record of an individual’s lifelong learning. As one of the interviewed experts put it: “This way, EUROPASS Training would make asignificant contribution to transparency. It would give the necessary information that civilservants who validate qualifications from other countries need.” Ministries of education in thedifferent EU countries validate previous studies of immigrants. It is often not explicit inexisting certificates how the number of years necessary to obtain a qualification, or itscontent. These are two of the most important pieces of information needed to validate theirstudies. This information is the same that is given in EUROPASS Training documents now. IfEUROPASS Training were extended to encompass all learning of an individual, it wouldperfectly complement qualification certificates and make them more transparent foremployers and public administrations in all European countries. This is of special relevance inthe context of enlargement when there is a greater necessity than ever before for transparencyof qualifications -with countries with different systems, not necessarily familiar to employersand civil servants in the EU15 Member States –and vice versa- joining the EU. This wouldalso mean that EUROPASS Training would be used to certify all previous studies and trainingof all individuals in all EU countries. This way it will be mainstreamed, and therefore usedand understood by citizens and employers alike.” The current EUROPASS Training serves as a record for formal work-linked learning abroad.A life-long learning record would cover all formal and non-formal learning37, be it educationor training and regardless of the training taking place in the individual’s own country orabroad. CURRENT EUROPASS Training LIFE-LONG LEARNING RECORD Formal Training Formal and non-formal training Work linked training All education and training Training abroad Training in own county and abroad Between these two models there are multiple intermediate possibilities. These differentpossibilities raise different issues about the competent body/bodies or authority/authorities toissue life-long learning certificates. The more encompassing EUROPASS Training becomesthe more widely it will be used and recognised. From the information obtained in our interviews the extension of EUROPASS Trainingbeyond its current boundaries had some support. Both NCPs and national experts endorsedthis (see above). In particular NCPs reported the following:

37 We believe that including informal learning would devalue rather than add value to the initiative.



102

Four of the 13 NCPs which reported on EUROPASS Training reform to us argued thatEUROPASS Training should be extended to other education and training areas, as its currentfocus is too limited. They thought that it should be extended to certify any learning experienceabroad, including informal learning38. This would simplify the framework for users and wouldmake the document clearer and more widely recognised. The current framework fortransparency was thought to be unclear and confusing. Five NCPs (out of 13 reporting on reform) considered that there should be a commonportfolio for recording skills, which could be called either a “Portfolio of EuropeanSkills/Competencies” or “EUROPASS” – its catchy name is considered to be a clear strengthof the initiative. This would be a life-long document or “passport” for each person, capable ofbeing updated, in which all the initiatives mentioned above would fit. One NCP suggestedthat conceived in this way EUROPASS Training could be an attachment to the European CV,containing details of all the relevant training and work experience of individuals and on allEUROPEAN pathways undertaken. As mentioned in section nine, we believe that a “SUPER-EUROPASS” organised as a recordof lifelong learning would be especially useful in the context of enlargement when there is ahigher need than ever before to make qualifications transparent in EU countries. A number of NCPs and national experts also argued that EUROPASS Training should also beintegrated within national qualifications. National qualifications could detail the educationallevel achieved by the individual and also refer to his/her EUROPASS Training as theinstrument where details of any periods of transnational mobility during his/her studies aredetailed. This would raise the profile of EUROPASS Training and would make it morewidely known.

38 It is not unclear that NCPs and national experts consulted were familiar with the difference between non-formal and informal learning. As mentioned above, we believe that EUROPASS Training should not beextended to encompass informal learning.

Annex One

Case Studies

CASE STUDIES This annex presents a series of case studies produced for this mid-term evaluation. Each case-study describes the experience of a best practice organisation – or an individual participantwithin a best-practice organisation, as identified by NCPs. The case studies are based on the “maximum difference strategy” for comparison. The mostcommon approach to comparison, the “maximum similarities strategy”, is typically based onanalysing two identical groups under different conditions and following and explaining theirdifferent evolution. This strategy is not suitable for the context of EUROPASS, in whichsimilar groups of users are difficult to identify. In this context it is more appropriate to use analternative strategy for comparison, “maximising” the differences of the groups underanalysis and focusing the analysis on the common trends within these heterogeneous groups.This is the approach followed here. As such, our case studies represent a plurality of countriesand economic sectors. We provide one case study for each participating country, except in the case of Belgium,where the nature of the implementation of the initiative suggested that two case studies wouldbe necessary. Economic sectors included range across engineering, tourism, businessadministration, social care, building and carpentry, information technology and spacetechnology. The case studies presented offer useful insights into the initiative, from a “user’s” perspective.These insights can be divided into points in favour of EUROPASS and points forimprovement. Points in favour � A great majority of the interviewees shared the belief that the certification of periods of

training abroad was positive. More concretely, they also considered that EUROPASS wasa positive initiative.

� EUROPASS has already achieved a degree of “goodwill”. In part thanks to its name,EUROPASS is considered by companies and other organisations which use it as “good forthe image of the organisation and for PR purposes”

� EUROPASS can lead to the exchange of ideas and information about different trainingsystems, which, without the need for organising the information to fill in the document,would not occur.

� Most interviewees argued that the implementation of the initiative had beenunproblematic for them. Most interviewees also highlighted that the quality of theirrelation with their NCP was satisfactory.

Points for improvement a) Dissemination � The EUROPASS initiative “does not have a personality of itself”. Most participating

associations first knew about EUROPASS from a LEONARDO da VINCI informationmeeting, in which EUROPASS was also disseminated. They normally did not hear aboutEUROPASS anywhere else outside these meetings. This has even led some of them to anamalgamation of both initiatives. Some interviewees talked about the funding offered byEUROPASS, or, when asked about EUROPASS replied with considerations on theEuropean pathway undertaken under LEONARDO. This leads us to a second point:

� Need for more dissemination activities. Outside the LEONARDO “circuit” very fewpeople know about EUROPASS. This limits both the number of participants in theinitiative and the usefulness of the document during job applications, since employers arenot familiar with it.

b) Process � EUROPASS is perceived as being a “bureaucratic” initiative. Although effort was made

by the European Commission and NCPs to implement EUROPASS in a user-friendlyway, with simple application procedures and less paper work than Communityprogrammes, EUROPASS is perceived as a bureaucratic initiative. This is due to twodifferent reasons: Firstly, EUROPASS is too linked to LEONARDO. EUROPASS “paper-work”, even if limited, is perceived as an extension of the work for LEONARDO, and thetotal load is perceived as too onerous by participating organisations. The second reasonrelates to the nature of the document itself. Even if paper-work for participation in theinitiative is limited, the work of filling-in by hand the same type of information for atrainee who undertook similar training abroad is very time-consuming and frustrating. Anelectronic format would reduce this workload considerably and is promoted in severalcase studies.

c) Document � There are three commonly referenced critiques of the EUROPASS document:

� The “document does not look professional”. This is related to its hand-written format.An electronic format would be welcome by most interviewees.

� “There is no space to describe the training period”. The format of the document couldbe further improved by allowing more space for describing the period of trainingabroad. This is basically detailed on question number 17, which allows about 3centimetres for its completion. One of the interviewees said “I had to get anotherpaper attached to my EUROPASS to describe the activities I undertook during myperiod of training abroad”. As another interviewee put it “This is frustrating,especially when you have one full page to write your name”.

� “The document is written in Euro-speak”. The document should be made clearer, andshould be written in plain language.

d) Effects � EUROPASS has to find its personality within the European transparency framework.

EUROPASS was seen as a competitor of other European tools for transparency –thecertificate supplement - by one interviewee. This highlights the importance of makingclearer how the European transparency framework works, and the complementarity –asopposed to rivalry- of existing tools.

� The added value of the initiative, from case study reports, is largely related to personalsatisfaction and participation in a process that most interviewees embraced as positive (theunion of European countries) and less related to the practical benefits brought about by thedocument. Although normally EUROPASS is described as “a useful record and proof ofthe period of training undertaken abroad” there is very little evidence of use of thedocument – one exception is the Luxembourg case study. In the words of one of ourinterviewees the EUROPASS document is “something that is interesting without beingparticularly useful”.

� The usefulness of the EUROPASS document is related to the training period abroad.Although EUROPASS can be conceptually separated from the European pathway which itcertifies, in practice both elements are closely inter-linked. The value of EUROPASSincreases when it certifies a period of training abroad in which the apprentice/traineeundertook training which has value and can set him/her apart from other trainees, givingthem an advantage in the labour market. If the trainee did not undertake a useful trainingexperience abroad, the value of EUROPASS decreases.

CASE-STUDY AUSTRIA (AT) Context Prior to the advent of EUROPASS, Siemens AG Austria had extensive experience in mobilityinitiatives as a result of their four year involvement in LEONARDO. SIEMENS decided toparticipate in the EUROPASS scheme as it is perceived as an instrument which assures thatthe time an apprentice spends abroad is recorded and ‘confirmed’. The company has so farissued some 60 EUROPASS documents. SIEMENS did not co-operate directly with the host organisations, but through agencies. ForSIEMENS, the IFA Internationalerr Fachkraefte Austausch (International exchange of skilledlabour) organised the exchanges, liasing with Twin Education and Travel, the agency thatarranges exchanges with the United Kingdom. Twinschools are experienced EUROPASSmanagers. Each year, Twinschools sends between 20 and 25 apprentices to the UK toundertaking a training period abroad using the EUROPASS initiative. EUROPASS training and its implementation SIEMENS uses EUROPASS in connection with the LEONARDO initiative. A privatecompany, Twinschool, is responsible for everything that happens from arrival to departure ofthe apprentices. Twinschool was selected on the basis of cooperation with the IFAInternationaler Fachkraefte Austausch (International exchange of skilled labour) and has sentEUROPASS applicants to over 30 different companies abroad. No major implementation problems have been raised during our interviews. Moreover, theefficiency of EUROPASS is ranked as high. The additional costs that are incurred as aconsequence of EUROPASS are very low, and the benefits that can be gained, both by theapprentices and the company itself, are high. EUROPASS has increased the visibility oftraining periods abroad, as it is an instrument for certification. For participants, EUROPASScan have a positive impact for future job applications. However, it should be noted that apprentices also benefit directly from new skills andknowledge they gain, as well as improved language skills, ‘cultural competence’, openness,and self-confidence. Thus, EUROPASS has not had a direct impact in improving the qualityof the training periods abroad. The benefits to the company are all related to the abovementioned benefits for the apprentices. Twin schools continuously seek feedback on the initiative from trainees. Reports are preparedby the apprentices on their training period. Also, there is a questionnaire from the IFAInternationaler Fachkraefte Austausch (International exchange of skilled labour) which isfilled in by the apprentices. This questionnaire is also made available to SIEMENS. Reportsshow that EUROPASS holders are satisfied with the initiative.

Innovation and good practice 1. EUROPASS is seen as a “proof” of the qualification obtained as it details what training

the was undertaken during the period spent abroad. 2. Good links to the LEONARDO programme: all apprentices who participate in the

LEONARDO initiative in SIEMENS obtain automatically a EUROPASS document 3. Good feedback mechanisms from trainees 4. High number of apprentices is involved in the scheme (around 25 each year)

CASE STUDY: FLEMISH BELGIUM (BE)

Context This case study deals with two organisations in Belgium that have used EUROPASS forstudents that have spent time abroad: EDUGO Campus Glorieux (school) and KTAZavelenberg (school), both of which are secondary schools for professional education. EDUGO is a secondary school that runs a large scale exchange programme. In the year 2000approximately 30 students aged between 17 and 19 years old undertook EUROPASS trainingperiods abroad. The exchanges took place with schools in Norway, Sweden and the UK andhad duration of three weeks. Over the past year KTA Zavelenberg has used the EUROPASS scheme for the first time been.Approximately 30 students between 16 and 20 years old who have undertaken training abroadand have received a EUROPASS document as a result. These students have not had anyprevious European experience. The school is very enthusiastic about international exchangesbecause it offers added value to the students’ education. The schools do not differ greatly in their approach towards foreign placements and the waythey handle EUROPASS. Both schools have contacts with partner schools abroad that helpthem in finding companies where the students can stay.

EUROPASS training and its implementation Both schools have learnt about EUROPASS via the Leonardo program. One school saw a linkon the Leonardo website and the other school has had information on a Leonardo informationmeeting in Belgium. The main conclusions on the effect of EUROPASS from both schools are as follows: � The EUROPASS document adds value for students by providing them with a formal

record of their training period broad. EDUGO told us “EUROPASS is an official, formaldocument, which proves that students have participated in an international exchangeprogram. The school used to have its own certificate but this one is more official and hasmore ‘standing’”.

� The EUROPASS document does not have any effect on the number of students that goabroad or on the quality of the period abroad. It is regarded as an extra for a stay abroadbut is not an incentive

� EUROPASS helps students in their job applications. KTA says, “EUROPASS is a goodinstrument in applying for a job. There is no proof as yet that students have gainedemployment as a result of EUROPASS, but there have been indications that employers arepositive about the document”.

The main conclusions from both schools relating to the process of EUROPASS are: � Schools and companies applying for EUROPASS documents are required to complete too

many forms, especially for short-term stays. “There is a lot of bureaucracy”- KTAinterviewee said. “It took me a lot of time to fill out all the necessary documents”.Different forms have to be filled out and translated for each of the students separatelywhich takes up a lot of time. It is the school’s opinion that companies should not beburdened to such an extent with all this paperwork. An electronic copy could be faster tofill in.

� More publicity is required, not only in Belgium but in the rest of Europe, to increase theimpact of EUROPASS. One of EDUCO ‘s partners in Sweden has started to useEUROPASS after they had learnt from the Belgium school, but was unaware of theinitiative before.

� EUROPASS should be open to organisations outside LEONARDO. KTA said that theynot only send students abroad (Spain), but also receive Spanish students. However, asthese are not under the Leonardo program, they do not participate in EUROPASS. KTAalso highlighted that “I happened to see the link at the Leonardo website, but otherwise Iwould not have known anything about EUROPASS “. They have not seen any publicityregarding EUROPASS elsewhere.

Both schools acknowledge that a placement abroad in some cases may not have the quality ofa placement in Belgium, but the students gain a lot of other experiences that are even morevaluable. The following items that the students learn abroad are mentioned. � Knowledge about the culture of the country� Knowledge of “work culture” abroad� Learn to be independent and cope in a strange environment� Further knowledge of foreign language� Make contacts with other people (formal and informal) Innovation and good practice The schools have undertaken the following activities to make the placement successful:

Good partnership between schools and host organisations, with schools reducing theadministrative burden of filling in the three records of the training period abroad so thatprivate companies are not deterred from participating.

Schools have seen more value in EUROPASS - recognised all over Europe- than in theirprevious records.

CASE STUDY: FRENCH BELGIUM (BE)

Context The Haute Ecole Provinciale de Charleroi is a ‘multicultural’ university level institution,which operates numerous exchange programs with universities across Europe and one inChina. Students know in advance that they will undertake a training period abroad duringtheir time at the University, and all of them receive information about EUROPASS andLEONARDO. Currently, students from two of the Haute Ecole’s departments are sent onplacement using EUROPASS documents: the ‘international trade department’ and ‘secretariatde direction’. There are approximately one thousand students in each department. In addition,at the end of their third year, all students have to do a four months training period, preferablyabroad (although this is not compulsory) where EUROPASS is once again widely used. EUROPASS training and its implementation The University chose to use and promote the EUROPASS document in order to ‘legitimise’training periods spent abroad by its students. Thus, EUROPASS is used by students toprovide evidence of their experience to prospective employers. Awareness of the EUROPASSinitiative came initially from “FOREM”, the Belgian job centre. When the Haute Ecoledecided to get involved in the initiative Mrs Defoin, in charge of the LEONARDOinternational mobility programme for the University, was asked to make a presentation to thestudents. Further promotion amongst the students takes place each year at the same time asthe annual presentation of the Leonardo programme. Crucially, there have been no significantimplementation problems. In part this is due to the quality of the university’s relationship withthe NCP. The Haute Ecole regards the National contact point as “very efficient and availableat any time”. However, whilst the university continues to believe that EUROPASS is a verygood way of certifying training periods abroad, in its current format the certificate is notsufficiently well known or understood in the Belgian labour market. Management: Regular meetings held between the sending and the host organisations assured a very goodunderstanding. Training periods abroad were “tailored” for every student, and regarded assuccessful when at least equivalent to training of a similar level being offered in Belgium. Thefuture relevance of the experience was also a key criteria. Final agreements on the functioningof the partnerships were reached through meetings: training periods had to match what hadbeen taught during the year. Impact: The impact which EUROPASS has had is difficult to measure since the scheme has only beenin use for one year. However, there is some concern about usefulness and usage. So far thedocument is not very well known and students have experienced difficulty in using it todemonstrate their experience to employers. More precisely our interviewees made thefollowing key comments:

Quality: EUROPASS has not increased the quality of the training period abroad in itself. Itgives a European certification to something that already existed. Visibility: This document certifies a quality standard, but interviewees considered that thecertificate supplement, (designed to enable people to compare and understand foreign degreesand keep track of the educational background of the student, as well of the internationaltraining), will make EUROPASS obsolete (since it only records training periods). Usage: In its current format, the student has the possibility of recording three pathways, eachone in three different languages. Instead it would be preferable to have two pages perpathway –rather than the current three- and adapt the document so as to allow the recording offour pathways. Mentoring and Quality assurance: Mentors are chosen during the preparatory meetings and a staff member of the Universityvisits every student for a few days to discuss problems and make changes if necessary. Thereare also more formal ways to monitor the quality of the training. After every visit, the traineementor writes a detailed report on the training period. If the partnership was not successful, ordid not meet the quality standards set by the Haute Ecole, it will not be repeated. This reportis also the base for the EUROPASS training record. The student also has to write a report,describing the work they’ve been doing, but also more subjective aspects such as acommentary on life in the country of destination or the content of the training itself Innovation and good practice This University’s close links with the job centre (FOREM) have proven to be useful in raisingawareness of the latest developments in the labour market and in the availability of newinitiatives. The long term usage of the EUROPASS document was far from sure since the new“supplement au diplome” is more comprehensive than the EUROPASS, and could be moreuseful in the future.

CASE-STUDY GERMANY (DE)

Context

For the elaboration of this case study we interviewed Linde AG (a sending organisation), theirhost organisation for EUROPASS (Lansing Linde) and one of the EUROPASS holders fromLinde AG. Linde AG is an international joint stock company based in Germany active in the Gas sector,Engineering, Material Handling, and Refrigeration. It employs more than 3,000 staff inAschaffenburg, where they focus on Mechanical Engineering, and more than 40,000 staffworldwide. Lansing Linde Ltd is a UK subsidiary oof Lansing AG and is the UK’s largestmaterial handling company. Sales and service in the UK is provided by 9 National NetworkCompanies. They have 29 depot locations and a team of over 800 skilled field serviceengineers So far 12 staff from Linde AG have spent a four week period working at Lansing Linde, witha further 12 apprentices currently engaged on EUROPASS. Linde’s participation in theEUROPASS scheme arose from their longstanding involvement in LEONARDO (they haveparticipated in LEONARDO since 1997/1998) which meant it was relatively easy toincorporate the new scheme into their existing activities. EUROPASS training and its implementation Once Linde AG had been informed about EUROPASS, they publicised the informationinternally. Apprentices then had the opportunity to participate in the EUROPASS initiative ifthey wished to do so. The training period abroad typically lasts four weeks, and apprenticeswork in at least two different departments/units in order to see as much as possible of the hostorganisation functioning. Although there is no formal written agreement between LansingLinde and Linde AG, the co-operation between them works very well and is one reason forthe success of the initiative in these companies. The reporting system is very well structured with a mentor in each of the departments inwhich the apprentices are working. Each head of human resources also acts as a mentor to theplacement trainees. The apprentice has to write a brief report on work done every day and onthe basis of these reports a weekly report is produced. Once a week the apprentice meets withthe main mentor and the reports are discussed. These reports are also used when filling in theEUROPASS document. This way the description in the document can be very detailed andaccurate. Once apprentices are back from their training period, members of the humanresources department of Linde AG also ask the apprentices about their experiences. EUROPASS is thought to be a good instrument for certifying training periods abroad but isthought to be neither better nor worse than other, pre-existing, certificates such as thosealready issued by Linde. The sending organisations highlighted that the document itself is notvery clear. They told us: “There are some problems with the design and the handling of thedocument. The design could be better and PCs should be used to fill it in, with a signature in

the document for certification reasons. As it is now, to have a second copy of the documentyou need to photocopy it, and that is very inconvenient. An electronic version would bebetter. There should also be personal details of the apprentice, such as the date of birth. There were divergent views about the space given in the document for the description of thetraining period abroad. Whilst the sending organisation argued that there is not enough spaceto describe the “content” of the training period abroad the host organisation argued that thisspace was sufficient and it can be expanded upon as required, say for example in interviewsfor new jobs, where the period of training abroad can be discussed in more detail. The beneficiary interviewed was critical of the format of the document, but he did hope that itwould be useful for external applications. However, for the applications he has made sincecompleting his European pathway, he has not used EUROPASS but has used the certificatethat was provided by the host organisations (Lansing Linde). He was particularly critical ofthe fact that the document has to be completed by hand. This does not look professional and isone of the reasons why he has not used EUROPASS in his applications. Also, he thought thatthere was not enough room to describe the content of the training period in the document. “Itis irritating that the EUROPASS provides almost one whole page just to write the holder’sname” he pointed out. It is not possible to enter the information with a typewriter, due to thematerial used. He thinks that a folder would be more useful. In such a folder certificatesproduced by employers could also be filed. This beneficiary would recommend EUROPASSonly with reservations: “I would recommend it as a means for documentation purpose, but Iwould not recommend to send it to employers in applications”

Innovation and good practice. The cooperation between host and sending organisation (the relationship between Linde AGand Lansing Linde) works very well. This case study also presents a good practice mentoringand structured reporting systems, with the involvement of the trainee in the elaboration of thebackground material from which the EUROPASS document is completed at the end of theEuropean pathway.

CASE-STUDY – DENMARK (DK)

Context The case study relates to a county school, Social-og sundhedsskolen I Ribe Amt, providingfor individuals studying to work in the Danish social care sector (principally care for theelderly). A key aspect of the training provided is on the job, and, therefore work placementsare integrated into the curricula. The school caters for a range of age groups. The institution isfully publicly financed and caters for a range of age groups. Presently there are 700 full timestudents and 500 participating in part-time courses. 25 EUROPASS documents have beenissued so far. Two students from the Social-og sundhedsskolen in the county of Ribe have been interviewedwith an emphasis on their use and evaluation of EUROPASS, including problems issuedaddressed. The students have been in Germany, Finland, Holland, Norway and Sweden. Wefocus on their experience in Norway and Finland, where one undertook training in a carefacility for the elderly (which in Finland is placed within a hospital), and the other at a Red-cross hospital. In Finland language used was English and in Norway Danish.

Implementation of EUROPASS and problems/issues addressed Interviews suggest that knowledge and value attached to EUROPASS are varied. One of thestudents said “they were confused on how to use the EUROPASS”. She further indicated thatshe “did not see the use of it”, as she did not expect that potential employers would value sucha document. By contrast, the second student was confident that using EUROPASS would helpher in getting a job, and stressed that employers would see the document as evidence ofpersonal development as well as training. Both students felt that EUROPASS was poorly structured and that too little space wasavailable for written comments, a view also expressed by the deputy-school administratorinterviewed. The school highlighted: “there is too little space to write references for theindividual student, but at the same time the school believes that three pages per apprenticeshipis too space demanding. The size of the three pagse per apprenticeship could be reduced byhaving one common language”. One of the students had been able to get a Supplement to herEUROPASS with an additional certificate, which described the activities she had undertakenduring her training period abroad. She regarded this combination of documents positively andas an aid in helping her secure employment in the future. Nevertheless, it was also argued thatmore space for written comments on the stay abroad is needed in order for EUROPASS to beof real value in the area of social care. In addition, the purpose of EUROPASS, it was argued,should also be more clearly spelled out. However, both students would have undertaken atraining period abroad without EUROPASS and stress that the opportunity to gain experienceby spending time working abroad during their studies was more important than a formal pieceof paper.

Innovation and good practice The innovation and good practice seems to be that the EUROPASS should combine itspresent official outlook with space and room for solutions which are bound to the specifictraditions and areas they in which they are used. In areas with more pedagogical approach, forexample, spaces for writing and comment on the individual student needs to be morecapacious.

CASE STUDY: SPAIN (ES)

Context The Spanish case study for the Mid-term Evaluation of EUROPASS is based on assessing theEUROPASS document which certifies the training period realised by Ms. Ireber IriondoArrillaga in the City College of Manchester (England). She was previously a student at the ELGOIBAR BH INSTITUTUA (ELHI) located in ELGOIBAR-GUIPUZKOA (BasqueCountry, Spain). The evaluator used the information provided by Mr. Jose Luis Fernandez Maure, responsiblefor international affairs within the sending organisation, Ms. Ireber Iriondo Arrillaga, thebeneficiary, and Mr. Mikel Bollar Arrate who was involved in managing the EUROPASSinitiative on behalf of the Government of the Basque Country. Mobility-oriented measures are financed through the EUROPEAN programmes for education(SOCRATES) and vocational training (Leonardo da Vinci), as well as through otherCommunity initiatives and programmes. In this case, the mobility initiative was carried outunder the LEONARDO project “Training abroad, a good way to improve workers’ skills(2000-2002) “ leaded by ELHI39. The EUROPASS Training was launched in 1st January 2000 and the first EUROPASSdocument was solicited by ELHI in 2002. EUROPASS training and its implementation EUROPASS document is a suitable tool for certifying periods of training abroad and forstandardising the professional profiles of the students from different EU countries. However,in order to facilitate labour market accessibility, it should have been necessary to emphasisethe complementarity of schools and enterprises as a specific objective (according to ELMI).

Impact, Effectiveness and Efficiency According to the information provided by the ELHI responsible for international affairs, themost relevant benefits that could have been achieved with the EUROPASS documents are thefollowing ones:

39 As to the aims of the project, we can underline two main ones; First of all, it will try to achieve a constantadaptation so that the workers (related to the economic sectors of motoring, health, and administrative studies)can fulfil the demands of the labour market. This would contribute to their personal and professionaldevelopment. Secondly, try to learn from the systems of training in alternation (emphasising the complementaryof schools and businesses) which are being developed in other European countries and therefore improving theELHI own ones.

� If the host organisation is a private company, it has the opportunity to gauge how youngpeople who come from different educational systems are prepared.

� Student benefits comprise the added value to the beneficiaries’ CVs. The EUROPASSdocument should benefit the trainees making easier their labour market access.

A significant problem emerged when we were analysing the achieved results where it was toosoon to the assess the benefit which EUROPASS had produced for the beneficiaries, sendingand host organisations. Bureaucratic problems with the EUROPASS initiative at thebeginning of its implementation in Spain meant that other European countries could accessEUROPASS at least one year before ELHI could. This also means that more effort is requiredto make this document well known amongst both employers and employees: “the document(as Ms. Iriondo said in her interview) is still totally unknown by employers. For this reason,this extra certificate cannot support a better labour market accessibility (which should be oneof the most increasingly important elements of this initiative)”. In spite of this fact,EUROPASS has:

� contributed to Ms. Iriondo’ s career development and progression in terms of improvingher foreign language skills, finances and human resources qualification.

� allowed her to discover different approaches to work and learn to connect and collaboratewith people from other cultures.

� increased the quality of the periods of training abroad by means of more visibility andunderstanding of qualification and training systems in countries.

Management The relationship between partners was excellent because they have been working together fora long time. This has meant that the process of agreeing objectives, duration, methods andcontents during the period abroad was successfully and efficiently achieved. According to the interviewees’ the success of training abroad depends on:

� The quality of the relationship between partners.

� The relationship between host organisation and the companies where students developtheir work placements.

� The students foreign language skills. In this case the implementation process of EUROPASS documents seems to be very balancedbetween the sending and host organisation in terms of the responsibilities assumed by eachone. The mentors’ professional profiles guaranteed the quality of support given to trainees andthe sending organisation monitored the quality of the training received abroad by means ofproviding partners.

Finally, some of the technical issues that hindered the EUROPASS implementation processwere related to the available electronic version and the simple format of the document. As theinterviewees from ELHI said “at the beginning of the initiative, the electronic version workedbadly making it impossible to complete the document and a lot of time was”. However, theEUROPASS application procedure is now quicker and more efficient. Innovation and good practice � Overall, the best results depend on the organisations involved in the programme. The

organisations participating in the European programme and national organisationsinvolved in it, guarantees the veracity of the data contained in the document.

� A copy of the EUROPASS document is retained by both the host abroad and also the

sending organisation. Perhaps this copy could be also sent to the National Agency for theLeonardo da Vinci Programme which could help giving wider visibility to the students.

� To improve the system to introduce data in the document and to prepare a more complexUser Manual of the computer system for the centres.

CASE STUDY: FINLAND (FI)

Context Nurmeksen oppimiskeskus (Nurmes Vocational School) is an upper-secondary levelvocational school with some 400 students and staff of 60. The school is owned by themunicipality and provides degrees in the following fields: � machinery� construction� electricity� car repair� catering� tailoring� information technology and marketing� business administration Nurmeksen oppimiskeskus is a newcomer to the EUROPASS initiative and has acted only asa sending organisation. The first applications for EUROPASS documents were submitted inthe Autumn of 2001 and so far 10 have been awarded. The plan is to increase this figure in thefuture, and possibly introduce EUROPASS to the associated tertiary level vocation institution(Polytechnic) as well. Prior to participation in EUROPASS initiative, the school has participated in two projectsunder Leonardo. Both of these projects have already finished, and the partners in theEUROPASS initiative (private companies) are different from Leonardo partners (schools).

With one exception, the partnership organisations were all small businesses. These werelocated in Spain (4 companies), Sweden (1 company) and Germany (1 company). Three of thecompanies operate in the field of tourism, one in the public sector, one in catering and one ininformation technology. Identification of all partners and assessment of their suitability is based on personal contactsof Mrs Jeskanen has made during her own holidays. EUROPASS training and its implementation Mrs Jeskanen first learned about EUROPASS at a seminar organised by the National Board ofEducation (National Contact Point in Finland) in 2000. She took immediate interest in theinitiative as “our school has to participate in initiative(s) that increase employability.”40 Inaddition, it was hoped that the EUROPASS document would increase the visibility of workbased training at upper secondary level and add to the status of upper secondary levelvocational training.

40 Nurmes is situated in the Eastern part of Finland. The area is suffering from high unemployment andmigration.

Information about EUROPASS is provided to the students both in their classes and throughindividual discussion. Co-operation with the National Contact Point is rated very high, andthe information received is clear and easily accessible. Mrs Jeskanen was familiar with theleaflet and brochure and had visited the EC and National Contact Point websites. TheNational Contact Point had also sent studies about EUROPASS. This information wasconsidered to be very useful. EUROPASS fits well into the training establishment’s curriculum and provides a naturalextension to the normal degree. EUROPASS helps developing links between training andwork experience, but due to limited experience with the scheme more extensive and detailedconclusions are difficult to draw. Mrs Jeskanen found EUROPASS complemented Certificate supplements and the EuropeanDiploma Supplement. She had no opinion regarding the relationship between EUROPASSand the European CV format, European Credits on non-formal and informal training andEuropean Credit Transfer System. In general the European Initiatives are complex butmanageable. In general, the information provided in the EUROPASS document is considered very usefuland it is attractive to the school and to the students as it is. However, the document could beimproved by including a qualitative assessment of training abroad. The main problem in effectively utilising EUROPASS initiative appears to be the very limitedknowledge of the initiative among employers. Though all partners (host organisations whoreceived students for training) reacted positively towards EUROPASS, none of them knewabout it advance. Mrs Jeskanen provided them with relevant information available (e.g. in theinternet). Management The links with the partners have been informal and communication easy. The specific targetsfor training abroad were decided on a case by case basis, ensuring the requirements specifiedin the school curriculum. Impact Due to limited experience, the impact of EUROPASS at Nurmeksen Oppimiskeskus and tothe beneficiaries is difficult to assess. So far EUROPASS has not increased the number oftraining periods abroad nor the quality of the training received. However, EUROPASS hasincreased to some extent the quality and recognition of qualifications gained through trainingabroad and it has also increased the visibility of these training periods. Visibility is an important aspect in promoting EUROPASS and vocational training in generalamongst young people. However, EUROPASS has not increased the willingness of studentsto undertake training abroad, those who have participated would have been interested inoverseas training opportunities without EUROPASS. However, most of the students,

especially at the upper secondary level, are still reluctant to go abroad for training. Thistendency can be affected by visibility. In Nurmes, there has been a story about EUROPASStraining and trainees in the local newspaper. Increased visibility will also raise awareness ofEUROPASS amongst future partners and potential employers who still no very little aboutEUROPASS. The EUROPASS document is valued by the students and the school. As employers tend not toknow about the initiative, assessing the impact of EUROPASS on employability is difficult.However, expectations are that EUROPASS improves the employment prospects of thestudents who participate. The question is, how much of this can be contributed to thedocument itself and how much to the fact that it shows that the person has been abroad, whichreveals much about aspects of an individual’s personality which are potentially valued byemployers. Mentoring and Quality assurance Students are required to report on their training abroad. There are also more informaldiscussions. The EUROPASS document is deemed clear and suitable for vocational schools.However, assessment of quality of the work carried out by the trainee would make thedocument even more informative. Innovation and Good practice Good communication between participating partners and consistent quality assurancemechanisms, which should be included in the EUROPASS document.

CASE-STUDY: LIECHTENSTEIN (FL)

Context

The cooperation was undertaken between UNAXIS Balzers AG (Liechtenstein) andMaggi/Nestle (Germany). UNAXIS and Maggi work in different sectors (UNAXIS in theareas of information technology, surface technology and space technology, Maggi in foodprocessing). However apprentices from both companies taking part in exchanges wereworking they are very area of industrial mechanics. The reason why UNAXIS decided toparticipate was that they believe that globalisation requires staff who are able to and do lookacross borders. They thought that apprentices were given this chance with LEOANARDO andEUROPASS. EUROPASS training and its implementation UNAXIS became aware of EUROPASS through an information session organised by theirNational Contact Point for LEONARDO. The EUROPASS National Contact Point inLiechtenstein also recommended Maggi/Nestle as a partner for UNAXIS. “The quality of theliaison with the National Contact Points was very good. There was regular contact, the NCP isalso geographically close, so it was easy to meet” said UAXIS. UNAXIS approached Maggiabout their willingness to cooperate. Maggi had no previous experience with any Communityinitiatives. They agreed, as they saw it as an opportunity for the apprentices to widen theirhorizon, gain new experiences and learn “new things”, not only in the area of work, but forlife in general. From the outset of the partnership, a plan for the stay of the apprentice in the hostorganisation was set up, and the objectives of the training period were defined. The definitionof targets regarding the training undertaken by apprentices was key to the success of theinitiative. Both UNAXIS and Maggi were clear about what they expected from the initiative.Good personal contacts between the two companies made sure that both sides’ expectationwere fulfilled. A good preparation of the training, both on the side of the apprentices and thecompanies, was also an important factor in the success, as was a good mentoring system. One of the most positive aspects of EUROPASS is that is can lead to the exchange of ideasabout different training systems. Both the sending and the host organisation benefit from thisand from everything else that the apprentices learn. Taking part in the scheme is also good forthe image of the company and therefore for PR purposes. Moreover, the EUROPASSdocument is seen as a good instrument for certifying periods of training abroad by bothparticipating organisations. However, there are doubts over its usefulness in practice as (currently) EUROPASS is notwell known. For example, when staff apply for a new job and present the EUROPASS to theirpotential new employer, it is unlikely that they will have heard about EUROPASS.EUROPASS increased the visibility of training periods undertaken abroad but only to alimited extent as the scheme is not promoted widely enough and is, therefore, not sufficientlywell known.

It is also important to note that from our interviews that the EUROPASS initiative has not yetacquired a ‘personality’ of its own and it is not perceived as being different fromLEONARDO. Innovation and good practice Maggi Nestle and UNAXIS Balzers come from different economic sectors and EUROPASShas provided an opportunity for both companies to exchange ideas about their differenttraining systems. This gives the apprentices the chance to get to know different sectors and toget to know a different environment. In addition, the requirement both for the mentors and theapprentices to prepare reports can be seen as an example of good practice. Also, the heads oftraining both in UNAXIS and Maggi were responsible for mentoring the apprentices.

CASE-STUDY FRANCE (FR)

Context The sending organisation, ‘Compagnons Du Devoir, Provence Alpes-Cote d’Azur’ is atraining centre, with the legal status of an association of public utility. Nationally, theorganisation covers 5000 apprentices. The branch of the organisation for the Alpes-Coted’Azur region offers apprenticeships mainly in the fields of building and carpentry. Theregional organisation has had experience with LEONARDO previously and was the first bodyin France to submit a project under EUROPASS. The apprenticeships offered last for two years and so far, two types of training periods abroadhave been organised for individuals in their second year of the apprenticeship: In the first instance, 12 beneficiaries undertook a three-week training period in Germany.In the second instance, a further 12 beneficiaries undertook a longer training period abroad,lasting three months. The host countries were Germany, Belgium and Ireland. EUROPASS training and its implementation

The sending organisation interviewed noted numerous benefits from undertaking a pathwayabroad. These benefits relate to gaining access to the culture of the new country but alsounderstanding the training systems of other countries as well as the professional culture andworking ethos of the hosts abroad. They were also able to become aware of differenttechniques or ways of working, such as for example, the greater use of automated machinery.A number of beneficiaries returned to Ireland and Germany after the end of theirapprenticeship in France, to attempt to find work there.

However, apart from the benefits of travelling and of working abroad, it proved difficult toidentify the value added by the EUROPASS document for the beneficiaries who received it.The EUROPASS document is a useful record and proof of the training period undertaken, butis not considered to offer an advantage to its recipients in any other way.

In terms of problems faced during the implementation of EUROPASS, none could beidentified, in addition to those related to the training period abroad. Some issues arose relatingto the administrative side of offering beneficiaries a period abroad. Namely, in France,individuals undertaking an apprenticeship are remunerated throughout the two years of itsduration and the apprenticeship is governed by a contract (contrat d’apprentissage), renderingthe training organisation responsible for each apprentice throughout its duration. Thepractical problem arose of how to continue the remuneration and protection of thebeneficiaries during their stay abroad. These issues were eventually overcome through long-standing dialogue and true commitment from all parties involved to make the arrangementswork. Another factor that is considered to have helped the resolution of this problem andother minor issues arising was the fact that there was good contacts and communication

between the partners involved. The partnership was built with organisations which were triedand trusted from the past. Other issues that arose and were also overcome related to validation of the training receivedabroad, as there exist certain differences in the curricula and definitions of what should bemastered in the context of certain professions between different countries. Innovation and good practice An important element of good practice from this case study relates to evaluation. Anevaluation seminar was organised half way through the three-month training period abroad totake stock of the experience and address any problems and issues arising up to that stage. Thisevaluation seminar was in addition to two visits (lasting one week) by a trainer from France tothe host country in order to monitor how things were progressing. Other issues that arose and were also overcome related to validation of the training receivedabroad, as there exist certain differences in the curricula and definitions of what should bemastered in the context of certain professions between different countries.”

CASE-STUDY: GREECE (GR)

Context IEK Epanomi is a public training institute in the field of tourism which had alreadyparticipated in six mobility projects under LEONARDO before taking part in EUROPASS. Ithas so far organised two rounds of EUROPASS certified training in France for students intheir first year of a tourism course. IEK has so far applied for 104 EUROPASS documents,which typically certify short training periods (three-weeks) where students do on-the-jobtraining in travel agencies in France. EUROPASS training and its implementation

IEK told us that they got to know EUROPASS through the Greek NCP (OEEK, under theaegis of the Greek Ministry of Education) which disseminated information on EUROPASS. Itdecided to get involved because “we believe in the future of Europe and the need to havecommon certification in Education”. The sending organisation and beneficiaries interviewed did not experience any problemsduring the implementation of EUROPASS. Beneficiaries expressed clear satisfaction with thetraining period itself in terms of opening up their horizons both culturally and professionally,learning more about their field but also about working and living abroad. These however are benefits linked to spending a training period abroad and less to do withbenefits from the EUROPASS document itself . Indeed, it has proven more difficult toidentify the added value that the EUROPASS document gives rise to, apart from offering anacknowledgement of the training period undertaken. The EUROPASS document is seen assomething that is interesting without being considered as particularly useful for securing a jobor further training. Expectations of benefits from participation in the initiative were not highfor the sending organisation - “we only aimed to have an official record of the period oftraining abroad”. Conversely, the beneficiary we interviewed form IEK hoped to improve herchances of getting a job upon completion of her training. Unfortunately, in practise,“EUROPASS did not prove to have a role in increasing employment opportunities becauseemployers are not familiar with the document”. EUROPASS might be useful in theory in recording multiple pathways consistently but inpractise in Greece, none of the beneficiaries has or would be undertaking a second pathwayowing to the lack of financial support to allow the same person to undertake a second pathwaywhether through Leonardo, EUROPASS or other programmes. Innovation and good practice The organisation stressed the important role of mentors and of closely following the studentsduring their period abroad.

Success depends heavily on the establishment of strong partnerships especially for shorttraining periods where the time margins for making improvements are tight. Goodcooperation entails a flow of communication between partners, the ability to trust andconsider them reliable, and making detailed arrangements and planning all aspects of thetraineeship abroad in advance.

CASE STUDY: IRELAND (IE)

Context

By Irish standards Inchicore College is a large Further Education College providing for morethan 900 students each year across a wide range of subjects. It has a long track record inimplementing European projects, including Leonardo, which are overseen by the DeputyPrincipal. The typical student attending Inchicore College of Further Education is between 18 and 20 (aminority are mature students and could age from 25-60); did not qualify for universityentrance and tends to live locally. Inchicore College has sent 50 students abroad withEUROPASS in the last year and will send a further 70 in 2003. It has hosted 20 students inIreland. The students who go on EUROPASS are seeking careers in tourism, data processing;health and social work; sports and leisure; culture (theatre); and accounting. EUROPASS training and its implementation In general students go abroad for a three week period of training. Their programmes cancontribute to the work experience element of their college qualification, but the college feltthere was real value in the employer certification of work experience in EUROPASS soInchicore College implements the scheme as a stand alone process. EUROPASS is managed by Mr. Martin Finn, the Deputy School Principal, which means thatexchange programmes such as EUROPASS receive a high level of priority. EUROPASS alsohas good management at the National Contact point. The Irish NCP has been found to be bothvery efficient and quick to arrive at a decision on any application. However, the applicationprocess has two significant draw-backs. First, the application form is difficult to follow and is‘peppered’ with Eurospeak. Second, “the process is too unwieldy and the document could beclearer and easier to complete. Hand written documentation is too time consuming for largenumbers - as at Inchicore” Innovation and good practice Time Availability The College staff assisted in negotiating arrangements with their employers and this restrictedthe duration to three weeks. Frequently the employers assisted with sponsorship monies.

Mentoring Host organisations work closely with the placed students, acting as mentors and providingnecessary support. In addition, staff from the College also visit the students during theirplacement period. After the placement, the College staff encourage students to use theirEUROPASS book to show potential employers the experience they have gained.

CASE STUDY: ICELAND (IS)

Context This case study is based on interviews with two sending organisations from Iceland, theApprentices Association and the Akranes College. The Apprentices Association, whichcurrently provides for approximately 6,000 students, has being using EUROPASS since 2000.They first heard about EUROPASS through Leonardo da Vinci, and it has so far issued 11documents, 5 in the year 2000/01 and 6 during 2001/02. It has sent students to Sweden,Denmark, England, Holland, Spain and France, in the hairdressing, painting and mechanicssectors. The Akranes College is a comprehensive public school. It has issued 38 EUROPASSdocuments so far, having sent students to Denmark and Italy.

EUROPASS training and its implementation The Apprentices Association first heard of EUROPASS through the Leonardo Programme.They started sending students abroad in the year 2000 through the Leonardo programme, andnow everybody using Leonardo also participates in EUROPASS. The ApprenticesAssociation decided to participate because they liked the concept of officially certifying thetraining periods spent abroad by their students, something that could not be done until theimplementation of EUROPASS. Students often have to do internships, and those goingabroad could not provide formal evidence of the tasks they had undertaken, the length of timespent abroad, etc., in one document. People now have proof of training and can be rewardedfor it. Leonardo and EUROPASS are advertised in a half-yearly newspaper published by theApprentices Association and also through posters. This promotion and word of mouth isworking well, and today a great deal of people use EUROPASS even if they do not knowLeonardo. However, Alongside the positive aspects of EUROPASS there are some featureswhich warrant improvement: In particular, there is not enough space for the host organisationto describe the various assignments and achievements of trainees and give their comments. The Akranes College also first heard of the EUROPASS via the Leonardo agency. Soon after,the College made it compulsory for every student that was sent on a training period abroad.The NCP’s played an important role, they were very efficient and helpful during all phases ofthe management of the initiative, and also collaborate in the dissemination of the scheme atthe college through a joint presentation on Leonardo and EUROPASS. However, Akranessays that much remains to be done to promote it since most companies or potential employershave never heard of it. They also mention that the document itself is clear, although it should be written in ‘plainEnglish’. It is very easy to fill in but it isn’t detailed enough. The student could benefit from amore precise description, and currently, there is not enough space in the booklet to allow that.

Innovation and good practice The experience of the Apprentices Association shows how good dissemination strategies canhelp to increase the number of EUROPASS applicants, and open its use to trainees outsideLeonardo. Akranes College also shows how participants organisations can engage with otheractors, such as the NCP, to increase awareness on the initiative.

CASE STUDY: ITALY (IT)

Context The Italian case study of the Mid-term Evaluation of “EUROPASS Training” is based onassessing the EUROPASS document certifying the two weeks training period undertaken byMr Raffaele Tammaro from the Professional school “Alessio Tramello” (in the town ofPiacenza, Italy) in the I.E.S. Institute of Escurce, in Bilbao (Basque Country, Spain). The evaluator used the information provided by� the responsible for European projects within the sending organisation (Mrs Fiorenza

Ferre´);� the beneficiary (Mr Raffaele Tammaro);� the reponsibles within the hosting organisation Mr. Vicente Diaz and Mrs. Begoña san

Jose. Implementation of EUROPASS and problems/issues addressed

Involvement and appropriateness It is clear that in this case the EUROPASS document is regarded as a powerful tool. It is lessclear, however, what the real impact of EUROPASS is on the “employability” of thebeneficiary as he is still studying at University level.

Impact, Effectiveness and Efficiency Sending and hosting organisations agreed the key benefits of the EUROPASS documents are:

� EUROPASS has increased the quality of the periods of training abroad by means of morevisibility and understanding of qualification and training systems in other countries.

� The sending and hosting organisation have the opportunity to contribute towards Pan-European educational networks (and thus integration), and are rewarded by theopportunity to issue EUROPASS certificates.

� The student benefits from a unique training experience which helps to widen both theirtechnical and cultural knowledge. It is less evident, however, how the scheme affects thebeneficiaries employability opportunities.

A problem has arisen in defining the minimum duration of the training periods spent abroad.This is important as overly short training periods may prove ineffective in terms of benefits tothe student. However, the student interviewed for this case study was very satisfied with hisexperience particularly with the availability of the hosting tutor. The only points of criticismwhich were made related to: � the length of the training which was considered too short

� the lack of knowledge of this tool amongst employers has made the recruitment of hostingcompanies difficult and reduced the value of the document as a aid to employability.

Management Throughout the project collaboration between the partners has proved very fruitful. In partthis is due to the fact that they have prior experience of working together facilitatingagreement on objectives, duration, methods and contents during the training period spentabroad. From the interviewees’ perspective, the success of periods of training abroad dependson:

� an open relationship between partners

� the suitability of professional profiles

� the students language ability. In this case, the implementation of EUROPASS seems to be very balanced between thesending and host organisation in terms of the responsibilities assumed by each party. Innovation and good practice � All the interviewees consider EUROPASS an indispensable in certifying and

standardising training periods spent abroad.

� Evaluation of EUROPASS should be carried out independently by a body other thanorganisations involved.

CASE STUDY: LUXEMBOURG (LU)

Context The Lycée technique pour la profession de santé (the ‘sender’) based in Esch-sur-Alzette inLuxembourg, is a public-sector body that trains nurses and nursing auxiliary staff (aides-soignants/aides soignantes). Depending on the year it has between 700 and 800 students withapproximately 100 members of staff. The Lycée has had previous experience with ECprogrammes, having participated in LEONARDO, and became aware of EUROPASS throughtheir National Contact Point at the Ministry of Education in Luxembourg. As part of theEUROPASS Initiative, it has sent fifteen students to three different countries: Belgium,Germany and Austria. The host organisation interviewed was the Landeskrankenhaus – UniversitätsklinikenInnsbrück in Austria (federal state of Tyrol). It is a public-sector institution that is responsiblefor training medical staff. There are over 2,000 nurses being trained and 4,000 people in total.They hosted eight students from Luxembourg (three different institutions). EUROPASS training and its implementation Both sender and host saw EUROPASS as something that was of primary interest to thebeneficiaries; it has had little effect upon the organisations. The Lycée remarked that: “It ismore about them than us”. However, the host organisation did discern some benefits. Theywere keen to participate, since they are “deeply involved in the process of education” and theywanted to look beyond training in their own country (“We wanted to cross national borders”).They also highlighted that they felt that EUROPASS is a good instrument for certifyingperiods of training abroad, since it provides the students with an official document confirmingtheir participation in the Initiative. Both of the beneficiaries interviewed were unable to distinguish EUROPASS fromLEONARDO, though they both acknowledged that it was good to have a formal documentthat certified their period of training abroad. “It has strengthened my C.V.” and employersseem to value the document (it is “often used in my job applications”). The other mainadvantage for the beneficiaries has come from the chance to work in a foreign country. “Iwelcomed the opportunity to be able to do a traineeship abroad”. All EUROPASS participants had a mentor in the Landeskrankenhaus – UniversitätsklinikenInnsbrück. The mentor was there to offer help and advice when they needed it, to “encadrerles elevès”. However, this quality criteria for the training period abroad was not introduced tosatisfy EUROPASS requirements. Mentoring and supervision systems were already in place.The EUROPASS beneficiaries were “integrated into the existing mentoring systems”. There were no problems discerned by any of the interviewees relating to EUROPASS or thetraineeship period abroad, but it is apparent that for this case study all of the beneficiarieswent to countries where they could speak the language to native speaker level. Luxemburgersare bilingual (German and French).

The Landesklinik, emphasised that the EUROPASS Initiative “has provided us with a greaterknowledge of practice in other countries”. They have learnt more about “education and care”in Luxembourg. There has been a very active “exchange of information”(Informationsaustausch). A point for improvement is the dissemination of the initiative. Landeskrankenhaus –Universitätskliniken Innsbrück was not made aware of EUROPASS through any officialdissemination mechanism in their country. They heard about the EUROPASS Initiativethrough the schools that requested their help and participation as a host organisation, whichalso explained to them how the scheme it worked. Innovation and good practice The quality of the training was assured through the construction of sound monitoringprocedures. In many cases, the students were visited abroad by teachers at the Lycée toensure that everything was running smoothly. In addition, both sender and host developedgood links with the National Contact Points. “Everything was clearly regulated and correct.”Landeskrankenhaus – Universitätskliniken Innsbrück in Austria. The functioning of the partnership between the sender, the host and the beneficiary wasenshrined in the form of a written agreement/contract (Vertrag), which was signed by all. Thisset out the objectives of the period of training and the obligations that were incumbent on thevarious parties. The Landesklinik was “bound” by its provisions.

CASE STUDY: THE NETHERLANDS (NL)

Context Roc Noorderpoort College. Before the EUROPASS initiative was launched, ROCNoorderpoort College already participated in a broad international network comprisingpartnerships with around 200 educational institutions and enterprises in Spain, Sweden,Germany, France, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Belgium and the Czech Republic. ROCNoorderpoort College already had a specific policy regarding international traineeships beforethe introduction of the EUROPASS.

EUROPASS training and its implementation ROC Noorderpoort College learned about the EUROPASS initiative through an informationmeeting of the National Contact Points and decided to participate in the initiative because itwas a valuable supplement to the certificate (diploma) obtained by the students. Since ROC Noorderpoort College already had a specific policy regarding internationaltraineeships, the decision to participate in the EUROPASS initiative did not lead to changes inthe implementation of international traineeships. The only aspect that changed was that at theend of the traineeship the students receive a certificate (diploma) that is officially recognizedby the European Union. EUROPASS offers a number of advantages, the main one being for the beneficiary, asstudents with EUROPASS documents have a better chance of securing employment in theEuropean labour market. The EUROPASS has also increased the visibility of the trainingperiods abroad because the students now official evidence of the activity they haveundertaken. The EUROPASS document may have a beneficial impact on the organisationitself because potential new students may hear about the EUROPASS (and about possibilitiesto follow a traineeship abroad) and, therefore, be attracted to follow an education at ROCNoorderpoort College. The costs of participating in the EUROPASS initiative are relatively small and in comparisonto the period before the EUROPASS initiative was put into practice the trainee-coordinatoronly needs extra time to fill in the EUROPASS document.

Innovation and good practice Mr. Hazewinkel of ROC Noorderpoort College indicates that the EUROPASS initiative needsmore promotion. His impression is that the EUROPASS initiative is not widely known amongother educational institutions (including other branches of ROC) in the Netherlands. The EUROPASS document is clear. However, Mr. Hazewinkel recommends the introductionof a digital version of the EUROPASS document.

In general EUROPASS has fulfilled people’s expectations in the sense that the EUROPASSdocument is officially recognised as evidence of the successful completion of an internationaltraineeship. In practice the EUROPASS has been of additional value for students followingtraineeships in “(international) trade and administration”, the “hotel & catering industry andthe tourist industry”. It seems of lesser importance for the students following a traineeship inthe Health and Welfare service.

CASE STUDY: NORWAY (NO)

Context

Sogn upper secondary school specialises in vocational training and is the largest of its kind inNorthern Europe. During the academic year 2000/2001 the school successfully applied for 30EUROPASS documents, whilst in the subsequent year 72 documents have been issued. The school learned about EUROPASS through the National Contact Point for which sharespremises with the National Leonardo Agency: “We received funding from the student exchange strand of Leonardo da Vinci during the firstyear. Afterwards, our students had to finance their training periods by loans and stipends, andthe administrative costs were born by the school.” EUROPASS training and its implementation Successful training abroad is achieved when the professional level surpasses what is offeredin Norway. On this point one of the apprentices who recently was in Bielefeld expresses anidentical opinion: “For me the stay was a success because the training centre and the car repair shops which wevisited were better equipped and had more qualified staff than what we normally find inNorway”.

A supervisor at the car repair shop where this apprentice now finishes his apprenticeshipperiod stresses that trainees with a EUROPASS document already have gone through aselection process and it is more likely that they are quality trainees. He adds that the mainasset of a EUROPASS pass holder is the technical and social competencies acquired duringthe training period abroad. This car repair shop received three EUROPASS holders when they returned from Bielefeld.The supervisor points to the fact that the repair shop also has been hosting German trainees aspart of an exchange agreement administered by Sogn Upper Secondary School. He goes on byaddressing the linguistic aspects of these exchanges: “If we e.g. could use English as a working language, the added value for us would increase. Ithink that the linguistic barriers reduced what we got out of German trainees who worked inour repair shop for a certain period”. The trainee’s period of training in Bielefeld formed part of an exchange agreement betweenhis school and the receiving organisation. Hence, he did not know at the start that he wouldreceive a EUROPASS document, which was awarded to him some months after his return toNorway. He is confident that the document strengthens his position in the labour market, buthe identifies some flaws in its layout:

“My document only certifies the length and the destination of my training period abroad,without telling what I actually learned in Bielefeld. I can justify this by showing my papersissued by the host organisation, but this information should rather be included in theEUROPASS document”.

Innovation and good practice In this case EUROPASS contributes to keeping the secondary school at the forefront ofvocational training, to the recruitment of mature apprentices to a combined car dealer and carrepair shop and to the acquisition of competencies that the trainee deems important for hisfuture career. But the effects outside the triangle of sending organisation, receiving organisation andvocational school seem to be limited. Whilst from a technical point of view the exchangesfunction well, dissemination activity relating to EUROPASS in the Norwegian labour marketis modest. This is linked to the loose connections between EUROPASS and other Europeantraining arrangements (like the programme Leonardo da Vinci). Although Albeit Sogn uppersecondary school received Leonardo funds to finance training certified by EUROPASSdocuments, the awareness among other stakeholders of the panoply of European trainingarrangements linked to EUROPASS appears to be quite limited. The inclusion ofsender/receiving organisations on a EUROPASS mailing list, in addition to involving them inongoing networking activities arranged by the National Leonardo Agency, may act to couldbetter embed the EUROPASS document in the Norwegian labour market.

CASE-STUDY: PORTUGAL (PT)

Context The Escola de Comércio de Lisboa is a private Professional School, founded in 1989, offeringan alternative to the standard educational system. It is based on the principles of technical andprofessional training for young people. The courses are classified as being at level III by theEuropean Union, and allow access to higher education or to a career in Commerce andServices. The Escola de Comércio de Lisboa supports the initiative EUROPASS, with thesame goal that support other community initiatives (SOCRATES and LEONARDO DAVINCI): that no student should complete the course without having done some workexperience abroad. For the development of EUROPASS, the Escola de Comércio de Lisboa establishedpartnerships with two host organisations: SUPEUROPA (in France) and TLSI - London SkillsInstitute (in England). The core business of both institutions is the teaching of languages. EUROPASS training and its implementation After the selection of the beneficiaries, an individual plan of activities was formalised (writtendocument) with the host organisations. Although none of the interviewees have referred to the existence of problems in theimplementation of the initiative, some limitations were found: - The initiative was not well known among employers (with an affect on participation)- The document caused confusion because it was written in the language of the sending

organisation;- The format of the document is not very attractive. Innovation and good practice The case studied shows some elements of good practices that can be followed by otherinstitutions. One of the good practices is based on the involvement and commitment of thesending organisation in several phases of the process: from the care taken in the selection ofthe host organisations to the attendance (in the 1st week and in the last week) of the traineesfamilies. Another interesting initiative by the sending organisation comprises the publicdissemination, by the trainees, of the apprenticeship experience and of the exhibition of theapprenticeship reports.

CASE STUDY: SWEDEN (SE)

Context Hwitfeldtska Gymnasiet is an Upper secondary school situated in Gothenburg in Sweden. It isa National Community School with approximately 1,800 students and 180 teachers. Differentprogrammes are available but students applying for EUROPASS are drawn from theprogramme of trade and business. Before becoming involved in the EUROPASS initiative, itparticipated in Leonardo da Vinci projects. This activity is still ongoing. The possibility of atraining period abroad as a part of Leonardo da Vinci increases the number of studentsapplying to the school and this particular programme. This opportunity is publicised on theschool’s website. The chance to apply for a EUROPASS is advertised by word-of-mouth. The school sends 10-20 students abroad with EUROPASS each year. Host organisations aredrawn from 10 countries and often take two or more students at a time. The organisationsrepresent banking, shipping, language education and retail trade. EUROPASS training and its implementation The school’s participation in the Leonardo programme makes it possible for students(enrolled on the trade and business programme) to undertake a training period abroad insteadof in Sweden. EUROPASS is now working alongside this initiative Several hosts participate from year to year, but no formal partnerships have been established.The school is, however, very pleased and satisfied with the co-operation so far. The school is working hard to ensure that training periods spent abroad are of a high qualityby producing a set of written goals in co-operation with the host and the student. In additionthe host organisations appoint a mentor to guide and assist the beneficiary, and the mentor isalso responsible for ensuring that the goals are fulfilled. Representatives from the school alsovisit the students half way through the training period. This is necessary to guarantee thequality of the training being received and for the final evaluation. The evaluation is made byall the participants and is the basis of the text in the EUROPASS document. In this regard theonly problem identified is that the form is hand-written, and therefore difficult to read. Gaining a EUROPASS gives beneficiaries the chance to seek employment requiring a higherlevel of qualifications and experience. However, at present EUROPASS is unknown byemployers both in Sweden and in other EU countries. As such, the students interviewed inthis evaluation have not used their EUROPASS when seeking jobs, mainly because they didnot think about it, but also because they did not think the employers would recognise it.However, as more and more people receive a EUROPASS it is likely that a greater number ofemployers will become familiar with the scheme and its value.

Innovation and good practice Preparation The school works hard to prepare the students prior to their stay abroad. However, thestudents are not always prepared for all the tasks they will have to perform. For example, inGermany, shop assistants are educated to a higher level than in Sweden. As a result, in onecase a student on undertaking a training period in Germany became an assistant to theassistant. This was very unsatisfactory, given the main goal that the student should gain aproper experience of work. Goals and Evaluation The three parties involved in the process (the school, the host and the student) describe thegoals of they wish to fulfil during the training period. This is a detailed plan and it may differfrom host to host depending on the nature of the organisation. The plan is evaluated half waythrough and at the end of the training and this provides the basis for the text in theEUROPASS document. The evaluation serves to make sure that the goals are fulfilled andimprove the quality of the future training periods.

CASE STUDY: UNITED KINGDOM (UK)

Context Park Lane College is a large Further Education College, providing for more than 32,000students each year across a wide range of subjects. It has a long track record of implementingEuropean projects, including Leonardo. The International Projects Manager oversees theimplementation of all EU projects, including EUROPASS. Park Lane College has sent 90-120 students abroad with EUROPASS, for each of the threeyears that the scheme has been in operation. These have been sent to 18 host organisationsacross 11 countries. Host organisations are from a range of sectors including tourism,agriculture, sports and recreation, and education. They include training and educationproviders, SMEs, large companies and employer organisations. The College also hosts between 100 and 300 oversees students per annum, although none hasbeen a EUROPASS beneficiary to date. However, the College is about to host 2-3EUROPASS beneficiaries from Minorca (Spain). Park Lane College’s motivation for involvement in EUROPASS was to strengthen thecertification of work placements abroad. The College had already made significant progressin this regard (prior to EUROPASS) through the creation of an OCN (Open College Network)module to accredit periods of work-based training abroad. EUROPASS training and its implementation Park Lane College implements EUROPASS as an addition to its Leonardo mobilityprogrammes, rather than as an initiative in its own right. Indeed, all EUROPASSbeneficiaries are undertaking training abroad supported by Leonardo. They do not activelychoose to participate in EUROPASS but are offered it as part of the overall ‘Leonardopackage’. The College has good partnerships with the host organisations through a history ofcollaboration in Leonardo projects. It seeks to work through good quality intermediaries inthe host countries who understand Leonardo and are themselves often sending organisations.These intermediaries have a good network of employers who are used to hosting students.Some intermediaries are employers (e.g. a hotel group in Spain) that the College has workedwith before whilst others are private colleges and private training providers. The College reports no particular problems in implementing EUROPASS, other than the timeand resources necessary for administering it. It reports that the main weakness ofEUROPASS is the format of the document, particularly since it is hand-written. It oftenbecomes tatty and does not look sufficiently ‘official’. Moreover, the information recorded inthe document by employers can vary considerably, particularly responses to Question 17.

The main weakness of EUROPASS, as reported by the College, is the low value placed on itby employers and beneficiaries. For beneficiaries, the placement itself is of most importance.The tutor interviewed reported that beneficiaries do not generally understand the purpose ofEUROPASS and are unlikely to use it after completing the training abroad. Moreover, it is oflittle additional value, since their training abroad is already credited through an OCN module.The tutor also reported that employers do not understand the purpose of EUROPASS but seeit a bureaucratic tool of education and training systems, rather than as something with value inthe labour market. Notwithstanding these comments, the College remains supportive of EUROPASS and willcontinue to implement it. EUROPASS supports the College’s objective of accrediting work-based learning abroad. However, the College sees EUROPASS more as a step in the rightdirection (towards certifying and accrediting work-based learning abroad), rather than as anend in itself. Innovation and good practice Elements of good practice result from the working arrangements for Leonardo, rather thanspecifically for EUROPASS. They include: � OCN accreditation of training abroad The College has developed an OCN-accredited module, to accredit work-based trainingabroad and to which EUROPASS is linked. All EUROPASS beneficiaries who successfullycomplete the training gain this accreditation. � Partnership "Guide to Good Practice", linked to OCN accreditation. This comprehensive guide is supplied to intermediaries, host employers and beneficiaries. Itincludes an agreement between the College and the host, guidelines for employers, abeneficiary CV, insurance details and guidelines for the beneficiary. All partners (includingbeneficiaries) therefore know what is expected of them � Strong relationships with host organisations

The College has well-established working arrangements with the host organisations, whichincludes formal partnership agreement and contract arrangements. These establishedarrangements help to ensure high quality of training placements. � Mentoring of beneficiaries Host organisations appoint a mentor to oversee the beneficiary during the placement. ParkLane College trainers also act as mentors, visiting the beneficiary halfway into theprogramme. Beneficiaries are not necessarily academic achievers, so mentoring is crucial tothe success of placements.

� Weekly log book of activities To enable the OCN accreditation process, there is a detailed beneficiary log of activities.Employers complete a report each week, which includes recommendations, problems andactions for the next week.

Annex Two

Tender Specifications

EUROPEAN COMMISSIONDirectorate-General for Education and Culture

Vocational trainingDevelopment of vocational training policy

Brussels, January 2002DG EAC B/1/CSC D(2002)

SPECIFICATIONS APPLICABLE TO THE INVITATION TO TENDER EAC/81/01Public service contract No DG EAC 81/01, to be awarded by restricted procedure andby invitation to tender, following the call for expressions of interest concerning theprovision of services in the field of education, vocational training, culture, audiovisualpolicy, sport, citizenship and youth (DG EAC/21/2000) and the call for expressions ofinterest in the field of evaluation (DG BUDG 2000/S 203-130610).

TITLE: Mid-term evaluation of the Decision of the Council 1999/51/EC on the promotionof European pathways for work-linked training, including apprenticeship (“EuropassTraining”).

@These specifications and its annexes are available in English and French aselectronic files and can be sent on request in either MS Word format or RTF.Requests should be addressed to:

- Hortensia Velez, e-mail “[email protected]”; or- Carlo Scatoli, e-mail “[email protected]”.

1. Introduction – Background information

1.1 Introduction. The “Europass Training” initiative

1.1.1 Legal basisThe decision of the Council (1999/51/EC) of 21 December 1998 on the promotion ofEuropean pathways for work-linked training, including apprenticeship, was published inthe OJ L 17 of 22 January 1999, p. 45, and entered into force on 1st January 2000.

The text, here enclosed as Annex 6, is available in all EU languages athttp://europa.eu.int/comm/education/europass/index_en.html.

1.1.2 The main concepts

The decision defines the “European training pathways” and creates the Communityinformation document, “Europass Training”.

“European training pathway” means any period of vocational training completed by aperson undergoing work-linked training as part of their training in another MemberState, complying with a number of quality criteria. This involves, in particular, forming apartnership between the establishment where the person completes his training and thehost body abroad. Within the framework of the partnership, both partners agree on thecontents, objectives, duration, methods and monitoring of the European pathway

In order to testify such a European pathway for training and to provide bettertransparency and greater visibility to these training periods abroad, a standardCommunity information document has been created: the “Europass Training”, whosecontents and presentation are defined at Community level, is established by the bodyresponsible for organising the training in the Member State of provenance. Thisdocument provides the personal details of the trainee, information on the traininginitiative concerned – which includes the European pathway, and details of trainingperiods abroad (host partner, mentor, etc.).

1.1.3 The objectives of the Decision

The Decision mentions several global objectives, namely:� to improve the employment prospects of young people and contribute to a more

effective social and occupational integration into working life and the labour market;� to encourage the development of effective links between training and work

experience;� to promote the mobility of persons in training;� to promote the transparency of vocational training certificates;� to improve the quality and attractiveness of vocational education and training.The Decision aims at contributing to the achievement of these global objectives bypursuing its specific objective, which is the following:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/europass/index_en.html

� To promote periods of transnational mobility within work-linked training.

To reach this objective, several operational objectives are defined:� establishing implementation mechanisms at national level, in the framework of a co-

ordinated approach at European level;� setting up a system for co-ordination and exchange of information;� promotion of the initiative;� production and distribution of the “Europass Training” documents;� ensuring the quality of the European pathways.In the text of the decision it is also possible to identify some recommendations, that canbe considered as complementary objectives:� to take into account the specific needs of micro-enterprises, SMEs and the crafts

sector;� to take into account equal opportunities in relation to participation in European

pathways and take appropriate measures to that end;� to ensure overall consistency between the implementation of this decision and the

Community programmes and initiatives in the field of education, of vocationaltraining and of youth.

1.1.4 Implementation

The decision asks the Member States to designate one or more bodies responsible forensuring implementation at national level, in close co-operation with the social partnersand, where appropriate, with representative organisations for work-linked training. AllMember States appointed such organisms, which act as national contact points. Onlythese bodies are entitled to distribute the “Europass Training” to the organisations oftheir country which send persons abroad within the framework of European pathways.

The implementation of the “Europass Training” Decision is strongly decentralised, andthe organisational frameworks established by Member States are rather different. Theyreflect the features of the national training systems, in particular the relative weight ofwork-linked training and the relationships between national and regional levels. Quiteoften, two main contact points were created, one dealing with the educational system andthe other focusing on training and/or employment issues. Certain countries decentralisedthe implementation to an even larger extent, creating a network of regional bodies or anumber of delivery points targeting different users. The evaluator should take intoaccount the diversity of the national education and training systems and traditions intowhich the implementation of the “Europass Training” Decision has to fit.

The Decision No. 36/2000 of the European Economic Area Joint Committee(amending Protocol 31 to the EEA Agreement, on co-operation in specific fields outsidethe four freedoms Pathways, and concerning the “Europass Training” decision) wasadopted on 31.3.2000 and entered into force on 1.8.2000, the first day of the secondmonth after the Norwegian Government notified the fulfilment of constitutionalrequirements.

Therefore, the geographical scope of the “Europass Training” decision includes the 15EU Member States and the three countries of the EEA (Norway, Iceland and

Liechtenstein). Each one of these eighteen countries can fully participates in theEuropean pathways European courses, both as sending and as host countries.

The decision covers the period 2000-2004. Therefore this tender concerns a mid-termevaluation. It is important to note that the implementation of the “Europass Training”Decision actually began some months after it entered into force (1st January 2000): insome countries it started in Spring 2000, in others in Autumn 2000 or even later. In mostcountries, the implementation activities concerned by the evaluation will not havecovered more that 18-20 months.The amount of reference for the implementation of the decision is € 7.3 Million for theabove mentioned period. This amount is supposed to cover the production costs of the“Europass Training” documents and of promotional documents, the management costs atEuropean level – including evaluation – as well as to support the national contact pointsfor their implementation activities at the national level.

1.2 The “Europass Training” in the new policy framework

The “Europass Training” initiative is not a mobility programme and, in particular, it doesnot finance mobility initiatives. The European pathways recorded by the “EuropassTraining” documents can take place within the framework of any education and trainingprogramme or initiative, as well as outside any Community or national programme.

The aim of the Decision is to improve mobility in work-linked training (cf. below,§ 1.2.3), making its good effects more visible and easier to communicate. The “EuropassTraining” document is a tool of communication, which helps the holder to show potentialemployers or further learning institutions the experience gained through his or herEuropean pathway. It is more objective than a CV, as it is not completed by the holder,but by third parties – the sending and host body. However, it has no legally recognisedstatus, like a diploma.

This approach is therefore consistent with the recent extension of concern from thetraditional issue of the formal recognition of titles and qualifications – which remains animportant issue – to the transparency and transferability of qualifications and skills.Several instruments now exist or are emerging, in response to the need, evermore felt, tomake skills more transparent and easier to transfer. While the “Europass Training”initiative is clearly in tune with this developments, it is necessary to consider to whatextent an integration is possible with tools as diverse – but clearly interrelated – as theEuropean CV format, the diploma supplement, the certificate supplement, the “EURESCV search” tool, the European Credit Transfer System and other related initiatives.

Annex 7, Further information, gives references for background documents (§ 1).

To prepare the proposals for future developments, with the aim of providing theEuropean citizens with a coherent set of tools, a thorough mid-term evaluation exerciseis clearly necessary.

1.3 The mid-term evaluation exercise

In relation to the evaluation of the initiative, the Decision (Article 9) states the following:

“Three years after the adoption of this Decision the Commission shall submit to theEuropean Parliament and the Council a report on its implementation, evaluate theimpact of the Decision on the promotion of mobility in work-linked training, includingapprenticeship, propose any further corrective measures designed to make it moreeffective and make any proposals it deems appropriate, including budgetary proposals.”

The Commission has planned three correlated activities:

I. A mid-term implementation report, that the Commission will submit to theEuropean Parliament and the Council (available by March 2002);this report focuses on achieving the operational and complementary objectives,giving a picture of the implementation up to mid 2001.The selected contractor will normally use this report as a basis for analyses, ifnecessary updating and completing the information it offers.

A description of this report is given in Annex 7, Further information (§ 3). A draft report will be ready and could be sent, on request, around mid-february.

II. A seminar with the actors concerned – Member State representatives and experts –that should take place in Spain on 3-4 June 2002. The selected contractor is expectedto attend this seminar.

A draft programme is given in Annex 7, Further information (§ 4).

III. A mid-term evaluation (by the end of 2002).

2.0 Purpose of the contract

The contractor will carry out the third activity mentioned in § 1.3, point III above:� a mid-term evaluation of the “Europass Training” initiative.

2.1 Evaluation questions

The evaluation will provide:� useful lessons and recommendations for the management of the initiative in its last

years (2003 and 2004);

� indications for the development of its successor initiative in the new policyframework (cf. above, § 1.2). Particular attention should be paid to the opportunity for an extension of the“Europass Training” approach to forms of learning other than work-linked training.

In particular, it will provide substantiated opinions on the following questions to assessthe effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of the Decision.The evaluator should assess:

– the clarity of the specific and operational objectives;

– the extent to which the “Europass Training” initiative reaches its specific objectives– promoting periods of transnational mobility within work-linked training – andwhether the operational objectives are still the most appropriate to achieve this aim;

– the extent to which the outcomes and results attain the operational objectives; theefficiency in the use of resources;

– the extent to which the operational objectives are consistent with the operationaltools being developed in the field, and whether this could be improved;

– the extent to which the “Europass Training” initiative is consistent with the policydevelopments in the field of lifelong learning, particularly in relation totransparency and transferability of qualifications and skills, and how could aneffective integration be achieved.

– whether the specific objective – promoting the periods of transnational mobilitywithin work-linked training – is still relevant, in particular the limitation of itsscope to work-linked training;

– the taking into account of:� the specific needs of micro-enterprises, SMEs and the crafts sector;� equal opportunities in participation in European pathways.

2.2 Methodology

� Tenderers are invited to propose a methodological framework to conduct the intendedevaluation. They should present a detailed plan for providing answers to the mainevaluation questions, including proposals for indicators and criteria to be applied forassessing achievement.

� Tenderers may propose additional or more specific questions that they should addressin order to lay a basis for evaluating the main questions presented above.

� The contractor should work in close co-operation with the Commission and keep intouch regularly with the national contact points, which are the main informationsources. The national contact points are informed of this exercise and will beexpressly invited to co-operate, making all relevant information available to thecontractor.

The Commission will of course share all the available information with the contractor.However, it is clear that only the national contact points are in a position to inform thecontractor on most achievements, concerning the structure as well as the promotionactivities, the effective results in terms of the distribution of the “Europass Training”, etc.The implementation is largely decentralised. As a result, information is available atEuropean level only insofar as it is given to the Commission by the national contactpoints. In particular, certain national structures carried out or are carrying out evaluationexercises at national level, which will have to be taken into account.

� The contractor will have to collect and analyse quantitative and qualitative data,relying upon the implementation report that will be available in March. It is importantto note that the period covered by this evaluation (2000-mid 2002) is in practice rathershort, as the actual implementation started several months later – at different times ofthe year in the various countries. The amount of quantitative information will varysignificantly form one country to another, but, in general, it will not be a largeamount.

� A number of surveys will be necessary. In order to update and integrate theinformation already available in the implementation report and its annexes, a surveycovering all national contact points will be necessary.

To comply with the needs for further information it will also be necessary to envisagesurveys – with a representative geographical coverage – targeting other groups, namelythe “Europass Training” holders, the sending and host bodies and other mobility projectpromoters, policy makers, social partners and experts.The methodology and budget proposed in the bid should reflect these information needs.

A first list of quantitative data, as an indication which is by no means comprehensive, is proposed inAnnex 7, Further information (§ 3).

� Travel arrangements. For the collection of information from the national contactpoints as well as for any contact with the Commission, the intensive use ofcommunications technology should reduce displacements to a minimum. While itshould not be necessary to envisage travelling to all 18 countries, a representativeseries of visits should be planned.

The evaluation seminar scheduled for June 2002, will offer the opportunity for contactand exchanges. The contractor is expected to attend. The relevant travel and subsistenceexpenses should be included in the budget.In addition to these travelling arrangements, the evaluators should plan for threemeetings in Brussels.

� The evaluation exercise includes several activities and is part and parcel of theoperational implementation of the “Europass Training” initiative, which is carried outitself in a coherent framework of policy initiatives in the field of lifelong learning,focusing on mobility as well as on transparency and transferability of skills andqualifications. The contractor is expected to be acquainted with Communityprogrammes and initiatives in the field of education and training and be aware ofrecent developments. In particular, the attention of candidates is drawn to the growingintegration of education and training policies and the European strategy foremployment as expressed in the conclusions of the European Councils of Lisbon(March 2000) and Stockholm (March 2001), and to the effort of rethinking educationand training policies under the overarching framework of lifelong learning.

References for relevant documents, all available on the Internet, are given in Annex 7, Furtherinformation (§ 1).

� The vehicle languages commonly used within the “Europass Training” network areEnglish and French. Acquaintance with these languages is therefore mandatory – andshould be enough – for the team charged with carrying out the evaluation;acquaintance with further languages would be an asset.

3.0 Reports and documents to be submitted

The services provided by the contractor in performance of the contract will be the subjectof the following reports, three copies of which are to be sent to the Commission by thecontractor, in French or English – with the exception of the summary of main results,that will be in three languages: FR, EN, DE. The reports will also be sent as electronicfiles, in a format agreed with the Commission services.

Inception reportThe draft inception report, developing the methodology proposed in the contractor'soffer, should be produced and sent to the Commission for approval within 5 weeks ofsignature of the contract. On the basis of this draft report, a meeting will be held with theCommission at which the evaluation team will present the proposed methodology andwork plan for approval. The final inception report will be sent to the Governing Boardfor information;

Interim report

The interim report is to be submitted to the Commission within 15 weeks of signatureof the contract. This report will describe the services performed and the results obtained,indicating in particular:

- any overall impact which the results may have on the services covered by thecontract;

- the programme of services scheduled for the subsequent period.

Final report

The final report will describe all the work carried out and the results obtained inperformance of the contract, in the following form, that includes three separatedocuments:

- a main report of about 30-40 pages;

- an analytical and statistical annex;

- a summary of main results – maximum five pages (in EN, FR, DE).

The draft final report is to be submitted to the Commission no later than six monthsafter the signature of the contract by both parties. The Commission will then inform thecontractor of its acceptance or will make any necessary comments.

Within a month of receiving the Commission's comments, the contractor is to forward tothe Commission the final version of the report, either taking account of the comments orputting forward alternative viewpoints.

If the Commission does not make any comments in the month following receipt of thedraft report, the contractor will be entitled to request written acceptance thereof.

The final report will be deemed to have been accepted by the Commission if, within aperiod of one month from receipt of such request, it has not expressly informed thecontractor of any comments.

4.0 Payment arrangements

The payment arrangements are as follows:

– an initial payment of 30% within 60 days of the signing of the contract by the twoparties involved;

– a second payment of 40% within 60 days of approval by the Commission of theinterim report;

– the balance to be paid within 60 days of approval by the Commission of the finalreport.

Payments will be made to the contractor's bank account, on presentation of invoices.

5.0 Bids are to be drawn up with due regard to the provisions of the standard contractannexed to this invitation to tender (Annex 1)

6.0 Tenderers must include in their bid:

– all the information and documents needed to enable the authorising department toanalyse bids on the basis of the award criteria set out in Section 9; in particular,detailed information is necessary on the team that will be charged with carrying outthe evaluation;

– the financial tables as per Annex 2 to these Specifications, duly completed;

– the relevant bank details of the tenderer, showing the bank account number, theaccount holder (name and address), the bank/branch code and the BIC/SWIFT code(the form "Information relating to the tenderer" enclosed as Annex 4 to theseSpecifications, duly completed, may be used for this purpose);

– a declaration to the effect that the tenderer is/is not subject to VAT and, as the casemay be, the VAT number or certificate of exemption;

– the price in accordance with Point 7;

– candidates, whose file is not complete and who have received a letter as such from DGBudget, shall provide, together with their tender and in a separate envelope, thedocuments and information requested in view to complete their file. Otherwise, thetender will not be accepted.

7.0 Tenderers' attention is drawn to the following aspects in relation to the pricequoted:

– The total amount envisaged for the contract is comprised within € 90 000 – 110 000,including travel expenses.

– Prices must be quoted in euros:

Tenderers from countries not taking part of the "Euro" area must use theconversion rates published in the Official Journal of the European Communities, Cseries, on the expedition date of the invitation to tender;

– An all-in price is to be quoted (in euros), covering all of the work required;

– The price must be fixed and not subject to revision;

– The price quoted is to include a separate estimate of the travel and subsistenceexpenses, including meetings with the Commission.

This estimate is to be based on Annexes 1/III and 2 of these Specifications,including any travelling necessary for meetings with the Commission Educationand Culture Directorate-General and will, in any case, constitute the maximumamount of travel and subsistence expenses which may be paid for all of theservices.

While travel and subsistence costs are explained separately, they must be includedin the all-in price.

Under the terms of Articles 3 and 4 of the Protocol on the Privileges and Immunitiesof the European Communities, the latter are exempt from all charges, taxes and duties,including value added tax; such charges may not therefore be included in thecalculation of the price quoted; the VAT amount is to be indicated separately. TheVAT will not be taken into account when examining the prices quoted in the differentbids.

8.0 Bids must be drawn up in one of the official languages of the European Union andmust be submitted in triplicate.

9.0 Selection criteria

Tenderers must provide evidence:

a. that they are not barred under the terms of Article 29 of Council Directive 92/50/EECof 18 June 1992 (see Annex 5) relating to the co-ordination of procedures for theaward of public service contracts (OJ L 209 of 24 July 1992).

b. of their financial economic ability to take on the tasks specified in this contract. Suchevidence may be provided in the form of one or more of the following referencedocuments:

– appropriate bank declarations or proof of professional indemnity insurance;

– balance sheets or extracts therefrom;

– a statement of overall turnover or turnover relating to the services in question,covering the last three financial years.

If, for duly justified reasons, the service provider is not in a position to produce thereferences as requested by the awarding authority, he is authorised to provide evidenceof his / her financial and economic capacity by means of any other documentconsidered appropriate by the awarding authority;

c. of their knowledge of the context and object of the present contract and of theirexperience in similar services provided.

In particular, it is mandatory to enclose in the bid:

– a presentation of the team that would be charged with executing thecontract, identifying the contract project manager;

– the curriculum vitae and responsibilities of each consultant proposed.

10.0 Award criteria

The contract will be awarded to the tenderer submitting the economically mostadvantageous bid, on the basis of:

– the legal quality of the bid submitted (20 points):

- understanding of the problem, detailed level of analysis;

- quality of the proposed methodology and consistency of the work plan (includingthe timetable) with the tasks to achieve;

- composition of the team that will carry out the evaluation (to be detailed throughCVs and other relevant documents);

– the total cost of the project (derived from a clear and comprehensive budget plan).

Bids that don’t get at least 15 points on a total of 20 for the first criterion will bediscarded.

11.0 Duration of contract: six months.

12.0 Submission of a bid implies acceptance of our "general terms and conditionsapplicable to contracts" and all the provisions set out in the specifications, theinvitation to tender and any other relevant documents.

13.0 Bids must remain valid, in respect of all conditions, for a period of six monthsfollowing the deadline for lodging them.

14.0 Bids must be made with a letter of presentation (*), signed by the tenderer or anauthorised representative.

A signed bid is binding upon the tenderer vis-à-vis the awarding authority. The tenderermust indicate clearly the identity of the organisation concerned: business name (full legaltitle); short name (where appropriate); acronym (where appropriate); legal status(association, commercial company, university or other), VAT No (where appropriate);address; and any other relevant information.

(*) Annex 4 "Information relating to the tenderer" may be used.

15.0 Submission of bids

Tenderers can opt to submit their bids:

a) either by registered mail, posted no later than 11th March 2002, as evidenced bythe postmark, to the postal address below:

European CommissionDirectorate-General for Education and Culture

Unit B/1“Europass Training – Mid-term Evaluation”

Office: B—7 5/30B-1049 Brussels

b) or by hand (delivered by the tenderer or by any authorised representative,including private courier) to the secretariat of the department concerned:

European CommissionDirectorate-General for Education and Culture

Unit B/1“Europass Training – Mid-term Evaluation”

7 rue Belliard / Belliardstraat 7Fifth Floor, Office 5/30

Brussels

no later than 4 p.m. on 11th March 2002. In this case, proof of submission willtake the form of a receipt dated and signed by the official to whom the documentsare handed over.

Tenderers are asked to check, before 18th March 2002, the good reception of their bids,no matter whether they followed option a) or b), by addressing one of the followingofficials, preferably by e-mail:

- Carlo Scatoli, e-mail “[email protected]”, tel. +32.2.29.57033;

- Hortensia Velez, e-mail “[email protected]”, tel. +32.2.29.98283.

Bids must be submitted in two envelopes, one inside the other, both of them sealed. Theinner envelope, addressed to the department concerned, is to be marked:

“Appel d’offres nº DG EAC 81/01A ne pas ouvrir par le service du courrier ni par le secrétariat”

(= “Invitation to tender No DG EAC 81/01 – Not to be opened by the internal maildepartment nor by the secretariat”). If self-adhesive envelopes are used, they must besealed with adhesive tape and the sender must sign across this tape.

16.0 The cost of submitting a bid is to be met by the tenderer.

17.0 PublicationThe rights relating to the report and to its reproduction and publication will remain theproperty of the European Commission. Any document based wholly or partly on thework carried out under the contract may be published only with the formal writtenagreement of the European Commission.

18.0 Tenderers will be informed of the outcome of their bids.

* * *

Annexes:

1 Model contract *II General conditionsIII Reports and documentsIV Reimbursement of expenses

2 Financial tables3 General terms and conditions applicable to contracts4 Information relating to the tenderer5 Article 29 of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the

coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts (OfficialJournal L 209 of 24 July 1992)

6 Decision of the Council (1999/51/EC) of 21 December 1998 on the promotionof European pathways for work-linked training, including apprenticeship

7 Further information

* The contract that will be sent to the selected applicant will also include an Annex 1.I, “Program ofwork”.

Annex Three

Supplementary Tables

EVALUATION APPROACH AND KEY EVALUATION TOOLS On the basis of our interpretation of the evaluation objectives and key aspects as described inthe Terms of Reference and summarised in section 2 above, our methodology has beendeveloped in order to address three core evaluation issues (see table 1). Table 1: Evaluation content Analytical Dimension

Perceivedappropriateness

Impact Management andimplementation

Level ofAnalysis

EU Beneficiaries EU

National Contact Points Participatingorganisations

National

Key stakeholders atnational level

National policies Regional

National experts EU policies Participatingorganisations

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting The issues above are closely interrelated and complementary. For example, the assessment ofmanagement and implementation structures and procedures will strongly feed into theassessment of the impact of the initiative and vice-versa. The methodology and data collectiontechniques for the study are related to the above issues in table 2. Table 2: Evaluation tools

Object Tools Appropriateness Desk research, interviews with EU policy makers,

NCPs, key stakeholders at national level and nationalexperts.

Impact Desk research, host and sending organisationssurvey, NCPs and EU policy makers interviews, casestudies, desk research, data grid.

Management and implementation Desk research, data grid, interviews with EU policymakers, NCPs, case studies.

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting An overview of the stakeholders to be approached during the evaluation and the evaluationtools used are given in table 3.

Table 3: Stakeholder groups and evaluation tools Stakeholder Group Evaluation tool

EU In-depth qualitative interviews National Contact Points In-depth qualitative interviews, data grid,

qualitative analysis of available secondary datafrom national evaluations

Other national and sub-nationalOrganisations

Qualitative analysis of available secondary datafrom national evaluations and information frominterviews with NCPs

Key experts at national level In-depth qualitative interviews Participating organisations Survey, data grid, case studies, qualitative analysis

of available secondary data from nationalevaluations

Beneficiaries Survey, data grid, case studies, qualitative analysisof available secondary data from nationalevaluations

Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting Quantitative Information from National Contaxt PointsThe quantitative information provided in this report was obtained from NCPs. Available datafrom NCPs was recorded for different time periods. The period to which data for each NCPrefer is given in table 4. Table 4: Period to which data refers

Country Period to which data refers AT 01/ 00 to 12/ 01 Be (De) 10/ 00 to 09/ 02 Be (Fr) * Be (Nl) * De * Dk 01/ 00 to 07/ 02 E 04/ 02 to 09 / 02 Fin 01/ 00 to 05/ 02 Fl 01 /00 to 09/ 02 Fr * Gr * Ie * Is 08/ 00 to 08/ 02 It 11/ 00 to 08/ 02 Lu * Nl * No 08/ 00 to 08/ 02 Pt * Se 04 / 02 to 10 / 02 UK * Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting

* Information not available.

The differences in the periods for which data has been collected in each NCP reflect to someextent the different timing in the opening of NCPs, which is given below, in table 5.

Table 5: NCPs opening dates

Country NCP opening data AT 01/ 00 Be (De) 10/ 00 Be (Fr) 03/00 Be (Nl) * De Autumn 1999 Dk 01 / 00 E 04 / 02 Fin 01/ 00 Fl 09 / 00 Fr / 99 operative in 2000 Gr 01/ 00 Ie / 98 Is 08 / 00 It 11/ 00 Lu / 00 Nl 01 / 99 No 08 / 00 Pt 02 / 00 Se 08/ 00 UK 12 / 99 operative since 05/ 00 Source: ECOTEC Research and Consulting

* Information not available Table number 6: Relation between data grid questions and report tables Table number Data grid question 2 3.1 & 3.2 3 3.5 4 3.7 5 4.1.1 6 4.1.2 7 4.1.4 8 4.1.5 9 4.1.7 10 5.1 11 5.3 12 5.5 18 4.1.8

Table number 7: Relation between interviews with NCPs and report tables. Table number Question number in interview with NCP

questionnaire 1 Sections 1, 4.1 & 4.2 14 8.1 15 8.2 16 8.3 17 8.4 19 7.2 & 8.6

Table number 8: Participation: Main reasons for non-participation (beneficiaries) Reason Number of NCPs agreeing (n=18) Lack of knowledge of the initiative 12 Unawareness of the benefits of the initiative 8 Lack of interest by individuals 5 Lack of support in the application by sending organisation 4 Unclear application procedures 2

Table number 9: Participation: Main reasons for non-participation (organisations) Reason Number of NCPs agreeing (n=15) Lack of knowledge of the initiative 13 Unawareness of the benefits of the initiative 10 Lack of interest from potential applicants within theorganisation

8

Lack of interest from organisations 7 Document shortcomings 4

Table number 10: Wide national and EU objectives: Has EUROPASS been an effectivetool for stimulating training periods abroad

Yes No Don’t know/ no answer 3 13 3

Table number 11: Wide national and EU objectives: Has EUROPASS been an effectivetool for improving the quality of training periods abroad


Table number 12: Wide national and EU objectives: Has EUROPASS been an effective tool forimproving the recognition of training periods abroad


Table number 13: Wide national and EU objectives: Has EUROPASS been an effective tool forincreasing the visibility of training periods abroad


Table number 14: Wide national and EU objectives: Has EUROPASS been an effective tool forincreasing the transparency of training periods abroad


Table number 15: Wide national and EU objectives: Has EUROPASS been an effective tool forsupporting mobility of people in training


Table number 16: Wide national and EU objectives: Has EUROPASS been an effective tool forimproving the links between training and work experience


Table number 17: Wide national and EU objectives: Has EUROPASS been an effective tool forpromoting vocational training


Annex Four

References

ReferencesBarbier et. al. (2002). “European Digest”, Journal of European Social Policy, 12(2).

Barcelona European Council (2002) “Presidency conclusions”. March 2002.

CIRIUS (2002) “Internationalisering af de danske uddannelser”, Denmark.

European Council (1999) “Council Decision on the promotion of European pathways inwork-linked training including apprenticeship”http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/europass/decen.pdf

European Commission (1999) “EUROPASS Training Information booklet”http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/europass/broch_en.pdf

- (2000) “Implementation of the White Paper “Teaching and Learning –Towards the learning society”” COM (1999) 750 Final.

- (2001) “New European Labour Markets, open to All, with access for all”COM (2001) 116 Final

- (2001) “Making a European Area of Lifelong Learning a Reality” COM(2001) 678 Final

- (2001) “Passport to mobility: Learning differently, learning abroad”Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

- (2002) “Commission’s Action Plan for skills and mobility” COM (2002) 72.

- (2002) “Report on the implementation of the Decision 1999/51 EC of theCouncil of 21 December 1998 on the promotion of European pathways inwork-linked training, including apprenticeship” COM (2002) 214 Final.

- (2002) “Increased co-operation in European vocational education andtraining” Unpublished.

- (2002) “Increased co-operation in vocational education and training:towards an integrated approach” Unpublished.

European Forum in the field of Transparency of Vocational Qualifications (2000) “Achievingmobility by improving transparency of vocational qualifications: A proposal for action.”Unpublished.

EUROSTAT/European Commission (2002) “The social situation in the European Union:2002” Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.

FBH (2001) “Evaluation des EUROPASS Berufsbildung” Köln.

http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/europass/decen.pdf


Annex Five

Methodological Tools

Mid-term Evaluation of Decision of theCouncil 1999/51/EC on the promotion ofEuropean Pathways for work-linked training,including apprenticeship (“EUROPASSTraining”)


Topic Guides for discussion with National Contact Points

ECOTEC Research and Consulting Limited Priestley House

28-34 Albert Street Birmingham B4 7UD UK Tel: +44 (0)121 616 3600 Fax: +44 (0)121 616 3699

Name and address of interviewee

Country ............................................................................................................................................. Name (person filling the questionnaire)......................................................................................... Institution/ Organisation ...................................................... City....................................................................................... Telephone number ............................................................... E-mail address...................................................................... National Contact Point opening date ...................................

Name and address of contact person for the purposes of the mid-term evaluation(if different)

Name (person filling the questionnaire)............................... Institution/ Organisation ...................................................... City....................................................................................... Telephone number ............................................................... E-mail address...................................................................... Period to which data refers in the answers (please specify the period to which the datagiven refers in answering the questions whenever different): from to

Interviewer........................................................................................................................................ Date of interview.................................................................. SECTION ONE- National Contact Point and management and implementationstructures

1.1 When was the National Contact Point set up? ...................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 1.2 What types of activities outside EUROPASS is the NCP organisationresponsible for? ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

1.3 How many people work in the EUROPASS initiative in total in this country?And in this National Contact Point? .....................................................................

......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 1.4 How is the level of financial and human resources available at national levelin relation to given time-scales and targets for the initiative (from 1= verydeficient; 2= deficient; 3=adequate; 4=more than the necessary)? –please specify.......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 1.3 Had your organisation had previous experience with other initiatives and/oractivities of the European Commission previously to EUROPASS? ....................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... SECTION TWO- EUROPASS AWARENESS 2.1 Have you used or received any promotional material of EUROPASS? If yes,which ones? And what did you think about each item in terms of, Source Number of items Usefulness of the item Item description E.C. Nat. Sub-

Nat. Notsufficient

Sufficient Poor Average Good

2.2 Have any internet sites or on-line information systems been established forthe dissemination of the initiative and how effective have these been? ................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2.3 How effective overall has been the publicity campaign for EUROPASS in thiscountry? ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... SECTION THREE- EUROPASS APPROPRIATENESS EUROPASS INITIATIVE 3.1 How clear is the understanding of the specific and operational objectives ofEUROPASS (as stated in the decision) amongst NCPs? ........................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 3.2 How clearly understood is it by employers and beneficiaries?........................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 3.3 How effective has EUROPASS been in promoting periods of transnationalmobility within work-linked training?........................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 3.4 How can this effectiveness be monitored quantitatively? ................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 3.5 How much has EUROPASS succeeded in targeting disadvantaged groups? ... .........................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 3.6 How much has EUROPASS succeeded in targeting SMEs? How can it bemade more attractive to them?.................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... EUROPASS DOCUMENT 3.7 How would you assess the EUROPASS document in terms of clarity,transparency and transferability?............................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 3.8 Question 17 of the EUROPASS document is currently completed in a veryvariable way. How do you think guidance should be given in relation to what itought to contain............................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 3.9 What other improvements could be made to the document or its format (e.g.electronic version)? ...................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 3.10 Does EUROPASS help a host body to define the objectives of the training intheir organisation? How does EUROPASS format now allow for this? ................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

3.11 Are there any standards set on the translation between the language of thecountry of the sending organisation and the country of the host organisation? ..... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... SECTION FOUR- MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATIONSTRUCTURES AND PROCEDURES 4.1 Management 4.1.1 How is the initiative implemented in your country and how is the supply ofthe EUROPASS training document organised?......................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 4.1.2 Are all relevant stakeholders adequately represented in the implementationstructure of the initiative? EC ................................................................................................................................... NCPs ............................................................................................................................... Beneficiaries ................................................................................................................... Participating organisations.............................................................................................. Other –please specify...................................................................................................... 4.1.3 At programme launch, were roles, responsibilities and tasks clearly definedand understood by the actors involved ....................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... EC ................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... NCPs ............................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Other national and sub-national public organisations (please specify)........................... ......................................................................................................................................... Beneficiaries ................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Host and sending organisations ...................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Other (please specify) ..................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 4.1.4 Were time-scales for the implementation of the initiative at national levelrealistically set? If any delays in the implementation of the initiative occurredplease explain................................................................................................................. .........................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 4.1.5 What were the main obstacles encountered with regards to managing,implementing and evaluating the initiative at national level? ................................. ......................................................................................................................................... Managing ........................................................................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... Implementing .................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... Evaluating ....................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 4.1.6 How were these overcome and systems improved? .......................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 4.2 Territorial Organisation 4.2.1 How effective has it been having a decentralised management structure forthe initiative? Decentralised from the EC.............................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Decentralised at national level (if applicable)................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 4.2.2 Have responsibilities in the implementation of the initiative being given toregional organisations? If “yes” why was this option preferred ............................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

4.3 Audit and quality assurance 4.3.1 Have any auditing and/or evaluation procedures have taken place?.............. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................... 4.3.2 How is the respect of the quality criteria established at European level forthe “European Training Pathways” ensured? ........................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 4.3.3 How is it checked that the “EUROPASS Training” documents are actuallygiven to persons having the right to it?....................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 4.3.4 What measures have been established to ensure data collection at nationallevel to monitor and assess the initiative (e.g. by means of questionnaires) ............ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... SECTION FIVE- POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL IMPACT

5.1 Policy impact 5.1.1 Are there any complementary initiatives to EUROPASS in place in yourcountry? ......................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.1.2 Were the initial objectives of EUROPASS in contradiction or in support ofnational education and training policies and the wider life-long learning agenda?In what ways?................................................................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 5.1.3 How relevant is EUROPASS in its current form for taking objectives ofnational education and training policies forward? .................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

5.1.4 If there have been significant policy developments in your country, do youthink that the initial objectives of the EUROPASS initiative are still relevant?Especially the objectives of “ promoting the periods of transnational mobilitywithin work-linked training” only?............................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.1.5 What are the main problems in the adaptation and use of EUROPASS inyour national education and training policy context? ............................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.2 Institutional impact

5.2.1 Efficiency and Effectiveness 5.2.1.1 How effective is the EUROPASS scheme within your Member Stateregarding Management processes ................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Results............................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... Outputs............................................................................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... Reaching target groups ................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.2.1.2 Overall, did you meet your initial target? Please identify success factorsand obstacles ..................................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. ............................................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... 5.2.1.3 How far have instances of good practice and/or lessons to be learnt beenidentified for the initiative and how could the efficiency and effectiveness of theinitiative be improved? ................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

5.2.2 Beneficiaries 5.2.2.1 What are the motivations of individuals to participate in the scheme ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.2.2.3 What are the main reasons for potential beneficiaries, who would qualifyfor EUROPASS Training (e.g. participants in the LEONARDO Programme), notto make use of it? e.g. –please reply to each Unawareness of the initiative.......................................................................................... Unawareness of the benefits of the initiative.................................................................. Lengthy application process ........................................................................................... Lack of support in the application by employers............................................................ Lack of other type of support in the application ............................................................. Unclear procedures in the application process................................................................ Lack of interest in the initiative ...................................................................................... Other (please specify) ..................................................................................................... 5.2.2.3 How does EUROPASS help to improve the employment prospects of thepeople who use it? What is the evidence in this respect? ......................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.2.2.4 What is the frequency of participants carrying out more than onepathway? ........................................................................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.2.2.5 What have been the main problems found by EUROPASS users/ host /sending organisations and the organisation in charge of the management of theinitiative in your country?............................................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

5.2.2.6 What is the evidence on the impact of the initiative on beneficiaries? ........ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

5.2.3 Participating Organisations 5.2.3.1 What are the expectations of companies participating in EUROPASS? ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.2.3.2 In which particular sectors/organisations was EUROPASS particularlyused/ unused in your country?..................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 5.2.3.3 What are the main reasons for potential host or sending organisations,who would qualify for EUROPASS Training (e.g. participants in theLEONARDO Programme), not to make use of it? e.g. –please reply to each Unawareness of the initiative.......................................................................................... Unawareness of the benefits of the initiative.................................................................. Lengthy application process ........................................................................................... Lack of interest by its personnel ..................................................................................... Lack of other type of support in the application ............................................................. Unclear procedures in the application process................................................................ Lack of interest in the initiative ...................................................................................... Other (please specify) .....................................................................................................

5.2.4 Wider European Objectives 5.2.4.1 To what extent do you think EUROPASS has been an effective tool toachieving the following objectives (please explain in what ways and providequantitative and qualitative evidence as much as possible): Objective Comments on the extent to which it has

been achieved and in what ways stimulating more training periods abroad?

improving the quality of training periods abroad?

improving the quality and recognition ofqualifications gained through periods abroad?

increasing the visibility of periods of trainingabroad?

increasing the transparency of periods of trainingabroad?

acting as a tool for supporting the mobility ofpersons in training?

improving the links between training and work-experience?

promoting vocational training and to make it moreattractive to young people?

SECTION SIX- PARTNERSHIP 6.1 What is the nature and functions of the partnerships between participatingorganisations and NCPs and the EC? ........................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 6.2 How formal/informal are they? ............................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

6.3 What is the level of communication between the participating organisations? ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 6.4 Is the exchange of information effective between the National Contact Points?......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 6.5 How effective is the ‘co-ordination and mutual information system’ agreedbetween the Commission and the Member States? ................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 6.6 How effective are the mechanisms set up by the Commission for theimplementation and exchange of information in EUROPASS? ............................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... SECTION SEVEN- EUROPASS AND OTHER EU INITIATIVES 7.1 How does EUROPASS integrate with European mobility programmes, suchas LEONARDO, SOCRATES and YOUTH? ............................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 7.2 How complementary are and how strong is the synergy between EUROPASSwork and other actual and potential mechanisms for ensuring the transferabilityand transparency of qualifications? ............................................................................ ......................................................................................................................................... European CV format ....................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Certificate Supplements ..................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................... European Diploma Supplement ...................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... European portfolio for languages skills .......................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... European credits on non-formal and informal training................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... European computer Driving Licence .............................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... EURES CV search tool ................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... European Credit Transfer System................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Other –please specify...................................................................................................... 7.3 Should EUROPASS be revised to enable it to support/ be central to the otherdevelopments mentioned above? If “yes” how? ....................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 7.4 What has the impact of the scheme been on the following Communityobjectives: Equal Opportunities ....................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Social Inclusion............................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Employment and competitiveness ................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... Promotion of lifelong learning........................................................................................ SECTION EIGHT- SUSTAINABILITYA AND REFORM 8.1 How would you judge overall results of EUROPASS in your country so far?(from 1= very poor; 2=poor; 3=normal; 4=good; 5=very good) ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 8.2 How would you rate the continuing relevance of the EUROPASS scheme inthe light of changing National and European policy contexts? (from 1= notrelevant, 2= partially relevant; 3=relevant; 4=very relevant) ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................... 8.3 How far is EUROPASS’s focus on vocational training justified? ...................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 8.4 How easily could EUROPASS be transferred to other education and trainingareas? ............................................................................................................................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 8.5 Do you think EUROPASS should continue in the future? ................................. ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... 8.6 How do you think it should be improved for the future –if applicable-particularly looking at? Integrating EUROPASS within other initiatives European CV format................................................................................................................................. Certificate Supplements............................................................................................................................ European Diploma Supplement................................................................................................................ European Credits on non-formal and informal training............................................................................ European Credit Transfer System............................................................................................................. Other –please specify................................................................................................................................ Integrating other initiatives within EUROPASS European CV format................................................................................................................................. Certificate Supplements............................................................................................................................ European Diploma Supplement................................................................................................................ European portfolio for languages skills .................................................................................................... European credits on non-formal and informal training............................................................................. European Computer Driving Licence ....................................................................................................... European Credit Transfer System............................................................................................................. Other –please specify................................................................................................................................ ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Extending its scope beyond work-related training.......................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Maintaining its independence and focus but re-vamping or improving certain aspects(like the document’s content or format).......................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... As part of this evaluation we will prepare several case studies of participatingorganisations, explaining their experience. Could you please suggest anyorganisations in your country which are examples of best-practice in respect ofEUROPASS. We also would like to interview experts in the initiative in your country.Could you please suggest any experts to us?

Proposed case-studies Name of organisation: .................................................................................................... Contact details:................................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Reason for selection: ......................................................................................................................................... ......................................................................................................................................... Proposed National experts: Name: ............................................................................................................................. Contact details:................................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. Reason for selection: ......................................................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................................................

Thank you very much for your collaboration

Mid-term Evaluation of Decision of theCouncil 1999/51/EC on the promotion ofEuropean Pathways for work-linked training,including apprenticeship (“EUROPASSTraining”)


Data grid to National Contact Points ECOTEC Research and Consulting Limited

Priestley House 28-34 Albert Street Birmingham B4 7UD UK Tel: +44 (0)121 616 3600 Fax: +44 (0)121 616 3699 Website: www.ecotec.com

DATA GRID TO NATIONAL CONTACT POINTS

Name and address of person filling in the questionnaire

Country ............................................................................................................................................Name (person filling the questionnaire)...............................Institution/ Organisation.......................................................City .......................................................................................Telephone number................................................................E-mail address ......................................................................National Contact Point opening date....................................

Name and address of contact person for the purposes of the mid-term evaluation (if different)

Country ............................................................................................................................................Name (person filling the questionnaire)...............................Institution/ Organisation.......................................................City .......................................................................................Telephone number................................................................E-mail address ......................................................................

Period to which data refers in the answers41: from toInterviewer ...........................................................................Date of interview..................................................................

SECTION 1- BASIC INFORMATION ON THE BUDGET

1.1 What has been the EU budget (committed and paid) for your country during 2001......................................................... Euros 2002......................................................... Euros 1.2 What have been the 5 most important budget headings in your country (pleasespecify amount)?

41 Please specify the period to which the data given refers in answering the questions whenever different

2001 2002 Type of activity Euros Type of activity Euros 1. 1.2. 2.3. 3.4. 4.5. 5.

SECTION 2- NATIONAL CONTACT POINTS (NCPs)

2.1 How many EUROPASS contact points are there in your country?

2.2 Are the EUROPASS NCPs linked to any other national or European organisation(e.g. Leonardo da Vinci national agency)? –please specify.

2.3 Are there any sub-national organisations involved as EUROPASS contact points?

Yes No

If Yes,REGIONAL LOCAL

Number NumberType of organisation Type of organisation

Functions Functions

2.4 Are there any sectoral organisations involved in the functions of NCPs?

Yes No

If Yes NumberSectorNature of the Organisation(s)

Functions

SECTION 3- EUROPASS DOCUMENTS

3.1 What is the absolute number of applications received for EUROPASS documentssince the initiative started? Please specify the period to which all data correspond.

3.2 How many applications have been?- Approved:- Rejected:

3.3 What are the most common reasons for rejection?

3.4 What is the number of EUROPASS applications as a percentage of the total numberof people in work-linked training in your country?

3.5 Please specify the number of applicants and the number of awarded EUROPASSdocuments by the level of education and training to which the applicants aspire –forinformation on ISCED levels please see Annex 1.

Applicants Awarded EUROPASS documents ISCED LEVEL 1 ISCED LEVEL 1ISCED level 2 ISCED level 2ISCED level 3 ISCED level 3ISCED level 4 ISCED level 4ISCED levels 5/6 ISCED levels 5/6

3.6 What has been the cost per unit (cost of operating the scheme/ number ofEUROPASS documents awarded) in this country?

3.7 Please specify the number of EUROPASS applicants and the number of awardedEUROPASS documents by economic sector in which the training would take part?

Applicants Awarded EUROPASS DocumentsSECTOR NUM SECTOR NUMAgriculture, Hunting and Forestry Agriculture, Hunting and ForestryFishing FishingMining and quarrying Mining and quarryingManufacturing ManufacturingTransport, Storage and Communications Transport, Storage and CommunicationsElectricity, gas and water supply Electricity, gas and water supplyConstruction ConstructionWholesale and retail trade, repair ofmotor vehicles, motorcycles andpersonal and household goods

Wholesale and retail trade, repair ofmotor vehicles, motorcycles andpersonal and household goods

Hotels and restaurants Hotels and restaurantsFinancial intermediation Financial intermediationReal state, renting and business activities Real state, renting and business

activitiesPublic Administration and defence Public Administration and defenceEducation EducationHealth and social work Health and social workOther Community, social and personalservice activities

Other Community, social and personalservice activities

Private households with employedpersons


Extra-territorial organisations and bodies Extra-territorial organisations and bodies

SECTION 4- PARTICIPANTS IN EUROPEAN TRAINING PATHWAYS

4.1 What has been the absolute number of participants in European pathways obtaininga EUROPASS document by

4.1.1AGE GROUP 15-20 20-25 25-35 35-45 45-

aboveNumber

4.1.2GENDER MALE FEMALENumber

4.1.3 Highest previouseducational attainment

ISCED 1 ISCED 2 ISCED 3 ISCED 4 ISCED 5 ISCED 6

Number

4.1.4PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONALSTATUS AT THE TIME OFAPPLYING FOR A EUROPASSDOCUMENT

In paidEmployment

Student(non-University)

Student(University)

Not in paidemploymentnot studying

Number

4.1.5 Country of destination (sent to)A B D DK E El F Fin Fl I Irl ISL L N Nl P S UK

4.1.6 Country of Origin (received from)A B D DK E El F Fin Fl I Irl ISL L N Nl P S UK

4.1.7LENGTH 1-2

weeks3-4weeks

2 –3months

4-5months

6-7months

8-9months

10-11moths

12monthsor more

Number

4.1.8 Number ofpathwaysfunded by

Leonardo daVinci

SOCRATES OtherEU/EEAprogrammes

Nationalprogrammes

Other Sources

Number

SECTION 5- HOST AND SENDING ORGANISATIONS

5.1 What has been the number of organisations participating in the EUROPASSinitiative in your country as

HOST organisations SENDING organisations

What have been the top 10 participating organisations in terms of number of pathwaysundertaken as host or sending organisation in your country?

HOST organisation SENDING organisation COMBINEDName and typeof Organisation

Number ofpathways

Name and typeof Organisation

Number ofpathways

Name and typeOrganisation

Number ofpathways

1

2345678910

5.3 Please specify the number of participating organisations (host and sending) byeconomic sector?

Applicants Awarded EUROPASS DocumentsSECTOR NUM SECTOR NUMAgriculture, Hunting and Forestry Agriculture, Hunting and ForestryFishing FishingMining and quarrying Mining and quarryingManufacturing ManufacturingTransport, Storage and Communications Transport, Storage and CommunicationsElectricity, gas and water supply Electricity, gas and water supplyConstruction ConstructionWholesale and retail trade, repair ofmotor vehicles, motorcycles andpersonal and household goods

Wholesale and retail trade, repair ofmotor vehicles, motorcycles andpersonal and household goods

Hotels and restaurants Hotels and restaurantsFinancial intermediation Financial intermediationReal state, renting and business activities Real state, renting and business

activitiesPublic Administration and defence Public Administration and defenceEducation EducationHealth and social work Health and social work





Extra-territorial organisations and bodies Extra-territorial organisations and bodies

5.4 Please specify the number of participating organisations (host and sending) by size ofcompany

Host Organisation Sending OrganisationSIZE NUMBER OF

ORGANISATIONSSIZE NUMBER OF

ORGANISATIONS1 12-49 2-4950-99 50-99100-249 100-249250-499 250-499500-999 500-9991000 + 1000 +

5.5 Please specify the number of EUROPASS documents awarded by size of sendingorganisation?

Sending OrganisationSIZE NUMBER OF EUROPASS DOCUMENTS

12-4950-99100-249250-499500-9991000 +

5.6 What has been the frequency of participation of host and sending organisations bysize of the organisation?

Host Organisation Sending Organisation

Number of

European

pathways

1-10 11-25 26+ Number of

European

pathways

1-10 11-25 26+

SIZE oforg.

Freq. SIZE oforg.

Freq.

1 100% 1 100%2-49 100% 2-49 100%50-99 100% 50-99 100%100-249 100% 100-249 100%250-499 100% 250-499 100%500-999 100% 500-999 100%1000 + 100% 1000 + 100%

5.7 How many host/sending organisations have participated in mobility programmesprior or during EUROPASS –mobility programmes are defined here as programmeswhich fund mobility of students at European, National or sub-national level?

Host Organisation Sending OrganisationPROGRAMME NUMBER OF

ORGANISATIONSPROGRAMME NUMBER OF

ORGANSIATIONSLeonardo da Vinci Leonardo da VinciSOCRATES SOCRATESOther Communityprogramme

Other Communityprogramme

Nationalprogramme

Nationalprogramme

Sub-nationalprogramme

Sub-nationalprogramme

Other programme(please specify)

Other programme(please specify)

Please add any additional data that you have collected and feel would be useful for theevaluation to be analysed

........................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................................................

Thank you for filling in this questionnaire

ANNEX 1: ISCED Levels

How to determine the level of a programmeProxy criteria for contents Name of the level Code ComplementaryMain criteria Subsidiary criteria dimensionsEducationalpropertiesSchool or centre-basedMinimum ageUpper age limit

Staff qualification Pre-primary education 0 None

Beginning ofsystematicapprenticeship ofreading, writingand mathematics

Entry into thenationally designatedprimary institutions orprogrammesStart of compulsoryeducation

Primary educationFirst stage of basiceducation

1 None

Subject presentationFull implementationof basic skills andfoundation forlifelong learning

Entry after some 6years of primaryeducationEnd of the cycle after9 years since thebeginning of primaryeducationEnd of compulsoryeducationSeveral teachersconduct classes in theirfield of specialization

Lower secondary educationSecond stage of basiceducation

2 Type of subsequenteducation or destinationProgramme orientation

Typical entrancequalificationMinimum entrancerequirement

(Upper) secondaryeducation

3 Type of subsequenteducation or destinationProgramme orientationCumulative durationsince the beginning ofISCED level 3

Entrancerequirement,Content,Age,Duration

Post-secondary non tertiaryeducation

4 Type of subsequenteducation or destinationCumulative durationsince the beginning ofISCED level 3Programme orientation

Minimum entrancerequirement,Type of certificationobtained,Duration

First stage of tertiaryeducation (not leadingdirectly to an advancedresearch qualification)

5 Type of programmesCumulative theoreticalduration at tertiaryNational degree andqualification structure

Research orientedcontent,Submission of thesisor dissertation

Prepare graduates forfaculty and researchposts

Second stage of tertiaryeducation (leading to anadvanced researchqualification)

6 None

Source: UNESCO ISCED (International Standard Classification of Education) Manualshttp://www.uis.unesco.org/en/pub/pub0.htm

http://www.uis.unesco.org/en/pub/pub0.htm

Mid-term Evaluation of Decision of the Council1999/51/EC on the promotion of EuropeanPathways for work-linked training, includingapprenticeship (“EUROPASS Training”)


Questionnaire for beneficiaries

ECOTEC Research &Consulting Limited

Priestley House28-34 Albert StreetBirminghamB4 7UD

Tel: +44 (0)121 616 3600Fax: +44 (0)121 616 3699

Questionnaire for beneficiaries of the EUROPASS scheme

The European Commission is undertaking an independent evaluation of the EUROPASSscheme. This evaluation will assess the impact of the EUROPASS scheme on participantswith a key focus on the impact that the scheme has on their future career prospects.

You have received this questionnaire as a previous participant in the EUROPASS scheme.The questionnaire will enable you to provide feedback on your experiences, which willcontribute to the overall evaluation. Findings from the evaluation will be used to revise theEUROPASS scheme, to make it more responsive to the needs of participants.

Please answer as many questions as possible and return the questionnaire, as this will help theEuropean Commission to improve the future running of the EUROPASS scheme. If you areunable to answer any question, please leave it blank. All replies are confidential and yourname will not appear in any report or other publication, without your permission.

It is important that you refer to the EUROPASS document and not to the period oftraining abroad when answering the questions. Please refer to the last period of trainingof training abroad recorded in your EUROPASS document unless otherwise specified.

You can fill in and submit this questionnaire:

� On the internet (English version) at

http://www.ecotec.com/europass/beneficiaries.asp

from the 23rd of October.

� By post:

EUROPASS EVALUATION TEAMECOTEC Research and Consulting LtdPriestly House28-34 Albert StreetBirminghamB4 7UDUK

� By e-mail to:

[email protected]



SECTION ONE- BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1.1 Please provide the following details:

Name (not compulsory):E-mail address:Gender: Male Female

3.1 What is your nationality?.............................................................................................................................................

1.3 In what country were you living when you applied for your EUROPASSdocument?.............................................................................................................................................

1.4 Where was the organisation where you did your training abroad based?

Austria Belgium Denmark

Finland France Germany

Greece Iceland Ireland

Italy Liechtenstein Luxembourg

Netherlands Norway Portugal

Spain Sweden United Kingdom

3.1 What was your age when you obtained your EUROPASS document?...................................................................................................................................

1.6 How many periods of training abroad are certified in your EUROPASSdocument(s)?

One Three

Two More than three

1.7 How long was each of those periods?

Period one ............................................................................................................................................................Period two ............................................................................................................................................................Period three ..........................................................................................................................................................Other periods........................................................................................................................................................

1.8 What was the highest level of qualification you had before starting the trainingabroad recorded in your EUROPASS -please remember that all questions belowrefer the last period of training abroad certified in your EUROPASS document?

Primary education / equivalent Tertiary education (non-university)

Lower secondary education Post-graduate qualification

Higher secondary education Other (please describe)

University education / equivalent

1.9 What qualification level were you aiming for when you obtained yourEUROPASS document?

Primary education / equivalent Tertiary education (non-university)

Lower secondary education Post-graduate qualification

Higher secondary education Other (please describe)

University education / equivalent

1.10 What training abroad did you undertake? Please tick as many as applicable.

Languages Safety

Accounts/ finance Data processing

Human Resources Hotels and restaurants

Marketing Real state/ renting /business activities

General Management Mining and quarrying

Fishing Public Administration and defence

Agriculture, hunting and Forestry Education

Manufacturing Health and social work

Electricity, gas and water supply Other community and social

Construction service activities

Wholesale and retail trade/ repair of motor Other –please specifyvehicles /personal and household goods

Transport, storage and communication

SECTION TWO – THE EUROPASS INITIATIVE

2.1 How did you first hear about EUROPASS?

Media

Fairs and exhibitions

Through European level information and publicity (e.g. Commission website, publication, leaflets, etc.)

Through national level information and publicity (e.g. National Contact Points activities, web-site,mailings, etc.)

Professional networks

E-mail groups

Education institution or training providers

Other –please specify

2.2 How supportive was the organisation where you developed the training certified inyour EUROPASS in respect of completing your EUROPASS document?

Very supportive Not supportive enough

Fairly supportive Not supportive at all

2.3 How would you rate the quality of your training experience abroad?

Excellent Average

Very good Poor

Good Very poor

2.4 How was the quality of the training you received in your host organisationcompared to the training you were receiving in your sending organisation?

It was at higher level It was at lower level

It was at the same level

Please explain: ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.5 What did you hope to achieve from the EUROPASS document?..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.6 What problems did you face in relation to EUROPASS (if any)?.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.7 What benefits did you get from your participation in the EUROPASS initiative?.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.8 Would you recommend the EUROPASS document to anyone?

Would strongly recommend it Would not recommend it

Would recommend it with reservations

2.9 How aware and interested in Europe do you feel since having undertaken thetraining abroad?

Much more aware/interested No difference

Slightly more aware/interested

SECTION THREE- THE EUROPASS DOCUMENT

3.1 How clear is the EUROPASS document? Very clear Not clear Relatively clear 3.2 How easy to complete is the EUROPASS document? Very easy No opinion Relatively easy Don’t know yet Not easy

3.2 What are the main problems with the document –please tick as many asapplicable? Size Unclear information Hand written Not sufficiently recognized by employers Not enough information Translation of its content Not relevant information Other (please specify) .......................................................................................................................................... 3.3 How could the EUROPASS document be improved?

1/...............................................................................................................................................2/...............................................................................................................................................3/...............................................................................................................................................

SECTION FOUR – THE EUROPASS EXPERIENCE AND WORKING LIFE

4.1 Please indicate your occupational status before undertaking EUROPASS trainingabroad

Paid employment Unpaid employment (e.g. voluntary work)

Student (university) Student (non-university)

Trainee / Apprentice Unemployed

Other (please describe)

If your occupational status was different to “paid employment” before undertakingEUROPASS training, please go directly to question 4.3

4.2 If your occupational status was “paid employment” before undertakingEUROPASS training, how would you classify your occupation at that time?

Manager / Senior official Professional

Associate professional / technical occupation Administrative or secretarial

Skilled trade occupation Personal Service Occupation

Sales or customer service occupation Process, plant or machine operative

Elementary / unskilled occupation Other (please describe)

4.3 What is your current occupational status?

Paid employment Unpaid employment (e.g. voluntary work)

Student (university) Student (non-university)

Trainee / Apprentice Unemployed

Other (please describe)

4.4 How would you classify your current occupation?

Manager / Senior official Professional

Associate professional / technical occupation Administrative or secretarial

Skilled trade occupation Personal Service Occupation

Sales or customer service occupation Student

Elementary / unskilled occupation Other (please describe)

Process, plant or machine operative

If you are a student please go directly to question 4.6

4.5 In which economic sector does your current employer operate? – please choose one

Agriculture, hunting and Forestry Financial intermediation

Fishing Real state, renting and business activities

Mining and quarrying Public Administration and defence

Transport, storage and communication Education


Electricity, gas and water supply Other Community, social and personal


Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motorvehicles, motorcycles and personal and household goods Private households with employed persons

Hotels and restaurants Extra-territorial organisations and bodies

4.6 How have you used your EUROPASS document since you received it and how?

Yes (please specify e.g. during job/ further study applications, etc.)..................................................

No

4.7 What have you done since obtaining your EUROPASS? –please tick as many asapplicable.

Continue training in the same training organisation as before EUROPASS Job seeking

Continue training in a different organisation Employment

4.8 How well known is the document amongst training organisations in yourexperience?

It is know amongst most of them It is not known at all

It is known amongst most of them Don’t know

Very few of them know it

4.9 How far is the EUROPASS document valued by training organisations?

Always / usually valued Not valued at all

Valued sometimes Don’t know

Rarely valued

4.10 How well known is the document amongst employers in your experience?

It is know amongst most of them It is not known at all

It is known amongst most of them Don’t know

Very few of them know it

4.11 How far is the EUROPASS document valued by employers?

Always / usually valued Not valued at all

Valued sometimes Don’t know

Rarely valued

4.12 How has your EUROPASS document contributed to your career development andprogression?

A lot Not at all

A little Don’t know

4.13 In which of the following aspects has the EUROPASS document had a positiveeffect for you? -please tick as many as applicable

Improved the chances of getting a job abroad Led to further training abroad

Promotion / new job Led to further training in my home country

Enhanced international awareness Greater self-confidence

Enhanced willingness to work abroad Other (please describe)

4.14 Do you have any other comments about EUROPASS?............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

SECTION FIVE –EUROPASS AND OTHER INITIATIVES

5.1 Did you use EUROPASS in conjunction with any other European Communityinitiative?

LEONARDO DA VINCI EUROGUIDANCE

SOCRATES None

YOUTH Other (please specify below)

.............................................................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................................................

5.2 What did you hope the EUROPASS document would add to you participation inthis other initiative?

..................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................

..................................................................................................................................................

Thank you very much for filling in this questionnaire.

Mid-term Evaluation of Decision of theCouncil 1999/51/EC on the promotion ofEuropean Pathways for work-linked training,including apprenticeship (“EUROPASS Training”)


Questionnaire to participating organisations


Priestley House28-34 Albert StreetBirminghamB4 7UD UKTel: +44 (0)121 616 3600Fax: +44 (0)121 616 3699

Questionnaire for participating organisations on the EUROPASS scheme

The European Commission is undertaking an independent evaluation of the EUROPASSscheme. This evaluation will assess the impact of the EUROPASS scheme on participantorganisations.

You have received this questionnaire as a previous participant in the EUROPASS scheme.The questionnaire will enable you to provide feedback on your experiences, which willcontribute to the overall evaluation. Findings from the evaluation will be used to revise theEUROPASS scheme, to make it more responsive to the needs of participants.

Please answer as many questions as possible and return the questionnaire, as this will help theEuropean Commission to improve the future running of the EUROPASS scheme. If you areunable to answer any question, please leave it blank. All replies are confidential and yourname will not appear in any report or other publication, without your permission.

It is important that you refer to the EUROPASS document and not to the period oftraining abroad when answering the questions. Please refer to the last period of trainingof training abroad recorded in your EUROPASS document unless otherwise specified.

You can fill in and submit this questionnaire:

� On the internet (English version) at


from the 23rd of October.

� By post:

EUROPASS EVALUATION TEAMECOTEC Research and Consulting LtdPriestly House28-34 Albert StreetBirminghamB4 7UDUK

� By e-mail to:

[email protected]



Name and address of person answering the questionnaire

Country ............................................................................................................................................. Name (person completing the questionnaire) not compulsory ....................................................Institution/ Organisation (not compulsory)...........................................................................Telephone number (not compulsory)....................................................................................E-mail address.......................................................................................................................

Please specify the date in which your organisation first applied for a EUROPASS document –if know. Month: Year:

If your organisation no longer participates in the initiative please specify the date in which yourorganisation last applied for a EUROPASS document.Month: Year:


1.1 What is the status of your organisation in relation to EUROPASS Training (tick as manyas applicable)

Currently participating as host organisation (organisation receiving people, for work-linkedtraining, who participate in EUROPASS)

Currently participating as sending organisation (organisation sending people, who participate inEUROPASS, to work-linked training abroad)

Not currently participating, but have participated as host organisation

Not currently participating, but have participated as sending organisation

5.5 How would you define your organisation?

Chamber of commerce/ industry /agriculture Private sector organisation

Employer Organisation Professional Organisation

Trade Union Public authority

European Organisation Research centre or institute

Training Organisation Public consortium

University Other –please specify

1.3 What is the size of your organisation all sites?

1-20 501-2000

21-50 2001-5000

51-200 More than 5000

201-500

ALL QUESTIONS BELOW REFER TO YOUR SITE

1.4 What is the main economic sector in which you organisation operates? –please choose one

Agriculture, hunting and Forestry Financial intermediation

Fishing Real state/ renting /business activities

Mining and quarrying Public Administration and defence

Transport, storage and communication Education


Electricity, gas and water supply Other Community, social and personal


Wholesale and retail trade/ repair of motorvehicles /personal and household goods Private households/ employed persons

Hotels and restaurants Extra-territorial organisations /bodies

1.5 Does your organisation have any sites abroad –please choose as many as applicable.

European Union Other international locations

European Economic Area No

Europe, candidate countries

1.6 How many “EUROPASS Training” certificates has your organisation been involved insince the launch of the initiative? Please include those that you currently involved in andtick as many as applicable

1-5 as sending organisation 1-5 as host organisation




50 + as sending organisation 50 + as host organisation

1.7 What beneficiaries participated mostly in EUROPASS in your organisation?

Those with less than 3 years working experience

Those with more than 3 years working experience

Not applicable (e.g. educational institution)

1.8 If you have participated as sending organisation, What proportion of EUROPASS holdershave carried out more than one work-related training period abroad?

Up to a quarter Up to three quarters

Up to a half More than three quarters

1.9 If you have participated as host organisation. What has/have been the subject(s) of thetraining provided in periods certified by EUROPASS –please tick as many as applicable?

Languages Safety

Accounts/ finance Data processing

Human Resources Hotels and restaurants

Marketing Real state/ renting /business activities

General Management Mining and quarrying

Fishing Public Administration and defence

Agriculture, hunting and Forestry Education


Electricity, gas and water supply Other community and social


Wholesale and retail trade/ repair of motor Other –please specifyvehicles /personal and household goods

Transport, storage and communication

5.5 In which economic sector(s) do trainees in your organisation look for their job when theyfinish their training? ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

SECTION TWO- EUROPASS INITIATIVE INVOLVEMENT

2.1 How did your organisation hear about “EUROPASS Training”?

Media

Fairs and exhibitions

Through European level information and publicity

Through national level information and publicity (including LEONARDO and EUROPASSnational agencies)

Professional networks

E-mail groups

Educational institutions

Other –please specify........................................................................................................

2.2 Had your organisation been involved with any other Community programme/ initiative inthe fields of Education or vocational training before EUROPASS?

Yes No

If yes please specify


SOCRATES Other (please specify below)

EURES........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.3 Had your partner organisation been involved with any other EU programme/ initiative inthe fields of education or vocational training before EUROPASS?

Yes No

Don’t know

If yes please specify


SOCRATES Other (please specify below)

EURES

....................................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................................

2.4 Have you read any EUROPASS promotional publicity? –tick as many as appropriate

Leaflet Internet, European Commission site

Brochure Internet other

Internet National Contact Points sites None

2.5 How would you rate the clarity of the publicity for EUROPASS?

Very good Poor

Good Very poor

Average No opinion

2.6 Have you recommended the experience to other organisation(s)?

Yes No

SECTION THREE- APPROPRIATENESS

3.1 How clear is your understanding of the objectives of EUROPASS?

Very clear Not very clear

Clear Very unclear

3.2 How would you rate your understanding of the equivalence of training levels between thehost and sending countries before your experience in EUROPASS?

High Low

Moderate Very low

3.3 How has that understanding changed since the involvement in EUROPASS?

It has improved significantly It has decreased slightly

It has improved slightly It has decreased significantly

It has not changed

3.4 Which of the following EU initiatives have you heard of? –please tick as many asapplicable

LEONARDO DA VINCI European Credit Transfer System

SOCRATES EUROGUIDANCE

YOUTH EURES CV search

EQUAL Marie Curie Fellowships

European CV format Other –please specify

Diploma and Certificate supplements

5.5 In your opinion, how complementary is EUROPASS to the following –please tick asappropriate

Verycomplementary

Relativelycomplementary

Notcomplementary

Duplicating No opinion /Don’t know

European CVformatCertificatesupplementsEuropean DiplomasupplementEuropean creditson non-formal andinformal trainingEuropean CreditTransfer System

3.6 Do you find European initiatives relating to the certification and transparency ofqualifications in the fields of education and training –tick as many as applicable

Clear Complex but manageable

Mostly clear with some difficult aspects Too complex to follow

3.7 What do you perceive as the main problems related to the EUROPASS initiative? –pleasetick all that apply and briefly explain your choices below.

Not well known by employers Linguistic problems

Not recognized certification Not appropriate format

Not attractive to employers Not enough emphasis on skills acquired

Not attractive to employees Other –please specify

Time-consuming application

3.8 To what extent does it help to develop links between training and work experience?

It helps a lot It does not help

It helps a little

3.9 How do you think that the EUROPASS document affects the employment prospects of itsholders?

Improves them a lot Does not affect them

Improves them slightly Decreases them

Please briefly explain how......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

3.10 Please briefly describe your expectations when you got involved in the EUROPASSinitiative, and what you wanted to improve/achieve by participating in EUROPASS

....................................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................................

3.11 What do you think that EUROPASS should certify –please tick as many asapplicable

Non work-linked training Work linked training

Informal training Formal training

Skills acquired abroad Training done abroad

3.12 How could EUROPASS be made more attractive to your organisation?............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

3.13 How would you rate the information contained in the EUROPASS document

Very useful Not useful

Useful

3.14 What sections would you improve and how?....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

3.15 Do you think an electronic version of the document would be beneficial?

Yes No

3.16 Why?............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

SECTION FOUR- MANAGEMENT

4.1 Where there any outstanding linguistic problems related to EUROPASS?

Yes, when recording the training period No

Yes, other (please specify)

4.2 What were the most beneficial and the most difficult aspects related to EUROPASS....................................................................................................................................................Most beneficial ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Most difficult ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

4.3 Were the main methods of communication adequate with?

Partner organisations Yes No

National Contact Point Yes No

4.4 How was the information received from National Contact Points when requested?

Very clear and accessible Difficult to grasp

Clear and accessible Very difficult to grasp

4.5 How is the respect of the quality criteria established at European level for the “EuropeanTraining Pathways” ensured from your organisation?

....................................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

4.6 Who in your experience has been involved in choosing are mentor(s) for the trainingrecorded in EUROPASS? -tick as many as appropriate

Host organisation Trainee

Sending Organisation Other –please specify

FOR SENDING ORGANISATIONS ONLY –If you have not participated as sendingorganisation please go to question 4.9 directly.

4.7 How do trainees in your organisation reacted when told of EUROPASS?

Positively Indifferently Negatively

4.8 If your answer to 4.7 has been “Negatively” please select the reason(s) for this

Lengthy application process Unclear application process

Unawareness of the benefits of the initiative Other –please specify belowby trainee

....................................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................................

FOR ORGANISATIONS ONLY –IF YOUR ORGANISATION HAS ONLY ACTED ASSENDING ORGANSIATION PLEASE GO DIRECTLY TO QUESTION 5.1

What help have mentors given to trainees?

....................................................................................................................................................

....................................................................................................................................................

SECTION FIVE -IMPACT

5.1 How do you think that EUROPASS affects trainees’ willingness to undertake trainingabroad

Increases a lot Increases a little It does not affect it

5.2 Do you think EUROPASS helps to promote vocational training and to make it moreattractive to young people?

Yes No

If “yes” in what ways?....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

5.3 How would you rate the quality of the training experience received by your staff abroadunder the EUROPASS initiative?

Better than average training abroad used before Lower than training abroad used before

Comparable with other training abroad No opinion

5.4 Has participation in EUROPASS increased the visibility of your organisation at Europeanlevel?

Yes, highly No

Yes, moderately

5.5 How would you rate effectiveness of EUROPASS in increasing –tick as appropriate

Veryefficient

Efficient Noeffect

Inefficient Veryinefficient

Don’tknow

Number of trainingperiods abroadThe quality oftraining periodsabroadQuality andrecognition ofqualificationsgained throughperiods of trainingabroadVisibility ofperiods of trainingabroad

5.6 How far have the objectives you had when you applied for a EUROPASS document havebeen fulfilled?

All fulfilled None fulfilled

Most fulfilled

5.7 Has your EUROPASS experience made it more or less likely that you look favorably inthe future on someone with an EUROPASS?

More Likely Less likely

5.8 Will your organisation continue to participate in EUROPASS in the future?

Yes Don’t know

No

If you were a sending organisation, could you give us contact details for the host organisationsyou worked with? –please fill in as available

Country ............................................................................................................................................. Institution/ Organisation.................................................................................................................Contact name ...............................................................................Address ........................................................................................Telephone number .......................................................................E-mail address..............................................................................

Country ............................................................................................................................................. Institution/ Organisation.................................................................................................................Contact name ...............................................................................Address ........................................................................................Telephone number ....................................................................... E-mail address..................................................................................................................................

Country ............................................................................................................................................. Institution/ Organisation.................................................................................................................Contact name ...............................................................................Address ........................................................................................Telephone number .......................................................................E-mail address

Please add more if necessary.

Thank you very much for filling in this questionnaire

Mid-term Evaluation of Decision of theCouncil 1999/51/EC on the promotion ofEuropean Pathways for work-linkedtraining, including apprenticeship(“EUROPASS Training”)


Topic guides for key stakeholders and national experts

ECOTEC Research &Consulting Limited

Priestley House28-34 Albert StreetBirminghamB4 7UD

Tel: +44 (0)121 616 3600Fax: +44 (0)121 616 3699

Country: Name of interviewee: Position: ............................................................................................................................................Institution/ Organisation ......................................................Position ................................................................................City.......................................................................................Telephone number ...............................................................E-mail address......................................................................

Interviewer:Date of interview:

SECTION ONE- EUROPASS AND NATIONAL TRAINING POLICIES

1.1 What is the level of integration of the EUROPASS scheme with national educationand training systems and national labour markets?

If it is integrated, in what ways is this?............................................................................................................................................................................................................................If respondent thinks it is not integrated ask reasons why (s)he thinks this is the case .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

1.2 How appropriate are the objectives of the EUROPASS initiative to the nationalcontext and wider lifelong learning agenda?

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

1.3 How appropriate is EUROPASS in its current form for taking these objectivesforward?

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

1.4 Are there any similar initiatives to EUROPASS in place in your country atnational or sub-national level?

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................1.5 Has the EUROPASS scheme caused adaptation and change in your country? -

ask for specific changes and adaptation

........................................................................................................................................................................

........................................................................................................................................................................

SECTION TWO- THE EUROPASS INITIATIVE

2.1 How well-known is EUROPASS in your country?....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.2 How effective is the EUROPASS document in terms of clarity, transparency andtransferability? –ask why in all cases.

Clarity ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Transparency.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Transferability...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.3 How could the document be improved in?

Clarity ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Transparency.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Transferability...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Other .............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.4 How effective is the EUROPASS scheme within your country according tomanagement processes, results and outputs and reaching target groups? Also askwhy.

Management processes .......................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

Results...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Outputs..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Reaching target groups ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2.5 How far have instances of good practice and/or lessons to be learnt been

identified for the initiative? ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.6 What have been the main problems found by EUROPASS beneficiaries/ host /sending organisations and the organisation in charge of the management of theinitiative in your country?

Beneficiaries .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Sending Organisations ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Host organisations.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

National Contact Points ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.7 In which particular sectors/organisations has EUROPASS been particularlysuccessful/unsuccessful so far?

Successful .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Unsuccessful .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.8 What is the degree of participation from the SME and craft sectors?

SMEs.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Craft Sectors..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.9 Does EUROPASS need to be made more attractive to SMEs? Why?

Yes No

If yes, probe on why and how? ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.10 Do you think that EUROPASS needs to be made more attractive todisadvantaged groups?

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

2.11 How could EUROPASS better reach disadvantaged groups?....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.12 How appropriate is the focus of EUROPASS on work-linked training?....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

2.13 In your opinion, should EUROPASS also encompass non-formal training? ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

SECTION THREE– EUROPASS AND OTHER COMMUNITY INITIATIVES

3.1 What is the overall added value of the initiative (note for interviewer: e.g.increases numbers of periods abroad, increases quality of training abroad,increases visibility of periods of training abroad)?

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

3.2 What has the impact of the scheme been on the following European Communityobjectives (note to interviewer: general answers are satisfactory)

Equal opportunities ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Social inclusion.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Employment and competitiveness ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Promotion of lifelong learning......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

3.3 What is the impact of the initiative on beneficiaries?....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

3.4 How do you perceive the level of integration of EUROPASS with Europeanmobility programmes, and European level tools for the transparency andtransferability of qualifications? –please refer only to those you are familiar with

European CV format .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

European Certificate supplements ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

European Diploma Supplement ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

European portfolio for languages skills ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

European credits on non-formal and informal training.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

European Computer Driving Licence ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

EURES..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

European Credit Transfer System.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Other – please specify...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

SECTION FOUR: FUTURE TRENDS

4.1 How are changing National and European policy contexts affecting the relevanceof the EUROPASS initiative in its current form?

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

4.2 Do you think EUROPASS should continue in the future?

Yes unchanged No

Yes, changed

If “Yes, changed” what changes do you think will be needed and why? .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

4.3 Do you think that EUROPASS should move from recording training done torecord skills developed during the European pathway and why –benefits ordisadvantages of such a move?

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

.............................................................................................................................................

4.4 How do you think it should be improved for the future in terms of?.............................................................................................................................................A/ Content and format ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

B/ Organisation in the context of the initiatives mentioned in 3.4 and the possibility of asingle EUROPEAN transparency framework encompassing the EUROPEAN CV,EUROPASS, European Diploma and Certificate Supplement ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Thank you very much for your collaboration.

Mid-term Evaluation of Decision of theCouncil 1999/51/EC on the promotion ofEuropean Pathways for work-linkedtraining, including apprenticeship(“EUROPASS Training”)


Interview checklist and reporting structure for project case-studies


Priestley House28-34 Albert StreetBirminghamB4 7UD UKTel: +44 (0)121 616 3600Fax: +44 (0)121 616 3699

Questionnaire for case-studies EUROPASS initiative

This is a topic guide to be used during the case studies’ fieldwork. This checklist is designedto collect information on best practices on the broad questions that the mid-term evaluation ofthe EUROPASS document is concerned with:

� The appropriateness of the EUROPASS initiative,� The impact it has had,� Its efficiency and effectiveness and� The way it has been managed.

In order to help you prepare the questions that you should examine with each case study, youcan also refer to the questionnaire that will be sent out to participating organisations andbeneficiaries This questionnaire can be used to prompt discussion in addition to the list ofmain questions, presented below.


1.1 Please provide the following details:

Company name:Interviewee:Location:

1.2 Description of the organisation:

Economic Sector:Legal status (Public/ Private organisation):Size:International/ National/ Local company:

1.3 Previous experience with Community initiatives (specially mobility programmessuch as LEONARDO):

1.4 How many EUROPASS documents have you successfully applied for since theinitiative launch?

SECTION TWO- HOST ORGANISATIONS

2.1 How many different host organisations have you collaborated with?

2.2 In what countries were they based?

2.3 In what sector did they operate?

2.4 How did you select the host organisation?

2.5 Why did you select them?

SECTION THREE- THE EUROPASS INITIATIVE

Involvement and appropriateness

3.1 How did your organisation hear about “EUROPASS training”? 3.2 Why did you decide to participate in the EUROPASS initiative?

3.3 How do you publicise the initiative amongst potential beneficiaries in yourorganisation?

3.4 Did you know any organisations participating in the initiative before you?

3.5 How is the quality of the liaisons with National Contact Points?

3.6 Do you think that EUROPASS is a good instrument for certifying periods oftraining abroad?

3.7 Is EUROPAS in tune with the objectives of your own organisation?

Management

3.8 What do you think are the key factors contributing to successful and lesssuccessful European Training abroad?

3.9 How do you agree the functioning of the partnership(s) with the hostorganisation(s) in terms of setting targets, time-scales, methods of communication andskills to be gained by the beneficiary?

3.10 What is the level of formality of the partnerships above?

Impact

3.11 What are the benefits of the EUROPASS document for your organisation?

3.12 What are the benefits of the EUROPASS document for its holders?

3.13 Do you think that EUROPASS has –please explain

Increased the quality of periods of training abroad

Increased the visibility of the training periods abroad

Increased your understanding of qualification and training systems from othercountries

3.14 What was the added value for your organisation and the beneficiaries ofEUROPASS training for the pathways achieved?

3.15 Did EUROPASS fulfil your expectations and objectives about it?

3.16 What extra-costs did you incur through EUROPASS?

Mentoring and Quality assurance

3.17 How are mentors for the training periods abroad chosen and how do they helpbeneficiaries?

3.18 Did you monitor (how) the quality of the training received abroad by thebeneficiary?

3.19 How clear do you think is the EUROPASS document?

Reporting format

This format is given as the minimum set of points covered in your report. Please addsubheading if and where deemed necessary.

1-Background information

Company name:Evaluator:Date of the interview:Location:Interviewee contact details:

2- Organisation (Economic sector, legal status, size, international/ national/ localcompany, number of EUROPASS documents)

3- Previous experience with Community initiatives

4- Partnership with host organisation (including sector, country and other backgroundinformation for this)

5- Involvement and appropriateness of the EUROPASS initiative

6- Management

7- Impact of the initiative (for beneficiaries, participating organisations, programmeobjectives)

8- Efficiency and effectiveness of the EUROPASS initiative from the organisation’sperspective

9- Mentoring and quality assurance

10- Elements of good practice and replicability of those for other organisations