Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Report on the Ex-post Evaluation of the Erasmus Mundus Programme 2004-2008
Date: 2009-12-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, cooperation policy, education grant, education policy, educational exchange, higher education, organisation of teaching, project evaluation, teaching quality, third country

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 22.12.2009 
COM(2009)695 final 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, 
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

Report on the Ex-post Evaluation of the Erasmus Mundus Programme 2004-2008 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE 
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Report on the Ex-post Evaluation of the Erasmus Mundus 
Programme 2004-2008............................................................................................................... 1 

1. 

2. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

3.3. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3 

Background to the external evaluation......................................................................... 3 

The external evaluation ................................................................................................ 4 

The terms of the evaluation.......................................................................................... 4 

Methodology ................................................................................................................ 4 

The evaluator’s findings............................................................................................... 4 

3.3.1.  Quality of Erasmus Mundus courses............................................................................ 4 

3.3.2.  Quality of Erasmus Mundus students and scholars...................................................... 5 

3.3.3. 

Impact on the "supply side" of higher education in Europe......................................... 5 

3.3.4. 

Impact on the international demand for European higher education ........................... 6 

3.3.5. 

Impact on students and scholars................................................................................... 6 

3.3.6.  Sustainability................................................................................................................ 6 

3.3.7.  Programme design and structure.................................................................................. 7 

3.3.8.  Programme management.............................................................................................. 7 

3.3.9.  Programme efficiency .................................................................................................. 8 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

5. 

Main recommendations of the external evaluation and comments from the 
Commission.................................................................................................................. 8 

Effectiveness ................................................................................................................ 8 

Sustainability................................................................................................................ 9 

Efficiency - programme design and management...................................................... 10 

The Commission’s conclusions.................................................................................. 10 

Statistical Annexes on application and selection figures ......................................................... 12

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, 
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

Report on the Ex-post Evaluation of the Erasmus Mundus Programme 2004-2008 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This report is presented under Article 12 of the Decision 2317/2003/EC1 of 5 December 2003 
establishing  the  Erasmus  Mundus  programme,  which  requires  an  ex-post  evaluation  of  the 
programme  to  be  carried  out.  It  puts  forward  the  Commission’s  position  on  the  main 
conclusions and recommendations of the ex-post evaluation that can be obtained via the link: 
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/evalreports/index_en.htm.  These  conclusions  and 
recommendations  are  based  on  extensive  surveys  of  Erasmus  Mundus  participants  and  key 
stakeholders. 

2. 

BACKGROUND TO THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION 

Erasmus  Mundus  2004-2008  was  a  co-operation  and  mobility  programme  in  the  field  of 
higher  education  intended  to  promote  the  European  Union  as  a  centre  of  excellence  in 
learning  around  the  world.  It  aimed  to  support  the  development  of  top-quality  European 
Masters Courses and to enhance the visibility and attractiveness of European higher education 
in third countries. The programme had, as its strategic aims, to improve the quality of higher 
education  in  Europe  and  to  promote  intercultural  understanding  through  co-operation  with 
third countries.  

The  specific  aims  of  the  programme  were  to:  promote  quality  and  excellence  in  European 
higher  education;  encourage  the  incoming  mobility  of  third-country  graduate  students  and 
scholars;  foster  structured  co-operation  with  third-country  higher  education  institutions;  and 
improve the profile, visibility and accessibility of European higher education in the world. 

The  2004-2008  programme  comprised  four  main  Actions.  These  were:  Action  1  -  Erasmus 
Mundus  Masters  Courses,  integrated  courses  at  masters  level  offered  by  at  least  three 
universities  in  three  different  European  countries;  Action  2  -  Erasmus  Mundus  scholarships 
for students and scholars from third countries; Action 3 - Partnerships with higher education 
institutions  in  third  countries,  including  scholarships  for  students  and  scholars  from  EU 
countries for mobility towards third countries; Action 4 - Projects to enhance the worldwide 
attractiveness of European higher education. 

1 

OJ L 345 of 31.12.2003. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION 

3.1. 

The terms of the evaluation 

ECOTEC  Research  and  Consulting  were  requested  to  carry  out  the  evaluation  under  their 
framework  contract  with  the  Commission2.  The  scope  of  the  ex-post  evaluation  was  the 
period 2004-2008, during which a number of calls for proposals took place to implement the 
programme, with particular attention being paid to the period since the interim evaluation of 
the  programme  in  2006-2007.  While  Erasmus  Mundus  Masters  Courses,  scholarships  and 
“attractiveness  projects”  (Actions  1,  2  and  4)  commenced  in  the  academic  year  2004-2005, 
Partnerships (Action 3) began one year later in 2005-2006. 

The  primary  objectives  of  the  evaluation  were  to  assess  the  impact  of  the  first  Erasmus 
Mundus  programme  and  to  reflect  on  lessons  learned  to  support  implementation  of  the 
successor  programme.  The  focus  of  the  evaluation  was  thus  on  the  "effectiveness"  of  the 
Erasmus Mundus programme - the extent to which the programme has achieved the objectives 
established for it at the outset. Alongside this consideration of short- and longer-term effects, 
the  evaluation  also  analysed  the  "efficiency"  with  which  Erasmus  Mundus  achieved  these 
effects3 and the extent to which the courses it supported are sustainable in the longer term.  

3.2.  Methodology 

The  methodology  included  desk  research  of  relevant  literature;  a  survey  of  institutions 
participating  in  Erasmus  Mundus  Masters  Courses,  Partnerships  and  attractiveness  projects 
(Actions  1,  3  and  4),  and  of  participating  third-country  and  EU  students  and  scholars;  and 
interviews  with  key  stakeholders,  including  the  Erasmus  Mundus  National  Structures  and 
participants in the four Actions of the programme. Case study visits covering twelve EMMCs 
were carried out. Triangulation and cross-verification of the collected evidence were present 
throughout the analysis. 

3.3. 

The evaluator’s findings 

The balance of evidence collected for the ex-post evaluation of Erasmus Mundus suggests that 
the  programme  has  been  effective  in  achieving  its  stated  objectives  and  has  created  a 
significant  Community  added  value.  Erasmus  Mundus  has  succeeded  in  bringing  together 
some of the best higher education institutions in the EU to offer 103 new and innovative joint 
masters  programmes,  which  were  unlikely  to  have  been  created  without  the  programme. 
These  masters  programmes  are  considered  to  be  of  high  quality  by  both  the  academic  staff 
and current and former Erasmus Mundus students consulted during the evaluation and have 
generally managed to attract large numbers of applications from third-country students.  

3.3.1.  Quality of Erasmus Mundus courses 

The  evidence  from  the  evaluation  suggests  that  the  Masters  Courses  supported  by  the 
programme have indeed been of high quality. The excellence of the institutions involved, and 
that  of  their  staff,  remain  a  fundamental  guarantor  of  academic  quality.  While  the 

2 

3 

Framework  Contract  for  Evaluation,  Evaluation  Related  Services  and  Support  for  Impact  Assessment 
(EAC/03/06 - 1st Renewal). 
The extent to which the effects of the programme were achieved at reasonable cost. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
geographical distribution of participating institutions was broadly balanced, institutions from 
the new Member States remained proportionally under-represented. 

The  high  academic  level  and  content  of  courses  was  the  characteristic  most  frequently 
perceived  by  course  co-ordinators  to  add  value  over  and  above  "mainstream"  (domestic) 
masters courses in the same discipline. Course co-ordinators and graduates also perceived the 
mobility built into Erasmus Mundus courses and the "intercultural experience" they offer to 
be important components of their added value. 

The  general  standard  of  support  to  students  and  academic  facilities  was  rated  highly  by 
students.  However,  the  evaluation  suggests  that,  in  some  cases,  more  could  be  done  to 
improve coherence between the curricula taught at different participating institutions and the 
different  training  paths  offered  to  students.  More  structured  formats,  with  common  courses 
and a more limited number of study tracks, can facilitate course integration.  

3.3.2.  Quality of Erasmus Mundus students and scholars 

With  a  limited  number  of  exceptions,  Erasmus  Mundus  courses  have  been  successful  in 
attracting high numbers of applicants from third countries. However, courses have frequently 
encountered  difficulties  in  recruiting  the  expected  numbers  of  EU  students.  This  was  often 
because of the level of fees charged by the courses (which could be higher than for "national" 
programmes) and the absence of scholarships for EU students in the 2004-2008 programme. 

The evidence from the evaluation suggests that the overall academic standard of the students 
selected for Erasmus Mundus courses is high. Fifty-five per cent of co-ordinators and partners 
replying to the online survey stated that the average academic standard of Erasmus Mundus 
students was "significantly above" the average of masters-level students in their departments. 

The use of additional funding for the targeted selection of students from specific geographical 
areas and countries as part of Action 2 (the "Windows") was not always consistent with the 
primary focus of the programme on academic excellence. In a limited number of cases, there 
is evidence that the primarily geographical criterion introduced by the "Windows" led to the 
selection of students of a below average standard. 

The  evidence  from  the  evaluation  suggests  that  the  overall  academic  standard  of  scholars 
supported through Action 2 was high. However, over 75% of scholars supported were men. 
This  level  appears  to  be  disproportionate,  even  taking  into  account  possible  variation  in  the 
gender profile of academic staff in different disciplines. 

3.3.3. 

Impact on the "supply side" of higher education in Europe 

Erasmus Mundus has added to the pre-existing supply of masters-level education in the EU in 
both  quantitative  and  qualitative  terms.  The  new  courses  supported  have  generally  been 
additional to the existing higher education offer, as "domestic" courses have been maintained 
in  parallel.  The  programme  has  also  enhanced  overall  quality  by  creating  new,  high-quality 
courses of a type rarely seen before the programme was established.  

In  addition  to  the  direct  impact  of  creating  new  courses,  the  evidence  from  the  evaluation 
illustrates  that  Erasmus  Mundus  has  brought  additional,  indirect  impacts  in  participating 
departments and institutions. In particular, the process of establishing and implementing joint 
courses appears to have strengthened a twin process of "Europeanisation" on the supply side 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
(as  higher  education 
together)  and 
"internationalisation" on the demand side (as institutions sought to attract more students from 
abroad and respond to their needs). 

from  different  countries  worked 

institutions 

The evaluation found that Erasmus Mundus has made a generally positive contribution to the 
EU's strategic objectives in the field of higher education. In particular, the integrated, trans-
national  nature  of  the  courses  has  required  participating  institutions  to  engage  directly  with 
the  detail  of  applying  aspects  of  the  Bologna  Process,  most  notably  the  European  Credit 
Transfer System. It has also increased mutual awareness among the academic community of 
the characteristics and functioning of higher education systems in other Member States.  

The  experience  of  a  number  of  courses  illustrates  that  the  issue  of  joint  degrees  (diplomas) 
remains  an  area  where  further  work  is  required  to  remove  obstacles  in  national  legislation, 
which prevent the accreditation of joint degrees. The enhanced level of joint quality assurance 
and  mutual  recognition  involved  in  joint  degrees  is  likely  to  contribute  further  to  the 
development of the European Higher Education Area.  

3.3.4. 

Impact on the international demand for European higher education  

There is evidence that Erasmus Mundus has led to an increase in the number of third-country 
students  attending  participating  departments  and  institutions,  although  this  pattern  is  not 
universally reported and it is possible that some third-country students who would have come 
to  Europe  in  any  case  have  opted  for  Erasmus  Mundus  courses.  Consolidated  data  on  the 
numbers  of  third-country  students  attending  individual  institutions  were  not  available  to  the 
evaluation  in  any  of  the  cases  examined,  although  such  data  would  be  a  valuable  means  to 
explore the quantitative effects of programmes such as Erasmus Mundus.  

Many  of  the  course  representatives  consulted  during  the  evaluation  noted  that  Erasmus 
Mundus has allowed their departments to attract third-country students from a wider range of 
countries and thus to break with traditional patterns of recruitment. 

3.3.5. 

Impact on students and scholars 

Evidence from the Graduate Impact Survey shows that Erasmus Mundus graduates generally 
believe  they  have  gained  valuable  and  relevant  skills  and  experience  from  their  courses. 
However, evidence about the long-term academic or career progression of graduates after they 
leave the course is, although broadly positive, currently inconclusive.  

The  results  of  the  online  survey  of  Action  2  scholars  suggest  that  Erasmus  Mundus  has 
allowed  these  individuals  to  strengthen  their  own  (research-related)  networks  and  improve 
their knowledge and understanding of higher education in the EU. It appears that the personal 
impact of participating in the programme and the impact on host departments and courses is 
enhanced when scholars are directly involved in the delivery of courses - something that has 
not always been the case. 

3.3.6. 

Sustainability 

The  evaluation  has  demonstrated  that  a  majority  of  co-ordinators  and  partners  currently 
participating in Erasmus Mundus do not believe the courses in which they are involved could 
continue in their present form without continued EU funding. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
Coming  from  beneficiaries  of  European  funding,  these  findings  are  perhaps  not  surprising, 
particularly  in  countries  where  the  higher  education  systems  face  significant  funding 
constraints. However, as the longer-term sustainability of Erasmus Mundus is likely to require 
a  reduction  in  the  level  of  EU  funding  for  scholarships  attached  to  individual  courses,  it  is 
clear  that  solutions  other  than  the  "status  quo"  need  to  be  found  if  many  Erasmus  Mundus 
courses are to continue. 

In principle, the internationally excellent quality of courses should allow the best among them 
to  recruit  high-quality,  self-financing  students  from  third  countries,  particularly  as  the 
tradition of paying for high-quality education is frequently more established outside the EU 
than inside it. While Erasmus Mundus is likely to have supported many students who would 
otherwise  not  have  been  able  to  afford  to  study  in  Europe,  it  is  equally  likely  that  the 
programme has supported students who would have been able to pay at least part of the cost 
of their studies.  

Although the process of diversifying student funding sources is already built into the design 
of  the  new  Erasmus  Mundus  programme,  the  evaluation  suggests  that  courses  need  to  be 
made more aware of the need to improve self-financing and of alternative funding sources. 

3.3.7.  Programme design and structure 

While  the  evaluation  found  that  Action  1  Masters  Courses  and  Action  2  scholarships  for 
students  were  clearly  complementary  and  worked  effectively  together,  the  evidence 
concerning the effectiveness of Action 2 scholarships for scholars, Action 3 Partnerships and 
Action 4 projects is less compelling. 

The impact of funding for Action 2 scholars on the quality of courses was not always evident. 
It seems likely that the contribution of funding under this Action is enhanced when scholars 
are employed specifically to contribute to the course in question (mainly through teaching). 

Although  Action  3  in  several  cases  added  a  valuable  extra  dimension  to  Erasmus  Mundus 
courses,  partnership  activities  have  often  been  insufficiently  integrated  with  the  courses  to 
which  they  are  linked  and  the  Action  as  a  whole  has  attracted  fewer  participants  than 
expected. This has been addressed in the new Erasmus Mundus programme, by making third-
country institutions eligible to be full consortium partners. 

The evaluators consider that,  while  Action  4 has supported  some interesting  and potentially 
effective projects, the funding for the Action was too thinly dispersed among many projects 
with  differing  objectives.  Action  4  could  have  been  more  effective  if  resources  had  been 
concentrated on a more limited number of larger projects. 

3.3.8.  Programme management 

The procedures for the management of Erasmus Mundus were found to have been appropriate 
and  largely  effective.  In  particular,  programme  beneficiaries  have  not  reported  any  major 
difficulties  with  the  programme's  selection  and  monitoring  procedures.  The  evaluators 
consider, however, that the quality of consolidated monitoring data for the programme could 
be  improved  without  considerable  additional  effort.  In  particular,  more  complete  data  on 
student  numbers  and  graduation/completion  rates  would  be  useful,  as  they  are  simple,  but 
valuable, "result" indicators. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
3.3.9.  Programme efficiency 

The evaluators consider the programme has achieved a generally high degree of efficiency. In 
particular,  the  comparatively  modest  sums  allocated  to  Erasmus  Mundus  consortia  to 
administer  the  courses  appear  to  have  had  a  leverage  effect,  as  considerable  additional 
resources (notably administrative staff time) have been devoted to their implementation. 

In view of the high proportion of Erasmus Mundus students on individual courses receiving 
full scholarship funding, it seems likely that overall efficiency could be improved by making 
efforts to ensure that more students attend courses with support from other funding sources. 

4. 

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE EXTERNAL EVALUATION AND COMMENTS FROM 
THE COMMISSION 

The  main  recommendations  of  the  evaluator  are  presented  in  bold,  while  the  Commission’s 
answer is in italics. 

4.1. 

Effectiveness 

Recommendation 1 

The  factors  explaining  the  continued  "under-representation"  of  institutions  from  the 
new  Member  States  in  the  Erasmus  Mundus  programme  should  be  explored  further 
and, within the scope of EU competence in the field, appropriate action taken to address 
the issues identified. 

The Commission agrees with this recommendation. In order to increase the participation of 
less-represented  EU  countries  in  the  programme,  the  Commission  is  supporting  a  project 
under  Action  3  (co-ordinated  by  the  Slovak  National  Structure)  that  aims  to  spread 
information  on  how  to  participate  and  provide  support  to  potential  participants  from  new 
Member States. It will be possible to assess the impact of this project in the summer of 2010. 

Recommendation 2 

In the ongoing monitoring of Erasmus Mundus courses, particular attention should be 
paid to the level of integration in the curricula and study tracks offered. 

The  Commission  welcomes  this  recommendation  as  a  way  of  further  promoting  the 
importance of integration. In future, applicants should be asked to explain and demonstrate 
more  clearly  the  level  of  integration  of  their  course  and  evaluators  of  proposals  should  be 
asked to take particular care in the analysis of integration and mobility mechanisms. 

Recommendation 3 

While  scholarships  for  EU  students  have  been  introduced  under  the  new  Erasmus 
Mundus  programme  to  increase  the  proportion  of  EU  students  on  Erasmus  Mundus 
courses,  the  actual  application  rates  and  numbers  of  EU  students  selected  should  be 
monitored closely during programme implementation. 

The  Commission  agrees  with  this  recommendation  and  will  closely  monitor  the  application 
and  selection  rates  of  EU  students,  as  it  has  done  up  to  now  with  non-EU  students.  This 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
information  is  essential  in  order  to  make  the  future  implementation  of  the  programme  as 
effective as possible. 

Recommendation 4 

In  the  new  Erasmus  Mundus  programme,  consortia  should  be  asked  to  pay  greater 
attention to the gender balance among the scholars supported in the framework of their 
Masters Course. 

The Commission agrees in principle with this recommendation and will make every effort to 
raise awareness of this issue among participants in the programme. 

Recommendation 5 

In  order  to  monitor  the  impact  of  Erasmus  Mundus  on  the  numbers  of  high-quality 
third-country  students  coming  to  Europe,  improved  data  are  required.  Participating 
institutions should therefore be asked to provide data on the overall numbers of third-
country students they recruit to allow more systematic analysis of the impact of Erasmus 
Mundus in this respect.  

The  Commission  welcomes  this  recommendation,  which  will  be  used  to  spur  participating 
institutions  to  provide  more  timely  and  accurate  statistical  information  on  the  numbers  and 
performance  of  their  students.  This  information  should  be  provided  via  the  existing  student 
database (managed by the Executive Agency), which should be as easy to use as possible. 

Recommendation 6 

The Graduate Impact Survey should be continued in future years, making use of a more 
systematic, but shorter, questionnaire, tailored to measuring the longer-term impact of 
the programme on participating students. 

The Commission agrees with this recommendation. The Graduate Impact Survey is a key tool 
for understanding and interpreting the past and future trends of the programme. Discussions 
are presently ongoing with the contractor in charge of the GIS to agree on a more effective 
questionnaire for students and graduates.  

4.2. 

Sustainability 

Recommendation 7 

In  order  to  ensure  the  sustainability  of  the  best  Erasmus  Mundus  courses,  while 
maximising the impact generated by EU funding, Erasmus Mundus should move away 
from  the  current  situation  in  which  the  vast  majority  of  third-country  students  on 
Erasmus Mundus courses receive a full scholarship. Existing courses should be strongly 
encouraged  to  move  to  a  more  differentiated  system  of  student  support,  with  a  higher 
proportion of students financed from sources other than Erasmus Mundus scholarships. 

The Commission agrees with the need to ensure the sustainability of Erasmus Mundus courses 
and  has  put  a  strong  accent  on  this  in  the  first  call  of  the  new  programme.  However,  the 
Commission deems it necessary to reflect further on the future of the scholarships system. For 
example,  this  may  in  future  become  separated  from  the  support  given  to  excellent  courses, 
with scholarships attributed as a function of the courses' capacity to attract students. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
Recommendation 8 

Action  3  of  the  new  Erasmus  Mundus  programme  should  take  a  more  strategic 
approach  than  was  the  case  under  Action  4  of  the  previous  programme,  funding  a 
in  clearly-defined  priority  areas  and  encouraging 
limited  number  of  projects 
"clustering" activities. Strengthened, targeted marketing of courses, particularly at elite 
higher education institutions in high- and middle-income third countries and in Europe, 
should be undertaken to boost (self-financing) demand for Erasmus Mundus courses. 

The  Commission  shares  the  concern  of  the  evaluators  about  the  lack  of  a  precise  strategic 
approach  in  the  definition  of  specific  objectives  under  Action  3.  This  year,  the  Commission 
has  decided  to  avoid  an  open  call  for  proposals  and  launch,  for  the  first  time,  a  call  for 
"clusters"  to  draw  the  best  out  of  past  Action  4  projects.  Future  calls  for  proposals  will, 
moreover,  focus  on  a  limited  number  of  priority  areas.  The  Commission  will  also  continue 
funding  some  actions  from  the  Erasmus  Mundus  Global  Promotion  Project  to  support  the 
promotion of European higher education worldwide. 

4.3. 

Efficiency - programme design and management 

Recommendation 9 

In  the  context  of  the  new  Erasmus  Mundus  programme,  visiting  scholars  should  be 
required  to  contribute  directly  to  the  course  for  which  they  receive  their  Erasmus 
Mundus grant, in order to enhance the quality of the course in question. 

The  Commission  considers  this  recommendation  interesting.  Up  to  now,  scholarships  for 
scholars were mainly intended to allow teaching or research activities related to the course. 
Directly contributing to the course may imply some previous participation of the scholars in 
the definition of the curriculum. Certain courses may already require a direct contribution, in 
which case this good practice could be made known to other consortia. 

Recommendation 10 

The  progress  and  final  reporting  formats  for  Erasmus  Mundus  courses  should  be 
reviewed to ensure that complete data on student numbers (EU and third-country) and 
graduation rates are collected.  

As with Recommendation 5, the Commission agrees that courses should be spurred to provide 
more  timely  and  accurate  statistical  information  on  the  numbers  and  performance  of  their 
students. In particular, graduation rates should be clearly stated to allow a more transparent 
analysis of the success of the course. 

5. 

THE COMMISSION’S CONCLUSIONS 

The  Commission  shares  the  overall  assessment  of  the  evaluators  that  Erasmus  Mundus  has 
made an important contribution to the internationalisation of European higher education. The 
programme remains relevant to the challenges facing European higher education institutions, 
particularly  in  the  current  global  economic  climate,  and  retains  a  high  level  of  enthusiasm 
among co-ordinators, partners, students and scholars. The results of the evaluation show that 
Erasmus  Mundus  continues  to  meet  its  political  and  operational  objectives,  as  well  as  the 
objectives of Article 149 of the Treaty. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
The fundamental quality of Erasmus Mundus Masters Courses, of the institutions behind them 
and  of  the  students  and  academics  they  attract,  are  essential  to  the  future  development  and 
health of the programme. The Commission welcomes the positive findings of the evaluator in 
this  respect  and  has  given  reinforced  status  to  the  role  of  Quality  Assurance  in  the  new 
Erasmus Mundus programme.  

The new programme has been designed to overcome certain structural shortcomings identified 
in  the  2004-2008  programme,  offering  scholarships  for  EU  students  and  allowing  third-
country  institutions  to  participate  as  full  partners  in  joint  programmes,  for  example.  The 
Commission notes the findings of this evaluation as to where further improvements could be 
made, and will pay due respect to these over the remainder of the 2009-2013 programme. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
STATISTICAL ANNEXES ON APPLICATION AND SELECTION FIGURES 

EU + 
EFTA/EEA 
Countries 

Austria 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Cyprus 
Czech Rep. 
Denmark 
Estonia 
Finland 
France 
Germany 
Greece  
Hungary 
Ireland 
Italy 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovakia 
Slovenia 
Spain 
Sweden 
UK 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Total 

HEI instances of 
participation in 
EM Masters 
Courses applying 
to EM (1) 

HEI instances of 
participation in 
EM Masters 
Courses selected 
under EM (1) 

HEIs participating 
in EM Masters 
Courses selected 
under EM 

32 
133 
2 
1 
56 
72 
25 
59 
465 
320 
43 
74 
44 
361 
21 
35 
7 
17 
162 
123 
170 
14 
14 
24 
464 
140 
257 
5 
0 
63 
3195 

7
21
0
0
9
14
3
11
65
54
5
10
6
44
0
2
1
1
29
16
26
0
1
3
62
22
42
0
0
14
468

4
7
0
0
4
7
2
5
49
33
4
4
5
26
0
2
1
1
14
8
11
0
1
2
27
11
28
0
0
9
265

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
EU + 
EFTA/EEA 
Countries 

Austria 
Belgium 
Bulgaria 
Cyprus 
Czech Rep. 
Denmark 
Estonia 
Finland 
France 
Germany 
Greece  
Hungary 
Ireland 
Italy 
Latvia 
Lithuania 
Luxembourg 
Malta 
Netherlands 
Poland 
Portugal 
Romania 
Slovakia 
Slovenia 
Spain 
Sweden 
UK 
Iceland 
Liechtenstein 
Norway 
Total 

HEI instances of 
participation in 
EM Action 4 
projects applying 
to EM (1) 

HEI instances of 
participation in 
EM Action 4 
projects selected 
under EM (1) 

HEIs participating 
in EM Action 4 
projects selected 
under EM 

41 
84 
18 
5 
27 
22 
20 
53 
135 
108 
27 
41 
11 
144 
11 
23 
2 
9 
73 
60 
55 
31 
30 
17 
133 
51 
99 
2 
1 
24 
1357 

8
18
2
2
4
6
5
17
26
16
5
4
3
15
3
4
0
3
14
12
10
3
6
1
32
11
22
2
1
11
266

6
16
2
2
3
4
5
12
20
10
3
2
3
12
2
3
0
1
9
9
7
3
3
1
18
8
15
1
1
9
190

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
Number of 
student 
applications 
received 

Erasmus 
Mundus 
scholarships 
awarded 

“Window” 
scholarships 
awarded 

Total number 
of 
scholarships 
awarded 

2004-05 

2005-06 

2006-07 

2007-08 

2008-09 

Total 

n.a.

3030

5500

12 766

18 820

40 116

140

455

741

1196

1957

4489

0

353

636

629

74

1692

140

808

1377

1825

2031

6181

EN 

14 

   EN