COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Ex-post evaluation of the operation and effects of Regulation (EU) 2016/589 on a European network of employment services (EURES) Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on the operation and effects of Regulation (EU) 2016/589 on a European network of employment services (EURES), workers' access to mobility services and the further integration of labour markets (submitted pursuant to Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2016/589)
Date: 2021-08-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, European Commission
Subjects: EURES, application of EU law, employment service, equal treatment, exchange of information, free movement of workers, frontier worker, job access, job vacancy, labour mobility

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 6.8.2021  SWD(2021) 217 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Ex-post evaluation of the operation and effects of Regulation (EU) 2016/589 on a European network of employment services (EURES)          Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS   on the operation and effects of Regulation (EU) 2016/589 on a European network of employment services (EURES), workers' access to mobility services and the further integration of labour markets   (submitted pursuant to Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2016/589)          {COM(2021) 452 final}  
 
 
Table of contents 

1. 

2. 

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 5 

BACKGROUND TO THE INTERVENTION ..................................................................................... 7 

2.1.  Description of EURES and its objectives ............................................................ 7 

2.2.  Baseline and points of comparison .................................................................... 13 

2.2.1.  Baseline .......................................................................................................... 13 

2.2.2.  Points of comparison ...................................................................................... 14 

3. 

IMPLEMENTATION / STATE OF PLAY ........................................................................................ 17 

4.  METHOD............................................................................................................................................ 18 

4.1.  Short description of methodology ..................................................................... 18 

4.2.  Limitations and robustness of findings.............................................................. 19 

5.  ANALYSIS AND ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS .......................................... 20 

5.1.  Relevance .......................................................................................................... 20 

5.1.1.  Relevance for intra-EU labour market mobility ............................................. 20 

5.1.2.  Adaptability to a changing context ................................................................. 22 

5.1.3.  Alignment with needs of target groups .......................................................... 24 

5.2.  Effectiveness...................................................................................................... 28 

5.2.1.  Provision of services to employers and jobseekers ........................................ 28 

5.2.2.  The EURES portal as a matching place ......................................................... 33 

5.2.3.  Effectiveness of EURES mobility schemes and cross-border partnerships ... 38 

5.2.4.  Effectiveness of EURES internal support and organisational set-up ............. 39 

5.2.5.  Visibility ......................................................................................................... 41 

5.2.6.  Sustainability and factors impacting effectiveness......................................... 42 

5.3.  Efficiency .......................................................................................................... 44 

5.3.1.  Cost-effectiveness........................................................................................... 44 

5.3.2.  The national side of cost-effectiveness ........................................................... 49 

5.3.3. 

Increase/decrease of administrative burden.................................................... 51 

5.4.  Coherence .......................................................................................................... 52 

5.4.1.  External coherence ......................................................................................... 52 

5.4.2. 

Internal coherence .......................................................................................... 57 

5.5.  EU added-value ................................................................................................. 58 

5.5.1.  Effects  of  EURES  operations  that  would  not  have  taken  place  without  EU 
intervention ................................................................................................................... 58 

5.5.2.  Comparison to bilateral or multilateral cooperation ....................................... 60 

1 

 
6. 

CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 62 

6.1.  Relevance .......................................................................................................... 62 

6.2.  Effectiveness...................................................................................................... 63 

6.3.  Efficiency .......................................................................................................... 64 

6.4.  Coherence .......................................................................................................... 65 

6.5.  EU added value.................................................................................................. 66 

6.6.  Lessons learnt .................................................................................................... 66 

I. 

ANNEX - PROCEDURAL INFORMATION .................................................................................... 68 

Lead  Directorate  General  (DG),  Decide  Planning/Commission  Work  Programme 
(CWP) references ......................................................................................................... 68 

Organisation and timing ............................................................................................... 68 

Exceptions to the Better Regulation Guidelines ........................................................... 68 

Consultation of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB) ................................................ 68 

Evidence, sources and quality ...................................................................................... 74 

II.  ANNEX - STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ............................................................................... 76 

III.  ANNEX - METHODS AND ANALYTICAL MODELS ................................................................... 89 

2 

 
Term or 
acronym 

Glossary 

Meaning or definition 

Cross-border 
partnership 

EURES  cross-border  partnership  means  a  grouping  of  EURES  Members  or  Partners  and  other 
stakeholders for long-term cooperation in regional structures in cross-border regions. 

CV 

EaSI 

ECG 

ECO 

ELA 

EFTA 

ESCO 

EU 

Curriculum  vitae.  Summary  of  an  individual’s  professional  and  educational  qualifications, 
experience, additional skills and other information of relevance in applying for a job vacancy. 

European Union Programme for Employment and Social  Innovation (2014-2020). EaSI is an 
EU-level  financing  instrument  managed  by  the  European  Commission  to  contribute  to  the 
implementation  of  the  Europe  2020  Strategy  and  promote  a  high  level  of  quality  and  sustainable 
employment,  guaranteeing  adequate  and  decent  social  protection,  combating  social  exclusion  and 
poverty, and improving working conditions. 

EURES Coordination Group. The EURES Coordination Group consists of representatives of the 
European  Coordination  Office  and  all  the  National  Coordination  Offices.  It  acts  as  a  forum  for 
coordination  and  exchange  of  best  practice  to  support  the  implementation  and  development  of 
EURES activities. 

European  Coordination  Office.  The  European  Coordination  Office  acts  as  a  coordinator,  at  EU 
level, to provide horizontal support to EURES National Coordinators, Members and Partners and to 
facilitate their operations and collaboration. 

European  Labour  Authority.  ELA  was  established  in  2019,  following  the  entry  into  force  of 
Regulation  (EU)  2019/1149,  with  the  aim  to  facilitate  access  to  information  on  labour  mobility, 
support  the  cooperation  between  EU  countries  in  the  cross-border  enforcement  of  relevant  Union 
law, and facilitate solutions in cases of cross-border disputes between national authorities.  

European  Free  Trade  Association.  EFTA  is  an  intergovernmental  organisation  established  in 
1960  to  promote  free  trade  and  economic  integration  to  the  benefit  of  its  Member  States.  It 
comprises four countries: Switzerland, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. 

European  Skills/Competences,  Qualifications  and  Occupations.  European  multilingual 
classification  aimed  at  identifying  and  categorising  skills,  competences,  qualifications  and 
occupations relevant for the EU labour market, education and training. In accordance with Article 9 
of  Regulation  (EU)  2016/589,  “Member  States  shall  cooperate  with  each  other  and  with  the 
Commission  regarding  interoperability  between  national  systems  and  the  European  classification 
developed  by  the  Commission”.  The  Implementing  Decision  (EU)  2018/1020  establishes  that 
ESCO is this European classification. 

European  Union.  The  Member  States  of  the  European  Union  are:  Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Czech 
Republic,  Denmark,  Germany,  Estonia,  Ireland,  Greece,  Spain,  France,  Croatia,  Italy,  Cyprus, 
Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Hungary, Malta, Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, 
Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom (until 31 January 2020). 

Network of employment services and other EURES Members and Partners of the EU-28 countries 
(UK until 31 December 2020) 1, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland, and the European 
Commission. Launched in 1994, the main goal of the EURES network is the support of fair intra-
EU labour mobility.  

EURES 

EURES services are delivered through a human network of EURES advisers and online through 
the EURES portal (European Job Mobility Portal). In the framework of EURES services:  

1  In  accordance  with  the  Withdrawal  Agreement,  the  United  Kingdom  is  officially  a  third  country  to  the  EU  since 

1 February 2020. However, the EU and the UK jointly agreed on a transition period until 31 December 2020.  

3 

 
 
 
                                                 
Term or 
acronym 

Meaning or definition 

  Contact refers to the exchange between a EURES adviser and a jobseeker or employer 
interested in receiving support through the network. The exchange can be in person, via 
phone, email or chat. It can cover topics such as general information on EURES, 
placement support, information on living and working conditions, or cross-border work. 
Job application refers to expressions of interest from workers.  
 
 
Job vacancy refers to offers from employers. 
 
Job placement is effected as a result of a recruitment and placement activity.  
  Recruitment event is a physical or virtual event bringing employers and jobseekers 

together to facilitate the recruitment process.  

EURES 
countries 

EURES 
mobility 
schemes 

EURES 
Regulation 

GDPR 

Labour 
market 
imbalances 

EU Member States, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and UK (until 31 December 2020). 

EURES mobility schemes aim to provide support to specific groups of jobseekers and to help fill 
vacancies in sectors with recruitment difficulties. They are financed under the EU Programme for 
Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI). For the purpose of this evaluation, the relevant EURES 
mobility schemes are: Your First EURES Job, Reactivate, and Targeted Mobility Scheme.  

Regulation  (EU)  2016/589  of  the  European Parliament  and  of  the  Council of  13  April  2016  on  a 
European network of employment services (EURES), workers' access to mobility  services and the 
further integration of labour markets, and amending Regulations (EU) No 492/2011 and (EU) No 
1296/2013 

Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the 
protection  of  natural  persons  with  regard  to  the  processing  of  personal  data  and  on  the  free 
movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation). 

Imbalance  between  supply  and  demand  in  the  labour  market,  which  can  be  driven  by  underlying 
skills mismatches, but can also be caused by other conditions.  

Mobile 
workers 

For the purpose of this evaluation, mobile workers are defined as employed citizens who reside in a 
EURES country other than their EURES country of citizenship. 

NCO 

PES 

PMS 

National Coordination Office. NCOs are designated by Member States “to ensure the transfer of 
available  data  to  the  EURES  portal  and  to  provide  general  support  and  assistance  to  all  EURES 
Members  and Partners  on  their  territory,  including  on  how  to  deal  with  complaints  and  problems 
with job vacancies, where appropriate in cooperation with other relevant public authorities such as 
labour inspectorates” (Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2016/589) 

Public  employment  services.  In  EU  countries,  public  employment  services  (PES)  are  the 
organisations, as part of relevant ministries, public bodies or corporations falling under public law, 
that  are  responsible  for  implementing  active  labour  market  policies  and  providing  quality 
employment services in the public interest. 

Performance Measurement System. The PMS is a performance monitoring tool that comprises a 
set  of  jointly  defined  indicators  that  measure  the  performance  and  the  activities  of  the  EURES 
network, providing a basis for evaluating its functioning. (Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/589, 
and Commission Implementing Decision 2018/170) 

Programming 
Cycle 

EURES harmonized programming. In accordance with Article 31 of Regulation (EU) 2016/589, the 
national  coordinators  are  responsible  for  drawing  up  annual  work  programmes  for  the  EURES 
activities  in  their  national  network,  and  provide  activity  reports  after  completion  of  their  work 
programme. 

Skills 
mismatch 

For the purpose of this evaluation, skills mismatches refer to misalignment between shortages and 
surpluses  in  skills.  Skills  mismatches  can  be  horizontal  (by  field  of  occupation)  or  vertical  (by 
educational attainment). Skills mismatches can be one of the causes of labour market imbalances. 

4 

 
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This  Staff  Working  Document  provides  the  ex-post  evaluation  of  the  operation  and  effects  of  the 
EURES  Regulation  (EU)  2016/5892  as  foreseen  in  its  Article  35.  The  Regulation  reformed  the 
existing  EURES  network  (e.g.,  improved  transparency,  enlargement  of  the  network,  better  service 
provision). 

EURES3  is  a  European  network  of  2194  organizations  across  the  EU  and  EFTA  Member  States 
committed  to  facilitate  fair  labour  mobility.  These  organizations  are  described  as  Members,  when 
they offer all the labour mobility services defined in the EURES Regulation, and Partners, when they 
can only offer part of those services5. All Public Employment Services are Members of the network. 

The  mobility  services  of  EURES  help  the  European  Union  to  deliver  on  the  promise  of  free 
movement  of  workers,  by  providing  transparency  about  vacancies  and  supply  of  labour  across  the 
Union.  

The  EURES  network  exists  since  1994,  well  before  the  EURES  Regulation6.  The  network  puts  in 
practice the provisions about freedom of movement for workers of Articles 45 TFEU and 46 TFEU. 
In  particular,  as  per  Article  46  TFEU  EURES  ensures  close  cooperation  between  national 
employment services and facilitates the achievement of a balance between supply and demand in the 
employment market. 

While  free  movement  of  workers  is  one  of  the  basic  freedoms  of  the  European  Union,  it  is  also 
economically important.  Six Member States7 register less than one million workers and another 11 
Member States register between one and five million workers. These rather small labour markets can 
not be considered self-sufficient in advanced and complex economies. In addition, the remaining 10 
Member States with bigger labour markets benefit from an exchange of work force across national 
borders.  

2 Regulation (EU) 2016/589 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 April 2016 on a European network of 
employment services (EURES),  workers' access to  mobility  services and the further integration of labour  markets, 
and amending Regulations (EU) No 492/2011 and (EU) No 1296/2013. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2016/589/oj  

3 https://ec.europa.eu/eures 

4 Figures reported by EURES countries at the end of 2020. 

5 Article 12 of the EURES Regulation defines that Members have to contribute to the pool of vacancies and CVs, and 
provide  support  services  to  employers  and  jobseekers.  Partners  only  have  to  fulfil  one  of  these  three  tasks.  This 
allows, for instance, Unions and Chambers of Commerce to participate  in the network, since  while a Union could 
provide  support  and  contribute  to  the  pool  of  CVs,  while  it  is  unlikely  that  can  provide  job  vacancies;  and  the 
opposite for a Chamber of Commerce. 

6  Regulation  (EU)  2016/589  replaces  the  EURES  relevant  parts  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  492/2011,  which  codified 

Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community. 

7 Estonia, Cyprus, Latvia, Malta, Luxembourg and Slovenia 

5 

 
                                                 
Furthermore, free movement of workers is an important instrument to promote European cohesion. 
Already the possibility to move freely throughout the Union provides incentives to lagging regions to 
modernise and increase their attractiveness and it offers to regions with booming labour markets the 
possibility to attract additional workers. 

Considering  the  positive  external  effects  of  mobility,  public  intervention  in  this  area  is  necessary, 
also to keep it positive avoiding to distort it into brain drain. This concerns the coordination between 
areas with surpluses and shortages, practical involvement in the matching process as well as a good 
understanding  of  administrative  hurdles  in  exercising  mobility  rights  (recognition  of  professions, 
access  to  the  social  security  system,  ensuring  that  claims  can  be  transferred  across  systems,  issues 
linked to taxation or housing), so to overcome them.  

Indeed,  the  employment  guidelines8  highlight  the  importance  of  ensuring  assistance  to  jobseekers, 
supporting labour-market demand and the mobility of workers. Recent analysis of the impact of the 
COVID-19 disruption also concludes9 that job-search assistance will be more important than ever to 
ease transitions and foster inclusive growth. 

EURES is a key instrument to achieve this. EURES is the only mobility service that covers all kind 
of jobseekers and employers, in all EU languages, in all the countries of a large economic region, as 
an  integrated  service,  both  online  via  the  EURES  portal  and  face-to-face  via  the  network  of  more 
than 1000 EURES advisers. EURES services are for free10 for employers and jobseekers. 

Currently, EURES activities are based on the EURES Regulation and six implementing acts11.  

8 Guideline 6: Enhancing labour supply and improving access to employment, skills and competences), “Policies should 
aim to improve and support labour-market participation, matching and transitions.... Member States should aim for 
more  effective  and  efficient  public  employment  services  by  ensuring  timely  and  tailor-made  assistance  to  support 
jobseekers, supporting labour-market demand and implementing performance-based management. ... The mobility of 
learners  and  workers  should  be  promoted  with  the  aim  of  enhancing  employability  skills  and  exploiting  the  full 
potential 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
labour 
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32018D1215 

European 

market.” 

the 

of 

9  Labour  Market  and  Wage  Developments  in  Europe  -  Annual  Review  2020,  p.  31,  ISBN  978-92-76-27014-0, 

https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=23268  

10 Article 21 of the Regulation considers the possibility to request limited fees for the services to employers. 

11 Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1255 of 11 July 2017 on a template for the description of national 

systems and procedures to admit organisations to become EURES Members and Partners. 

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1256 of 11 July 2017 on templates and procedures for the exchange of 

information on the EURES network national work programmes at Union level. 

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1257 of 11 July 2017 on the technical standards and formats required for 

a uniform system to enable matching of job vacancies with job applications and CVs on the EURES Portal. 

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/170 of 2 February 2018 on uniform detailed specifications for data 

collection and analysis to monitor and evaluate the functioning of the EURES network.   

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1020 of 18 July 2018 on the adoption and updating of the list of skills, 

competences and occupations of the European classification for the purpose of automated matching through the 
EURES common IT platform. 

Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1021 of 18 July 2018 on the adoption of technical standards and formats 

necessary for the operation of the automated matching through the common IT platform using the European 
classification and the interoperability between national systems and the European classification. 

6 

 
                                                 
 
The  EURES  ex-post  evaluation  is  required  by  article  35  of  the  Regulation:  By  13  May  2021,  the 
Commission  shall  submit  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  European  Economic  and 
Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  an  ex  post  evaluation  report  of  the  operation 
and effects  of  this Regulation. That report may be accompanied by legislative proposals amending 
this Regulation. 

Therefore, the scope of this evaluation is not the EURES network (e.g., provision of trans-national 
mobility  services),  but  the  operation  and  effects  of  the  EURES  Regulation  (e.g.,  improved 
transparency,  better  matching,  enlargement  of  the  network).  Accordingly,  the  evaluation  will  not 
question essential elements of EURES (e.g. the relevance of EURES), but the equivalent questions 
for  the  Regulation  (e.g.  the  relevance  of  the  Regulation).  However,  since  the  Regulation  and  the 
functioning of EURES are closely linked, it is not possible to evaluate the Regulation without also 
looking into the functioning of the broader EURES framework.  

The evaluation includes: 

- 
- 

- 
- 

the description of the implementing process and status; 
the  analysis  of  the  Regulation  operation  and  effects  in  terms  of  relevance,  effectiveness, 
efficiency, coherence and EU-added value; 
an assessment of strengths and weaknesses; and  
lessons learnt.  

The  geographical  coverage  encompasses  all  countries  of  the  EURES  network  in  the  2016-2020 
period – the EU-27 countries, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.  

The  ex-post  evaluation  refers  to  the  period  since  2016,  year  of  adoption  of  the  Regulation,  even 
though some obligations and the implementing acts only entered into force in the following years12. 
For comparison purposes, the evaluation also looks into the situation before the Regulation. 

While the major part of the work looks back at the effects of the EURES Regulation in the last four 
years,  the  evaluation  also  includes  a  forward-looking  element  when  analysing  potential  areas  for 
further development, taking into account the upcoming transfer of the European Coordination Office 
(ECO) role to the European Labour Authority (ELA)13. 

2.  BACKGROUND TO THE INTERVENTION 

2.1.  Description of EURES and its objectives 

The  European  Commission  set  up  the  EURES  network  through  a  Commission  Decision  on 
22 October 1993,  based  on  Regulation  (EEC)  No  1612/68  on  freedom  of  movement  for  workers 

12 The articles concerning the provision of CVs and vacancies (Article 12(3) and Article 17(1) to (7)) only apply from 13 
May 2018. Article 19(3) concerning the use of harmonized European classification (ESCO) for vacancies and CVs 
will apply as of 7 August 2021. In addition, six implementing acts were adopted in 2017 and 2018. 

13 https://www.ela.europa.eu/ 

7 

 
                                                                                                                                                                    
 
within  the  Community.  EURES  started  operating  in  199414,  as  a  network  of  national  employment 
services and other organisations currently known as EURES Members and Partners. EURES started 
its operations with the aim of enhancing mutual cooperation based on national interests and needs, 
and raising awareness about job opportunities and vacancies in other countries.  

Since 2011, EURES underwent reforms to reflect changes in the market for recruitment services and 
new  mobility  patterns,  and  to  improve  its  performance.  This  reform  process  lead  to  the  EURES 
Regulation in 2016. 

The  main  objectives  of  the  reform  were:  improved  transparency  of  the  network  and  services 
delivered; better matching between labour demand and supply through an increase of job vacancies 
and  CVs  on  the  EURES  portal;  the  enlargement  of  the  network  through  the  admission  of  new 
EURES  Members  and  Partners;  and  the  development  of  minimum  standards  for  the  provision  of 
support services. 

The  Regulation  defines  (Article  1)  EURES  as  a  framework  for  cooperation  to  facilitate  the 
exercise of the freedom of movement for workers within the Union. EURES is a service available 
to  all  workers  and  employers  across  the  Union  (Article  4),  contributing  to  voluntary  mobility  and 
helping the integration of the labour markets (Article 6). 

The intervention logic of EURES, summarised below and described in annex III, derives from the 
need to fulfil its general objectives as set out in Article 6 of the Regulation: 

a)  facilitating the exercise of the rights conferred by Article 45 TFEU and by Regulation (EU) No 

492/2011; 

b)  implementing the coordinated strategy for employment and, in particular, for promoting a skilled, 

trained and adaptable workforce as referred to in Article 145 TFEU; 

c)  improving the functioning, cohesion and integration of the labour markets in the Union, including 

at cross-border level; 

d)  promoting  voluntary  geographical  and  occupational  mobility  in  the  Union,  including  in  cross-
border regions, on a fair basis and in compliance with Union and national law and practice; 

e)  supporting  transitions  into  the  labour  market,  thereby  promoting  the  social  and  employment 

objectives referred to in Article 3 TEU. 

EURES builds its actions along the following specific objectives defined in the EURES Regulation 
Impact Assessment15: 

-  To achieve a nearly complete pool of job vacancies and CVs on the EURES portal; 

14 EURES: the story so far - Matching jobs and skills in Europe for 15 years, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the 
European Union, 2009, ISBN 978-92-79-11665-0 

15  SWD(2014)  9  final  “Impact  Assessment  Accompanying  the  document  Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council on a European network of Employment Services, workers' access to mobility services 
and the further integration of labour markets” 

8 

 
                                                 
-  To  enable  the  EURES  portal  to  carry  out  automated  matching  between  job  vacancies  and 
CV's  in  all  EU  languages,  and  understanding  skills,  competences,  occupations  and 
qualifications; 

-  To  make  available  basic  information  on  labour  opportunities  and  conditions  abroad  to  any 

jobseeker or employer; 

-  To assist any interested person with matching, placement and recruitment; 
-  To support Members and Partners through information exchange on national labour shortages 

and surpluses and the co-ordination of actions across Member States.  

factors 

influencing 

External 
(e.g. 
overqualification  rate16,  job  vacancy  rates17  and  labour  shortages18)  and  barriers  to  mobility  (i.e. 
recognition  of  competences,  language  and  administrative  barriers,  limited  transparency  of 
information19). 

labour  market 

intervention 

imbalances 

include 

the 

The  EURES  network  relies  on  two  essential  inputs:  the  EURES  Regulation;  and  the  resources 
(human, infrastructure, and IT services) financed by the Member States with their own sources, or by 
the EaSI programme in the case of EU actions20. 

The activities performed with these inputs are support services of four types: 

-  General  support  services  for  all  jobseekers  and  employers  (provision  of  information, 
matching  of  CVs  and  job  vacancies,  support  to  the  recruitment  processes,  and  post-
recruitment assistance) 

-  Specific  support  services  in  cross-border  regions  or  for  defined  target  groups  (e.g.  younger 

jobseekers); provided via the EURES mobility schemes and cross-border partnerships. 

-  Self-service support services via the EURES portal. 
-  Coordination and internal support (e.g. networking events to share best practices, monitoring 

activities). 

These activities are expected to lead to the following outputs:  

16  The  over-qualification  rate  increased  from  21.7%  to  22.1%  for  the  EU-28  between  2014  and  2018.  Eurostat’s 
experimental  indicator  on  vertical  skills  mismatches,  available  at  https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/experimental-
statistics/skills 

17 The EU-28 average job vacancy rate was 2.2% at the end of 2018, while it was 1.5% in 2014. Eurostat, Job Vacancy 
Statistics  (JVS).  The  same  rate  was  above  average,  in  particular,  in  the  Czech  Republic  (5.5%),  Belgium  (3.5%), 
Germany (3.1%), the Netherlands (3.0%) and Austria (2.9%). 

18 Increasing numbers of firms declared to experience labour shortages (European Business Surveys, several  years). In 
2014, about 10% of central European countries and 15% of eastern European countries declared to have experienced 
labour shortages. In 2017, 16% and 40% respectively. 

19 Evaluation study, p. 571, annex III.b - Comparative analysis of the labour market 

20  An  evaluation  of  the  EaSI  programme  including  the  EURES  axis  is  currently  prepared  and  will  be  available  by  31 
December 2022, according to  Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013 of 11 December 2013 on a European Union Programme 
for Employment and Social Innovation ("EaSI"). 

9 

 
 
                                                 
 
-  well informed and supported employers  and jobseekers, with special attention to those with 

specific needs (e.g. young jobseekers, cross-border employers); 

-  practical services for jobseekers and employers (e.g. contacts, placements); 
- 
- 

a complete pool of vacancies and CVs in the EURES Portal; and 
stronger internal coordination of the network. 

At the level of the expected results, the aim is to achieve smooth, effective and fair labour mobility 
within  EURES  countries,  more  accessible  intra-EU  labour  mobility  opportunities,  and  better 
integration  of  labour  markets.  Overall,  these  results  contribute  in  the  Union  towards  easy,  fair, 
voluntary,  secure  and  free  of  discrimination  labour  mobility,  favouring  transitions  into  a  labour 
market with more and better jobs (impacts). 

The  Regulation  does  not  define  targets  for  these  expected  results  and  impacts.  Their  achievement 
levels  are  therefore  assessed  via  the  specific  and  operational  objectives  defined  in  the  EURES 
Regulation Impact Assessment21 as detailed in 2.2.2. Points of comparison. 

EURES structure 

The  Regulation  defines  that  EURES  services  are  delivered  through  two  complementary  channels: 
the EURES advisors’ network, consisting of EURES staff across the network, and the EURES portal 
with a number of online service tools available. 

-  The  backbone  of  EURES  are  the  Members  and  Partners,  which  include  Public 
Employment  Services  on  national  and  regional  level  (142),  but  also  social  partners, 
universities,  private  employment  services  or  other  organizations  that  have  undergone  an 
admission  procedure,  a  total  of  23  Members  and  54  Partners.  They  are  tasked  with  the 
operational activities and they provide the network of more than 1000 EURES advisers. 

-  At the national level,  EURES is organised by the  National Coordination Offices (NCOs), 
generally linked to either the Public Employment Services or the Ministry of Labour, act as 
coordinators of the national EURES network, communicate with the European Coordination 
Office (ECO) and provide performance monitoring data and additional information. 

-  At the European level, the European Coordination Office (ECO), hosted by the Directorate 
General  for  Employment,  Social  Affairs  and  Inclusion  of  the  European  Commission,  and 
being  transferred  to  the  European  Labour  Authority  (ELA),  provides  horizontal  support  to 
the  NCOs.  It  provides  the  EURES  portal,  IT  support  and  helpdesk  services,  training 
programmes for EURES staff, information and communication activities, analyses of labour 
mobility  flows  and  labour  market  conditions  within  the  EU,  and  facilitation  of  networking 
and mutual learning events. 

Together,  the  NCOs  and  ECO  constitute  the  EURES  Coordination  Group  (ECG),  which  has  a 
coordinating role concerning the activities and the functioning of the network.  

EURES services 

21  SWD(2014)  9  final  “Impact  Assessment  Accompanying  the  document  Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council on a European network of Employment Services, workers' access to mobility services 
and the further integration of labour markets” 

10 

 
                                                 
The key EURES services can be summarised as follows: 

A.- EURES portal  

The European Job Mobility Portal is developed and maintained by the European Coordination 
Office  and  consists  of  a  number  of  central  elements:  database  of  job  vacancies  and  CVs, 
information on labour mobility (e.g. living and working conditions, hints and tips for employers 
and jobseekers), overview of EURES services, contact details of EURES staff, and a helpdesk. 
In  addition,  there  is  an  internal  section  of  the  Portal,  accessible  to  national  coordinators  and 
EURES  staff  for  monitoring,  planning  and  overall  coordination  and  exchange  of  information 
within the network.  

B.- Support services to jobseekers and employers  

The general support services provided by EURES Members and Partners include matching and 
placement  activities,  and  the  provision  of  information  and  guidance.  While  these  services  are 
provided  in  all  EURES  countries,  the  exact  portfolio  and  way  of  implementation  differ, 
corresponding to national practices and labour market needs. In particular, the format (e.g. one-
to-one  counselling,  events),  way  of  delivery  (e.g.  online,  on-site)  or  focus  (e.g.  sectoral 
approach,  general  labour  market  approach)  can  differ.  The  main  EURES  performance 
indicators22 in this regard are summarised as follows: 

Table 1 : Key EURES performance indicators. Source: EURES harmonised reporting (PMS) 23. 

Indicator 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

Individual contacts between EURES staff and workers  

791 101 

696 514 

2 305 490 

3 344 368 

Individual contacts between EURES staff and employers 

113 694 

111 636 

194 186 

194 789 

Job placements facilitated through the EURES Portal or staff 

Recruitment events attended by EURES staff 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

N/A 

84 580 

23 315 

83 360 

11 159 

In  addition  to  these  general  support  services,  a  number  of  EURES  countries  provide  specific 
support  services.  Around  two-thirds  of  the  EURES  countries  organise  post-recruitment 
activities, which include mainly information and guidance on tax and social security issues. In 
some cases, support services to  families  of  a recruited employee or language training are also 
provided.  Specific  support  services  targeting  youth  and  linked  to  apprenticeships  and 
traineeships  are  implemented  unevenly  across  the  EURES  countries,  as  detailed  in  section 
5.1.3. Alignment with needs of target groups. 

22  Commission  Implementing  Decision  (EU)  2018/170  defines  16  performance  indicators  to  monitor  and  evaluate  the 

functioning of the EURES network.   

23 Data for 2018 and 2019 based on the harmonised reporting (PMS) introduced in 2018, while 2016 and 2017 is covered 
by the previous voluntary system, with a response rate of around 60% and some missing countries. As a result, the 
numbers before 2018 are substantially lower. 

11 

 
  
                                                 
C.- Mobility schemes and cross-border partnerships  

As  a  complement  to  the  overall  services  described  in  B,  three  main  mobility  schemes  (Your 
First  EURES  Job,  Reactivate,  and  Targeted  Mobility  Scheme),  managed  by  the  European 
Commission, aim at reaching specific groups of jobseekers (aged 18-35 years or 35 and older) 
and  at  helping  companies  to  fill  vacancies  in  sectors  with  skills  needs.  At  the  end  of  2019, 
Targeted Mobility Scheme started to operate while 10 461 jobseekers and 3 007 employers had 
registered in Your First EURES Job and Reactivate. The main sectors in which placements were 
realised  are  Human  health  and  social  work,  Information  and  communication,  Education, 
Transportation and storage24. 

In  addition,  information,  placement  and  recruitment  services  tailored  to  frontier  workers  and 
employers  in  cross-border  regions  are  implemented  within  the  framework  of  EURES  cross-
border  partnerships.  Nine  partnerships  received  an  EaSI  grant  in  2018  and  11  in  2019.  Eight 
grants were awarded to cross-border partnerships for 2020 and 2021.  

D.- Internal support and coordination  

The work of the EURES network is enhanced by a number of support and coordination activities 
by  ECO.  This  includes  organisation  of  coordination  meetings  (five  meetings  a  year),  mutual 
learning  events  and  working  groups  on  selected  topics,  provision  of  a  regular  training 
programme25,  reports  on  occupational  and  geographic  labour  mobility26,  technical  guidance, 
templates supporting the implementation of various aspects of the Regulation, and the internal 
section for online coordination in the EURES portal. 

EURES financial approach has evolved in the last years. Until 2015, EURES was financed both at 
EU and at national level through annual grants deriving from a specific EU budget line. Since 2015, 
EURES  countries  are  charged  to  secure  their  own  budget.  The  EURES  Regulation  does  not 
provide any financial support. Therefore, the budget27 for EURES actions has to be provided from 
other sources, which are different at EU and national level: 

  At  EU  level,  the  EURES  axis  of  the  Programme  for  Employment  and  Social  Innovation 
(EaSI)  finances  (during  the  multiannual  financial  framework  2014-2020)  the  horizontal 

24  Your  First  EURES  Job  and  Reactivate  monitoring  reports.  An  analysis  of  placements  is  available  in  section 

5.2.3. Effectiveness of EURES mobility schemes and cross-border partnerships. 

25  ECO  provides  the  Common  EURES  Training  Programme  and  professional  development  for  the  EURES  staff  of 
Members  and  Partners.  The  training  activities  are  based  on  the  training  programme  for  EURES  comprising  a 
consolidation  phase  followed  by  the  EURES  Academy.  Every  year,  ECO  provides  an  average  of  70  training 
sessions, attended by around 1 500 EURES staff. 

26 For instance, the Annual Reports on Intra-EU Labour Mobility publicly available, providing updated information on 
labour mobility trends in EU and EFTA countries; and the internal annual  Performance Measurement System Joint 
Analysis Reports, providing only to the EURES network an overview of the activities, results, and trends as reported 
by the National Coordination Offices in their national analyses. 

27 EURES budget is detailed in annex III (Methodology), section b. Cost-effectiveness analysis / EURES budget. 

12 

 
                                                 
support  activities,  such  as  the  development  and  maintenance  of  the  EURES  portal,  the 
common  training  programme,  communication,  analytical  and  network  activities.  EaSI  also 
funds specific projects such as the cross-border partnerships and the mobility schemes, which 
are managed by EURES members and partners but funded after calls for proposals launched 
by  the  European  Commission.  The  annual  EURES  budget  under  EaSI  is  public  as 
Commission Implementing Decision28. 

  EURES countries contribute their resources to the network as they consider appropriate. The 
financial  resources  derive  from  three  main  sources:  national  budgets,  the  European  Social 
Fund  (ESF)  and  the  EURES  axis  of  EaSI  only  for  the  specific  projects  mentioned  above29. 
The composition of the budget  and its volume differ therefore from one EURES country to 
another. 

2.2.  Baseline and points of comparison  

2.2.1.  Baseline 

Following the mandate of Article 35 of the EURES Regulation (By 13 May 2021, the Commission 
shall  submit  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  an  ex  post  evaluation  report  of  the  operation  and 
effects of this Regulation), this evaluation compares the status quo with the situation in 2016, a 
priori linking any change to the EURES Regulation and its implementation. However, it provides 
also a wider perspective introducing additional comparative elements. 

Therefore,  the  reference  scenario  for  this  evaluation  would  be  a  situation  without  the  EURES 
Regulation, so to be able to assess to which extent the Regulation has achieved the expected targets 
identified in the Impact Assessment. 

The  EURES  legal  framework30  prior  to  the  EURES  Regulation  encouraged  Member  States  to 
introduce reforms, such as opening up the network to Private Employment Services. It was however, 
the prerogative of Member States to introduce such reforms depending on their political interests. At 
the  same  time,  the  European  Parliament  launched  a  request  for  annulment  of  this  legal  framework 
with the European Court of Justice, arguing that the Commission had overstepped its implementing 
powers31. 

28 All EaSI annual work programmes and amendments are available at 

https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?advSearchKey=easi+annual+work+programme&mode=advancedSubmit&catId
=1307&policyArea=0&policyAreaSub=0&country=0&year=0 

29 The EURES axis of EaSI supports specific projects awarded following calls for proposals: Targeted Mobility Schemes 

the adoption of the European Skills/Competences, Qualifications and Occupations classification, etc.  

30 Commission Implementing Decision 2012/733/EU of 26 November 2012 implementing Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 
of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  as  regards  the  clearance  of  vacancies  and  applications  for 
employment and the re-establishment of EURES. 

31 Case C-65/13, application from the EP in accordance with Article 236, third paragraph TFEU, registered by the ECJ on 

8.2.2013 as nr 927137, requesting for annulment of the Commission Implementing Decision 2012/733/EU. 

13 

 
 
                                                 
In this context, the first two policy options defined in the Impact Assessment32 provide a scenario for 
the potential consequences in the absence of the EURES Regulation: 

  Policy option 1 (No new action) would have created legal uncertainty, delaying any further 
reform of the network. The cooperation between Member States as regards intra-EU labour 
mobility would have continued on a bilateral basis. 

  Policy option 233 (minimal amendment of the regulation) would have provided legal certainty 
but would not have introduced clearer and stronger obligations to Member States, who would 
have cooperated depending on their potentially shifting political interest in mobility. 

Under  any  of  these  two  policy  options,  the  Impact  Assessment  found  it  difficult  that  the 
aforementioned specific objectives could be reached. It concluded:  

I. 

II. 

The accomplishment of the following two objectives would depend exclusively on voluntary 
efforts by Member States, thus even falling behind what was then the status quo: 
  To achieve a nearly complete pool of job vacancies and CVs on the EURES portal. 
  To enable the EURES portal to carry out automated matching between job vacancies and 

CV's. 

The  following  two  EURES  objectives  could  have  been  fulfilled,  depending  on  individual 
efforts and according to national needs, thus consistency across the EU could not have been 
achieved: 
  To  make  available  basic  information  on  the  EURES  network  to  any  jobseeker  or 

employer. 

  To assist any interested person with matching, placement and recruitment. 

III. 

Finally,  one  objective  could  in  principle  have  been  achieved  in  the  absence  of  the  EURES 
Regulation: 
  To  support  the  network  through  information  exchange  on  national  labour  shortages  and 

surpluses and the co-ordination of actions across Member States. 

However, as under these options, the ‘on-boarding’ of additional Members and Partners was 
quite  unlikely,  the  information  exchange  would  have  happened  only  among  Public 
Employment Services, missing the opportunity to collect additional information from private 
partners in an extended network. 

2.2.2.  Points of comparison  

Mobility is a right, not an obligation or an aim to be encouraged. Also, support to mobility is not an 
exclusive  competence  of  a  particular  organization.  Therefore,  the  Regulation  defines  EURES  as  a 
non-exclusive but far-reaching service open to all workers and employers across the Union interested 

32  SWD(2014)  9  final  Impact  Assessment,  p.  47,  chapter  5  “Description  of  policy  options”.  The  option  retained  was 
policy  option  4,  consisting  of  policy  option  3  (Modernising  and  strengthening  EURES,  via  sharing  of  CVs  and 
vacancies, with automated matching) plus EU wide partnerships with Private Employment Services. 

33 Option 2 was defined as ("Lisbonisation"): “Amending Regulation 492/2011  to introduce a legal basis for conferring 
powers  to  the  Commission  on  EURES  in  conformity  with  the  Lisbon  Treaty  and  subsequently  launching  a  new 
Decision in accordance with the amended basic act”. 

14 

 
 
 
                                                 
in  cross-border  labour  mobility.  The  Regulation  does  not  define  EURES  either  as  an  adjustment 
mechanism  to  economic  shocks  or  regional  disparities.  Coherently,  the  Regulation  neither  does 
define specific targets for EURES placements nor prescribes privileged target groups, which would 
be  incompatible  with  the  universal  right  for  free  movement  and  its  voluntary  scope.  However,  a 
comparison  is  needed  in  order  to  assess  the  success  of  the  EURES  regulation.  Two  points  of 
comparison can be considered for the purposes of this evaluation: 

the specific and operational objectives defined in the Impact Assessment. 

- 
-  benchmarking EURES against similar services. 

The following  table lists the specific  and operational  objectives defined in the  Impact  Assessment, 
with mention of the section of this evaluation that covers their analysis: 

Table 2 : Comparison points considered in the EURES Impact Assessment 

Point of comparison 

Section 

Specific objectives 
To achieve a nearly complete pool of job vacancies and CVs on the EURES 
portal 
To enable the EURES portal to carry out automated matching between job 
vacancies and CV's, in all EU languages, and understanding skills, 
competences, occupations and qualifications 
To make available basic information on the EURES network to any jobseeker 
or employer 

To assist any interested person with matching, placement and recruitment 

To support the network through information exchange on national labour 
shortages and surpluses and the co-ordination of actions across Member States 

Operational objectives 
75% of the job vacancies published by employment services in the EU are 
accessible through the EURES network (i.e. a target for the increase in number 
of vacancies shared on the EURES Portal) 
The exchange of CV's on the EURES portal is done on the basis of sharing of 
CV's available at national level (i.e. a target for the increase in the number of 
CV's shared on the EURES portal) 
There is a uniform standard for job vacancies and CV's that is applied by all 
organisations participating in the EURES network (i.e. a target for consistent 
application of standards for transparency of labour markets and automated 
matching) 
All job seekers and employers soliciting the assistance of an organisation 
participating in the EURES network are informed about mobility support 
services available at national level, and, when requested, provided with an 
offer for further assistance (i.e. a target for a consistent application of 
mainstreaming) 

5.2.2. The EURES portal 
as a matching place 
5.1.2. Adaptability to a 
changing context 

5.2.1. Provision of services 
to employers and 
jobseekers 
5.2.1. Provision of services 
to employers and 
jobseekers 
5.1.1. Relevance for intra-
EU labour market mobility 

5.2.2. The EURES portal 
as a matching place 

5.2.2. The EURES portal 
as a matching place 

5.1.2. Adaptability to a 
changing context 

5.2.1. Provision of services 
to employers and 
jobseekers 

15 

 
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 
EURES is not the only provider of trans-national job matching. However, research shows that there 
are no similar services that can be used as proper benchmark. 

There are no public job  matching services comparable to EURES. A study34 compiled in January 
2021 jointly by the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the UN International Organization 
for Migration (IOM) identifies only three state-facilitated digital technology platforms, in addition to 
EURES. These three platforms have helped to increase transparency, fair labour mobility and reduce 
recruitment costs. However, their features are limited compared to EURES. These platforms focus on 
digital provision for migration clearance checks, without job-matching features. Human interaction is 
very limited, provided by private recruitment agencies following their own business agendas.  

Private hiring platforms and matching on social  media can serve as  a point of comparison,  but 
only for the EURES services provided in the portal. These private platforms allow their customers to 
build  a  profile  with  their  résumé  or  company  description,  including  job  offers;  to  review  other 
customer’s  profiles;  to  facilitate  networking;  and  to  match  jobs  with  vacancies.  However,  these 
platforms work most often only in  English, for  a fee for the recruiting companies, and exclusively 
online in self-service mode for jobseekers. 

Both the most known private and public recruitment platforms that could be compared to EURES are 
purely virtual.  According to  the  ILO-IOM  study “digital technologies are not  a panacea, and they 
can  only  be  effective  when  rigorously  complemented  by  strong  legal  and  policy  provisions  on  the 
ground that fully uphold labour rights and by proactive follow-up mechanisms by States, employers, 
and other relevant migration stakeholders […] Private job sites exist to make a profit, and thus often 
do not include low-skilled or low-paid jobs. Governments can fill this gap by sponsoring job boards 
specifically targeting low-skilled or low-wage work.” 

International  head  hunting  companies  offer  multilingual  face-to-face  services,  often  with  some 
on-line  support.  These  companies  offer  services  for  a  fee  and  are  devoted  to  highly  qualified 
professionals who need little or no support to find jobs.  In fact, most often their customers are the 
companies  that  need  to  recruit  scarce  highly-paid  professionals  in  niche  sectors.  Recruitment 
packages  are  provided  by  the  recruiting  company  and  include  benefits  helping  relocation  such  as 
finding  accommodation  and  schooling.  These  services  are  not  comparable  to  EURES,  whose 
customers belong to all sorts of qualification levels and employers. 

Currently, EURES is the only international mobility service that covers all kinds of jobseekers and 
employers, for free, in their own languages, both face-to-face and online, in a large economic region. 

In any case, the aim of EURES is not to compete or replace private or public employment services, 
but to facilitate that they complement each other, becoming part of the network. 

34  The  three  platforms  identified  beyond  EURES  are  EPS  (Republic  of  Korea),  Musaned  (Kingdom  of  Saudi  Arabia), 
eMigrate (Republic of India). Promoting fair and ethical recruitment in a digital world: Lessons and policy options, 
the  UN  International  Organization  for  Migration,  2021. 
International  Labour  Organization  (ILO)  and 
https://rocairo.iom.int/publications/promoting-fair-and-ethical-recruitment-digital-world-lessons-and-policy-options  

16 

 
                                                 
3. 

IMPLEMENTATION / STATE OF PLAY 

The  implementation  of  the  EURES  Regulation  is  advancing35.  Organisational,  communication  and 
monitoring  aspects  have  been  fully  implemented  throughout  the  network,  but  some  other 
implementation areas, highlighted below, experience delays36.  

The implementation status of the main aspects of the EURES Regulation is summarised below:  

  The  broadening  of  the  network  happens  at  a  slow  pace.  While  all  EURES  countries  have 
established  or  started  preparing  an  admission  system37,  at  the  end  of  2020,  only  half  of  them 
have reported to have admitted new Members and Partners.  

  The transparent exchange of job vacancies and CVs between national databases and EURES is 
still to be completed: All EURES countries have set up a system for transferring job vacancies, 
but seven Member States are not transferring yet CVs through the single coordinated channel. 
  The work towards an automated matching on the EURES portal is ongoing but pending on the 
mapping of national classification systems to the European Skills/Competences, Qualifications 
and Occupations (ESCO) classification by the deadline (7 August 2021). In parallel, the EURES 
portal was updated with new search functionalities and design. 

  The  templates  to  enable  harmonised  planning  and  performance  measurement  across  the 
EURES network are in use since 2018 by all EURES countries. The activities are planned and 
monitored through the Programming Cycle, a harmonized planning  tool that provides a yearly 
overview of the planned (“work programmes”) and implemented (“activity reports”) activities 
of  the  EURES  network  at  national  level.  The  overall  performance  of  EURES  is  measured 
through the Performance Management System (PMS). The PMS was introduced in 2018 and, so 
far, not all EURES countries provide all reporting data with the appropriate quality38. 

Therefore, for substantial parts of the Regulation implementation efforts are still ongoing. This has to 
be assessed, taking into account that: 
  The  adoption  of  the  Regulation  did  not  complete  the  legal  framework  for  EURES.  Six 
additional implementing acts were to be adopted in 2017 and 2018. Furthermore, the provision 
of  CVs  and  vacancies  by  EURES  Members  entered  into  force  on  13  May  2018,  and  the 
harmonized classification allowing automated matching will enter into force on 7 August 2021, 
after the deadline for this evaluation. 

35  Based  on  the  findings  of  the  First  and  Second  EURES  biennial  activity  reports  to  the  European  Parliament  and 

Council, COM(2019) 164 final, COM(2021) 46 final. 

36 On 19 November 2019, the Commission sent administrative letters to the Member States that did not yet comply with 
the provisions of the EURES regulation, in particular the CV exchange and the admission system. Depending on the 
planned  compliance  dates  indicated  in  the  replies  to  these  letters,  further  monitoring  and  analysis  of  the 
implementation, the Commission will consider further actions. 

37 The non-EU EURES countries have  not  yet started the  work on admission as the Regulation  was  taken over in late 

2019 by the EEA Joint Committee and the implementation at national level is under way.   

38  Not  all  countries  provide  all  the  data  for  the  regular  internal  monitoring  (PMS),  and  many  submit  it  delayed.  The 
annual joint analysis reports in 2018 and 2019 contain input from only 22-24 countries. In addition, cases of extreme 
outliers can be identified what may question the reliance of the data. 

17 

 
 
                                                 
 

Some of the essential changes of the Regulation, particularly the transmission of CVs and the 
enlargement of the Network through national admission systems, required additional legislative 
adaptations in some Member States. These have been the areas where Member States have acted 
more  reluctantly,  particularly  after  the  introduction  of  the  GDPR39  in  2018,  thus  slowing  the 
implementation process. 

  The implementation was performed without additional resources. The EURES Regulation does 
not include any budget and Member States have to fund EURES action from their own sources 
(either national budgets or ESF).  

As  a  consequence,  the  evaluation  comes  at  a  moment  when  the  costs  of  the  reform  have  become 
evident, but not all the positive effects are observable yet. 

4.  METHOD 

The  evaluation  was  based  on  evaluation  questions  linked  to  the  five  criteria  defined  by  the  Better 
Regulation Guidelines (Relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and EU added value)40. These 
questions  were  broken  down  into  sub-questions  as  agreed  with  a  group  of  experts  from  several 
Commission  services  (Inter-Service  Steering  group).  The  full  list  of  the  30  questions  and  sub-
questions, and the analysis of the criteria built on the intervention logic are described in annex III.a.  

Following the Evaluation Roadmap published in July 2019, the evaluation was carried out with the 
support of a study (‘the study’)41, conducted between December 2019 and November 2020.  

4.1. 

Short description of methodology 

The  study  used  a  mix  of  evaluation  methods  including  desk  research,  statistical  analysis,  a  public 
consultation, surveys, workshops, case studies and interviews with stakeholders and Member States’ 
officials.  It  combined  quantitative  and  qualitative  data,  which  were  systematically  triangulated  to 
answer  the  evaluation  questions.  The  methodology  is  explained  in  annex  III  to  this  Staff  Working 
Document.  

The  study  builds  on  the  rich  stock  of  EURES  monitoring  and  internal  data,  but  also  on  multiple 
sources, cited throughout the study, such as other existing studies, academic literature and statistical 
data.  

It also includes seven case studies on specific topics: the single coordinated channel, IT platforms / 
matching  and  monitoring  tools,  cross-border  collaborations,  extension  of  the  network,  and  support 

39  General  Data  Protection  Regulation.  Regulation  (EU)  2016/679  strengthens  individuals'  fundamental  rights  in  the 
digital age  and  facilitate  business by clarifying rules for companies and public bodies in the digital  single  market. 
The Regulation entered into force on 24 May 2016 and applies since 25 May 2018. 

40  SWD  (2017)  350,  “Better  Regulation  Guidelines”,  tool#47:  https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-

guidelines.pdf 

41 Evaluation study: Study supporting the ex-post EURES evaluation and the second biennial EURES report, Deloitte, 

VVA and FGB for the European Commission, 2020. ISBN 978-92-76-22093-0, 
http://publications.europa.eu/publication/catalogue_number/KE-02-20-720-EN-N 

18 

 
 
                                                 
services to employers and to workers. The case studies covered 10 Member States (Belgium, Estonia, 
Germany, Hungary, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain and Sweden). 

Input from consultations with a range of actors also contributed to the evaluation. An open internet-
based  public  consultation  ran  from  31  March  2020  to  30  June  2020.  In  addition,  relevant 
stakeholders,  including  employers,  jobseekers,  national  coordinators  and  EURES  Members  and 
Partners were consulted in a targeted way through several fora. Details concerning the consultations 
and the responses received can be found in annex II. 

Member States were consulted through 14 workshops and the meetings of the EURES Coordination 
Group (ECG) from April to November 2020, as part of the study. 

4.2.  Limitations and robustness of findings 

Three main limitations of the evaluation should be taken into account: 

The object of the evaluation cannot be determined with precision. 

The  Regulation  comes  on  an  existing  network,  making  difficult  to  determine  whether  changes  are 
due to the Regulation or (also) due to other factors. This problem is reinforced by the deadline of the 
evaluation, which comes at a moment when the Regulation is not yet fully implemented.  

The evaluation has faced limitations on data availability. 

Since  the  Regulation  and  in  particular  the  harmonized  Performance  Measurement  System  (2018) 
entered into force, a multitude of monitoring data is collected. Given this short period of consolidated 
monitoring  requirements,  efforts  to  improve  comparability,  quality,  complete-  and  timeliness  of 
reporting are still ongoing. This is even more challenging as many Members and Partners consider 
the  data  of  placements  and  performance  (in  particular  in  combination  with  financial  data)  as 
sensitive.  Previously,  the  EURES  countries  were  using  their  national  monitoring  systems,  often 
based on voluntary reporting. Hence, monitoring information from 2016-2017 and 2018-2019 is not 
comparable.  

Concerning financial information, EURES countries provide information about their budgets planned 
for  the  following  year  as  part  of  the  Programming  Cycle.  However,  the  information  is  not 
standardised  and  also  the  basis  of  the  cost  calculation  models  differs  between  Member  States. 
Therefore, each country provides it in a different manner with some of them choosing not to disclose 
certain details.  

Finally, most of the bilateral cross-border flows of workers recorded by Eurostat are not statistically 
significant  or  even  cannot  be  disclosed  for  confidentiality  reasons,  since  it  would  be  possible  to 
identify the individuals given the relative small size of the phenomenon. 

Limitations  in  the  availability  of  stakeholders  for  interviews  or  workshops  also  affected  the 
evaluation. 

Due  to  the  outbreak  of  COVID-19  and  the  severe  restrictions  to  mobility,  it  was  not  possible  to 
conduct fieldwork for the data collection on the case studies. 

19 

 
Moreover, the administrations of certain Member States initially selected for the case studies, were 
facing  staff  shortages  because  of  new  emerging  national  priorities  with  a  different  focus  than 
EURES. 

Recruiting  participants  to  the  workshops  was  generally  difficult  due  to  data  protection  issues 
potentially preventing the disclosure of individual contact details by national coordinators. 

To  overcome  these  limitations  and  ensure  robustness  and  consistency  of  the  findings,  corrective 
measures were undertaken:  

  The unavailable countries were replaced by others, while keeping the overall set of countries 

analysed coherent, so as to cover all the selected topics.  

  The fieldwork was replaced by online interviews and workshops. 
  When data protection restrictions prevented sending direct invitations, national newsletters or 

anonymous mailings were used instead. 

  The data was triangulated with several sources of evidence and stakeholders’ opinions from 
the various consultation activities, where additional questions were included, particularly for 
national coordinators.  

  Two validation workshops allowed stakeholders and experts to provide critical input on the 

preliminary findings. 

When conclusions include uncertainties, because of data limitations, this is highlighted in the text. 

5.  ANALYSIS AND ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS 

This chapter analyses the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and EU-added value of the 
EURES Regulation. 

5.1.  Relevance 

5.1.1.  Relevance for intra-EU labour market mobility 

Employment  services are, similar to  health services, relevant  at  all times, but  their importance and 
visibility increases in times of crisis.  

According  to  76%  of  the  respondents  to  the  public  consultation,  EURES  provides  relevant  and 
modern employment services in line with the needs of European workers and employers, and 85% 
confirm  that  EURES  contributes  to  the  mobility  of  workers42.  This  is  in  line with  findings  of desk 
research43  and  the  views  of  EURES  national  coordinators  (23  out  of  26  respondents  agree44)  all 

42 Evaluation study, p. 328, annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

43 Countries with higher barriers to labour mobility (especially language and administrative barriers, creating difficulties 
both  to  work  abroad  and  to  receive  foreign  workers)  tended  to  be  also  those  with  worse  income  or  employment 
prospects,  often  in  conjunction  with  a  large  pool  of  overqualified  workers.  In  these  countries,  the  capacity  of 
matching supply and demand at national level remained far below pre-crisis levels and did not improve tangibly over 
the evaluation period. Evaluation study, p. 559, annex III.b - Comparative analysis of the labour market, “Barriers to 
mobility” 

20 

 
                                                 
pointing to the conclusion that EURES is a relevant tool for the EU to ensure the rights granted in 
Article 45 TFEU. 

The EURES portal’s objective of “achieving a nearly complete supply of job vacancies and CVs” is 
relevant,  particularly  in  a  context  of  increased  use  of  online  recruitment.  The  automated  matching 
function of the EURES portal responds to the expressed need of employers and jobseekers to reduce 
transaction costs and the duration of the selection process, resulting in a smooth recruiting process45. 
An automated matching tool does not take automated decisions, but facilitates the task of advisors, or 
even  employers  and  jobseekers  in  self-service  mode.  The  matching  results  are  ranked  along  with 
transparent details on how the job match was calculated, leaving the final decision to the advisor and 
the interested customer.  Aside to  the direct  benefit of matching automatically jobs  and profiles, an 
automated  matching  platform  can  provide  analytics,  gap  analysis,  and  reports  with  insights  to 
improve the matching process. 

The  EURES  network  makes  available  basic  information  required  by  jobseekers  and 
employers’  needs  and  provides  support  services.  The  relevance  of  these  services  is  confirmed 
from  the  case  study46  regarding  employers’  needs,  requiring  guidance  and  recruitment  assistance, 
particularly  in  an  international  context.  Similarly,  jobseekers  seek  EURES  services  mostly  for 
information and recruitment support. These services have been found relevant for addressing barriers 
to intra-EU labour mobility, such as lack of information on job opportunities and working conditions 
in other EU countries. 

The  objective  “support  the  functioning  of  the  EURES  network  through  information  exchange  on 
national labour shortages and surpluses and the co-ordination of actions across Member States” 
has  been  found  to  respond  to  labour  market  needs.  In  fact,  until  the  outbreak  of  COVID-19,  job 
vacancy  rates  were  progressively  increasing  across  the  EU,  reaching  2.3%  in  2019.  EURES  joint 
analysis  reports  show  that  there  are  complementary  differences  in  labour  shortages  and  surpluses 
across  Europe,  with  some  exceptions  in  specific  sectors  (e.g.  healthcare  and  ICT).  For  instance, 
“accountants”  and  “shop  sales  assistants”  were  reported  as  both  in  surplus  and  in  shortage  in 
different  countries,  and  “bus  and  tram  drivers”  were  reported  in  shortage  while  there  was  a 
potentially complementary surplus of “car, taxi and van drivers”47.  

44 Evaluation study, p. 332 (2.1.1 EURES evaluation National Coordination Offices’ survey analysis), annex II.c Details 

of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

45 “The online job vacancy market in the EU: driving forces and emerging trends”, Cedefop, 2019, p. 21, ISBN 978-92-

896-2864-8, https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/publications-and-resources/publications/5572 

46 Evaluation study, p. 294 (7 Advice and guidance to employers recruiting abroad), annex II.b Case studies. 

47 A comparison of shortage and surplus occupations based on analyses of data from the European Public Employment 
Services and Labour Force Surveys - Labour shortages and surpluses 2019, p. 7. European Commission. ISBN 978-
92-76-14246-1, https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=22126  

21 

 
                                                                                                                                                                    
5.1.2.  Adaptability to a changing context 

The changing context  includes 1) changing labour mobility patterns, 2)  emerging technologies and 
recruitment channels and 3) changes in the regulatory context: 

The reformed EURES network has shown its ability to adapt to changing labour mobility patterns, 
according  to  21  out  of  25  national  coordinators  who  expressed  their  views  about  EURES’ 
adaptability to changing  labour market  patterns  considered EURES as  responsive to  labour market 
changes. The opinion of the respondents to the public consultation is not conclusive48. 

The stakeholders interviewed in the case studies49 explain that recently EURES countries started to 
face  similar  skills  shortages  in  specific  sectors  (e.g.  healthcare  and  ICT).  To  adapt  to  this  new 
situation,  some  traditionally  sending  countries  (e.g.  Romania),  changed  their  strategic  priorities  by 
focusing  on  attracting  foreign  employees  and  providing  services  to  local  employers.  Indeed,  the 
analysis  of  the  EURES  national  work  programmes  shows  that  half  of  the  countries  have  been 
planning their activities based on a thorough assessment of their labour market needs. Specifically, 
15 countries in 2018 and 11 countries in 2019 linked the planning of their EURES activities to labour 
market conditions, in particular the analysis of bottleneck and surplus occupations. 

In line with the increasing return mobility50, EURES national work programmes show an increasing 
number of activities tailored to returning workers. 

The  COVID-19  disruption  provides  proof  of  EURES’  adaptability.  Counselling  services  and  the 
European  Online  Job  Days  were  available  in  virtual  format  beforehand,  and  became  exclusively 
digital  during  the  pandemic.  As  a  reference,  from  2016  to  2019,  an  average  of  27  job  days  (both 
online and onsite) were organized per year, while 20 online job days and 1 mixed online-onsite were 
organized  in  202051.  The  disruption  showed  also  EURES’  vulnerabilities:  while  countries  such  as 
Estonia ensured business continuity of counselling services by shifting to online service provision, in 
some countries, (e.g. Germany, Ireland) EURES advisers were reassigned temporary to PES national 
activities. 

48 Given the deep understanding of the labour market and EURES required to assess this topic, it was not asked explicitly 
in the consultation. However, their opinion can be assessed indirectly with two specific questions: “EURES provides 
relevant and modern employment services in line with the needs of European workers and employers?” and “Is there 
a need to improve EURES and its tools and services in the future?”. Respondents equally agree that EURES provides 
relevant and modern services (76%), but that EURES has to improve (72%). The written remarks provided show that 
the improvements are requested for the portal or existing services, but not concerning the adaptability of EURES to 
changing mobility patterns. Evaluation study, p. 328, annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

49 Evaluation study, p. 277 (6 Support to mobile workers), annex II.b Case studies  

50 2019 Annual Report on Intra-EU Labour Mobility, p.43, HIVA-KULeuven, IRIS Ghent University and Milieu Ltd. 

Eftheia for the European Commission, 2020. ISBN 978-92-76-15272-9, 
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&pubId=8242 

51 The list of past and planned events are public at https://www.europeanjobdays.eu/en/events 

22 

 
                                                 
EURES  is  in  general  keeping  pace  with  emerging  technologies  and  recruitment  channels. 
National coordinators broadly agree (73%) in their survey that EURES is adapting to the increase in 
the use of online platforms and social media for job searches and recruitment purposes. However, a 
large majority (72%) of respondents to the public consultation consider that the EURES portal needs 
to  improve52.  The  analysis  of  the  national  activities  shows  that  EURES  countries  introduce  more 
digital means in offering information and recruitment services. For example, in 2019, around 60% of 
the  European  Job  Days  were  hosted  exclusively  online.  The  level  of  adoption  of  online  solutions 
strongly depends on the national level of digitalisation, which is likely to accelerate as consequence 
of the COVID-19 disruption. 

Private  hiring  platforms  and  matching  on  social  media  can  serve  as  a  benchmark  for  the  online 
EURES  services  in  the  portal.  These  platforms  do  not  provide  publicly  accessible  information  on 
their number of customers, market share or placements, but an overview of well-known online hiring 
platforms and social media practices shows that they serve the needs of qualified jobseekers that are 
fluent  in  English  and  can  handle  autonomously  relocation  and  administrative  procedures.  These 
platforms  mainly  target  employers  looking  for  specialized  profiles  and  willing  to  pay  to  promote 
their vacancies. 

EURES is particularly relevant for employers who can profit from free counselling and advertising, 
and who are willing to  employ transparently, for instance, next  to  their competitors in  the EURES 
online  job  fairs.  EURES  services  are  also  particularly  relevant  for  jobseekers  with  limited  or  no 
fluency in foreign languages, in need for support to upscale or relocate, unable to find information on 
living  and  working  conditions  in  foreign  countries,  and  concerned  about  exploitation  and  in  fair 
mobility practices.  

Furthermore,  the  legal  status  of  all  employers  registered  in  EURES  is  checked  individually,  thus 
providing  for  jobseekers  more  protection  than  those  forms  of  labour  intermediation  which  operate 
unregistered  and  unlicensed  on  social  media,  favouring  undeclared  work  and  poor  working 
conditions53. 

The EURES portal responds to the trend of using online platforms for job searches. Both employers 
and jobseekers consistently respond (replies in the range 60% to 84%) that the portal is useful  and 
easy  to  navigate,  has  increased  employment  opportunities  and  the  information  provided  is  of  good 
quality, updated and easy to understand54. However, in the written remarks, some of them reported 
that it could be more user-friendly. Also, the search function still requires manual intervention and a 

52  The  respondents  consider  (72%  agree,  24%  no  opinion)  that  there  is  a  need  to  improve  EURES  and  its  tools  and 
services in the future. The written explanations provided to justify this request are often linked to improvements in 
the portal. Evaluation study, p. 328, annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

53 Tools and approaches to tackle fraudulent temporary agency  work, prompting undeclared work; Inga Pavlovaite and 
2021, 

the  European  Platform  Tackling  Undeclared  Work, 

Karolina 
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=88&eventsId=1788  

Jakubowska 

January 

for 

54  Evaluation  study,  p.  431  (2.1.3  EURES  evaluation  Jobseekers  survey  analysis)  and  462  (2.1.4  EURES  evaluation 

Employers survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

23 

 
                                                 
fully automated matching functionality is not yet available. The main limitation is the absence of a 
harmonized  way  to  encode  job  vacancies  and  CVs  all  over  Europe.  This  limitation  will  be  only 
overcome  when  all  the  EURES  countries  complete  the  mapping  of  their  national  classifications 
systems to the European Skills/Competences, Qualifications and Occupations (ESCO) classification. 
The deadline is set for August 202155. 

Further than the portal, there has been a major shift between 2018 and 2020 towards the use of social 
media channels for promoting EURES, with most EURES countries having a social media account. 
Similarly,  ECO  opened  social  media  accounts  and  a  video  channel,  to  keep  up  with  the  emerging 
information and communication trends56. Further details on media presence are available in section 
5.2.5. Visibility. 

         Table 3: Reach of posts on social media channels of EURES countries in 2018 and 2019. Source: EURES monitoring. 

Social media channel 
Facebook 
Twitter 
LinkedIn 

2018 
3 947 673 
2 119 316 
412 289 

2019 
7 092 504 
1 265 308 
1 176 639 

Total 
11 040 177 
3 384 624 
1 588 928 

To  adapt  to  changes  in  the  regulatory  context,  EURES  can  rely  on  three  mechanisms:  the 
discussions at the EURES Coordination Group, the exchange of information on labour mobility and 
the  Programming  Cycle  (harmonized  planning).  These  mechanisms  help  EURES  countries  to 
identify in a timely manner changes and trends with cross-border impact. However, their existence 
does  not  necessarily  imply  a  coordinated  response  from  the  EURES  network,  which  normally 
depends on each national network’s strategic focus and priorities. In any case, national coordinators 
did not observe57 relevant changes in this context, either hindering or supporting labour mobility.  

5.1.3.  Alignment with needs of target groups 

The  Regulation  requires  EURES  to  be  available  to  all  workers  and  employers  across  the  Union 
without exceptions58, preventing creaming and parking effects59. Indeed, the Regulation mentions as 
target  groups:  any  employer  interested  in  recruiting  from  within the  Union  (recital 39),  and  all  the 
citizens  of  the  Union  who  are  searching  for  employment  opportunities  in  other  Member  States 
(recital 46).  The  Regulation  also  identifies  groups  of  particular  interest:  frontier  workers  and 

55  7  August  2021  according  to  Article  19(3)  of  the  EURES  Regulation  and  Commission  Implementing  Decision  (EU) 

2018/1021. 

56 European Commission, Eurobarometer. “Communicating Europe: Where do EU citizens get their news on European 
political matters?”, https://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/topics/fs7_communicating_40_en.pdf  

57 Evaluation  study, p. 363 (2.1.1 EURES evaluation  National Coordination Offices’ survey analysis), annex II.b Case 

studies. 

58 Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2016/589 “Services under this Regulation shall be available to all workers and employers 

across the Union and shall respect the principle of equal treatment” 

59  “Creaming”  or  “cherry-picking”  consists  in  focusing  on  jobseekers  with  good  labour  market  prospects.  “Parking” 

means neglecting unemployed jobseekers who are difficult to place. 

24 

 
 
                                                 
employers in cross-border regions (recital 44), and young jobseekers/graduated in need of upskilling 
and  reskilling  through  apprenticeships  or  traineeships  subject  to  an  employment  relationship 
(recital 8).  

Accordingly,  both  employers  and  jobseekers  are  targeted  by  EURES’  national  work  programmes. 
The  survey60  of  EURES  Members  and  Partners  confirms  that  76%  of  respondents  target  both 
jobseekers  and  employers  with  their  services.  In  addition,  EURES  countries  provide  support  for 
specific  sub-groups:  frontier  workers  through  cross-border  partnerships,  young  people  through 
EURES mobility schemes, and returning workers through targeted information events.  

EURES  Members  and  Partners  attribute  a  similar  priority  to  all  the  proposed  groups,  except  for 
young workers, whose importance is ranked double by a majority (70 out of 94) of the respondents61. 
The 1 434 respondents of the public consultation62 also attribute the highest priority to young workers 
(850 respondents) while cross-border workers or other groups (such as unskilled workers) received 
less attention63. 

There are no conclusive figures identifying the groups that have used most EURES services. Due 
to privacy rules, Members and Partners remove personal information (age, gender) from the provided 
CVs  before  sending  them  to  the  EURES  portal,  making  it  impossible  to  elaborate  statistics  on  the 
stocks  of  CVs.  In  addition,  these  CVs  are  not  yet  harmonized  along  the  European  classification 
(ESCO), creating problems to determine their spread along qualifications or skills. Moreover, neither 
the employers nor those jobseekers who  get  a placement have an obligation to  report their success 
back to EURES.  

The available statistics64 from the internal harmonised monitoring show that EURES jobseekers are 
relatively  young  (those  aged  15-34  over  57%,  followed  by  35-49  at  around  25%,  and  50+  around 
18%)65. Jobseekers are predominantly in higher qualification levels (slightly more than half of the 

60 Evaluation study, p. 384 (2.1.2 EURES evaluation Members and Partners survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the 

stakeholders’ consultation 

61 Evaluation study, p. 405 (2.1.2 EURES evaluation Members and Partners survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the 

stakeholders’ consultation. 

62  Public  consultation  for  the  European  network  of  employment  services  (EURES  evaluation  2016-2020), 
https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/11866-European-network-of-employment-
services-EURES-evaluation-2016-2020--/public-consultation 

63 These priorities might reflect a bias by the respondents, who are nearly all (80%) EU citizens (rather than companies or 
organizations); unemployed or employed but searching a job (69%); and who have in many cases (41%) not worked 
abroad.  In  addition,  unskilled  jobseekers  are  unlikely  to  reply  to  an  online  consultation,  being  possibly 
underrepresented in the sample. The public consultation did not ask information on the age of the respondents. 

64 Internal monitoring data (PMS) 2019 and first semester of 2020; and EURES portal figures at the end of 2020. Public 

snapshots of EURES figures are available at https://ec.europa.eu/eures/eures-apps/cvo/page/statistics 

65 These results align well with a recent standard Eurobarometer 93 summer 2020: A socio-demographic analysis shows 
that all categories of the European population primarily see the European Union as a space  of freedom and mobility for 
everyone. However, there are differences in the extent to which respondents declare this view. This association is more 
widespread  among  15-24  year-olds  (60%)  than  among  those  aged  55  and  over  (46%),  among  managers  (65%)  than 

25 

 
                                                 
 
jobseekers have post-secondary or tertiary education, with the spread among these evolving unevenly 
overtime;  around  48%  has  secondary  education).  Men  and  women  are  equally  represented  overall, 
with a slight majority of men. EURES employers are predominantly SMEs, particularly micro- (less 
than 10 employees) or small- (10 to 50 employees) enterprises, in line with EU reality, with SMEs 
representing 99% of all businesses and creating 2/3 of the jobs66. 

The  business  model  of  employment  services  in  general  is  very  much  based  on  identifying  a  job 
vacancy to  which potential candidates can be matched.  To implement  this demand-based approach 
and  contribute  to  labour  market  integration,  EURES  annual  activities  are  planned,  via  the 
Programming  Cycle,  according  to  the  identified  surpluses  and  bottlenecks  in  sectors  and 
occupations  along  the  European  labour  market67.  The  analysis,  however,  confirms  that  shortages 
converge more and more, for example shortages of software skills have become omnipresent in the 
European Union, making increasingly difficult this approach.  

Jobseekers and employers’ needs are mostly related to the presence of obstacles to labour mobility 
within the EU, such as lack of transparent information, the existence of administrative, language and 
socio-cultural barriers, and challenges in the first months of moving to another country.  

The provision of information and guidance by EURES advisers and the publication of information on 
living  and  working  conditions  in  European  countries  on  the  EURES  portal  respond  to  the  lack  of 
transparent  information.  This  information  is  also  relevant  in  dealing  with  administrative  obstacles. 
Overall, the information provided on the portal appears to be useful, up-to-date and of good quality 
both  for  jobseekers  and  employers  (replies  in  the  range  60%  to  84%)68.  However,  jobseekers 
mentioned examples of additional information that could be included (e.g. more detailed information 
on rights and obligations, details on taxation and cost of living in each country). This suggests that 
the current information available can be expanded. In addition, the information presentation could be 
improved by making it more user-friendly, which was suggested by jobseekers, employers as well as 
Members and Partners. 

among unemployed people and house persons (45% for both), among people who studied up to the age of 20 and older 
(58%) than among those who left school aged 15 or earlier (37%) and among those who see themselves as belonging to 
the upper class (69%) or upper middle class (64%) of society than among those who see themselves as belonging to the 
lower middle class (47%) or working class (46%). These differences are very similar to those observed in the previous 
survey. 

66 https://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes_en  

67 Analysis on shortage and surplus occupations, December 2020.  
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&pubId=8356  

68 Evaluation study, p. 431 (2.1.3 EURES evaluation Jobseekers survey analysis) and p. 465 (2.1.4 EURES evaluation 

Employers survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

26 

 
                                                                                                                                                                    
 
Obstacles linked to the recognition of qualifications and language proficiency are addressed to some 
extent by the EURES mobility schemes, as identified in the related case study69. However, EURES 
general support services do not play a central role at present in this field due to budget limitations. 

Post-recruitment assistance is not widely developed across the network and is often provided only on 
demand.  Moreover,  EURES  advisers  have  limited  scope  to  work  on  cultural  barriers  or  influence 
political priorities.  

Looking at frontier workers and employers in cross-border regions, overall cross-border mobility 
is  experiencing  an  upward  trend  within  the  EU.  As  highlighted  in  the  related  case  study70,  the 
persistent  differences  between  social  security  schemes,  tax  administration  and  other  bureaucratic 
processes  across  borders  lead  to  the  need  for  access  to  transparent  and  complete  information  on 
living  and  working  conditions  in  the  neighbouring  countries.  This  need  is  felt  by  both  workers  or 
jobseekers and employers.  

The specific labour mobility barriers in cross-border regions, underline the relevance of EURES for 
this  target  group.  The  interviews  and  workshops  organised  for  the  case  study  show  that  EURES 
advisers and cross-border partnerships staff, through the provision of information and guidance, are 
able to offer correct, detailed and credible information to both jobseekers/workers and employers. 

Finally, the specific challenges for young jobseekers willing/needing to upskill or reskill highlight 
the relevance of EURES for this target group. The youth labour market is characterised by relatively 
high  unemployment  rates,  low  quality  of  employment  contracts,  and  a  growing  demand  for  digital 
and other technical skills. At the same time, a low adaptability of the education systems is observed71. 
To  address  these  limitations,  the  Council  adopted  on  30  October  2020  a  Recommendation  on  'A 
Bridge  to  Jobs  –  Reinforcing  the  Youth  Guarantee',  aiming  to  better  support  youth  employment 
across the EU72, in parallel to EURES activities. 

EURES advisers, through the provision of guidance and information offer valid support to filling the 
knowledge gap concerning working conditions abroad and traineeship requirements. Moreover, the 
EURES  mobility  schemes  provide  financial  support  and  respond  to  the  need  to  gain  the  skills 
necessary to  gain sustainable access to the labour market. However, apprenticeship and traineeship 

69  Evaluation  study,  p.  275  (3  Cross-border  collaboration  /  support  services  in  cross-border  regions),  annex  II.b  Case 

studies. 

70  Evaluation  study,  p.  216  (3  Cross-border  collaboration  /  support  services  in  cross-border  regions),  annex  II.b  Case 

studies. 

71 “Youth Guarantee in light of changes in the world of work”, Evaluation office and ICON institute for the European 
Commission,  2018.  https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=1079&furtherNews=yes&newsId=9295. 
ILO, 2017. “Rising to the youth employment challenge: New evidence on key policy issues” www.ilo.org 

72  Interinstitutional  File  2020/0132  (NLE).  The  reinforced  Youth  Guarantee  reaffirms  the  commitment  of  the  Member 
States  to  set  up  national  schemes  through  which  young  people  can  receive  an  offer  of  employment,  education, 
traineeship or apprenticeship within a period of four months of becoming unemployed or leaving formal education. 
The  upper  age  limit  of  the  Youth  Guarantee  was  extended  from  25  to  up  to  29,  providing  for  better  inclusion  of 
persons from vulnerable groups, such as NEETs, young women and people with disabilities. 

27 

 
                                                 
schemes supported by EURES are not widespread across all countries, as often it is not felt to be a 
priority, and persisting challenges cannot be tackled by EURES staff due to the lack of a European 
definition and standards, and the heterogeneity of the national legal frameworks. 

In  addition  to  the  target  groups  highlighted  by  the  Regulation,  the  analysis  identified  two  other 
groups of mobile workers, namely seasonal workers, whose specific needs became obvious during 
the COVID-19 disruption, and returning workers, a group accounting for 41% of the total of EU-28 
movers’ inflows in 2019, with an increase of 11% compared to the previous year73. These groups are 
so far only marginally covered by EURES74 and their needs should be further monitored. 

To  this  end,  the  portfolio  of  EURES  tools  and  services  provides  the  possibility  to  target  specific 
needs of jobseekers and  employers, adapting in  a proportionate way to  the evolving labour market 
needs, as described in section 5.1.2. Adaptability to a changing context. These tools and services are 
seen as complementary by experts and employers75 and are in line with the requirement of Article 45 
of the TFEU to provide support in a non-discriminatory way. 

5.2.  Effectiveness 

5.2.1.  Provision of services to employers and jobseekers 

The respondents to the public consultation agree that EURES provides quality information on living 
and  working  abroad  (74%)  and  in  their  search  for  jobs/candidates  (78%)76.  National  coordinators, 
Members,  and  Partners  find  nearly  unanimously77  that  EURES  services,  and  the  information 
available,  raise  awareness  of  intra-EU  labour  mobility  possibilities.  These  responses  suggest  that 
EURES fulfils its objective of making available basic information to any jobseeker or employer. 

With regard to the outreach to jobseekers and employers, the EURES Impact Assessment sets as 
an objective for EURES to provide matching, placement and recruitment assistance to all interested 
people, but does not provide a quantitative target. The number of individuals assisted is increasing 
(performance  measurement  data  shows  an  increase  of  45.1%  of  contacts  with  jobseekers  between 

73 2019 Annual Report on Intra-EU Labour Mobility, p.43, HIVA-KULeuven, IRIS Ghent University and Milieu Ltd. 

Eftheia for the European Commission, 2020. ISBN 978-92-76-15272-9, 
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&pubId=8242 

74 Evaluation study, p. 405, annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation, question “Which of the following target 

groups do you think EURES should prioritise in the future?” 

75 EURES services complement each other according to 81% of the respondants. Evaluation study, p. 463 (2.1.4 EURES 

evaluation Employers survey analysis), Annex II.c Results of the stakeholders’ consultations 

76  Of  those  who  had  an  opinion,  78%  (871)  agree  that  "EURES  offers  useful  support  and  information  to 
jobseekers/employers in their search for jobs/candidates" and 74% (761) EURES that "provides quality information 
on  living  and  working  abroad".  Public  consultation  for  the  European  network  of  employment  services  (EURES 
evaluation  2016-2020),  https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/11866-European-
network-of-employment-services-EURES-evaluation-2016-2020--/public-consultation. 

77 Evaluation study, p. 340 (2.1.1 EURES evaluation National Coordination Offices’ survey analysis) and p. 383 (2.1.2 
EURES evaluation Members and Partners survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

28 

 
 
                                                 
2018  (2 305 490)  and  2019  (3 344 368)).  Stakeholders’  opinions  suggest  that  almost  all  customers 
seeking support could be assisted even though, occasionally78, they indicated that the support services 
are not equally accessible throughout the network. Some jobseekers claim that they did not receive a 
response after reaching out to EURES advisers. These dissenting opinions would suggest that despite 
the overall positive figures, more effort is required. Also, the analysis of national activity reports and 
stakeholders’  feedback  shows  that  support  services  targeting  youth  are  not  equally  spread  along 
EURES countries. This is due to the differences in national legislative frameworks for traineeships 
and apprenticeships, leaving this kind of activities out of the scope of PES in some countries. 

Jobseekers and employers are generally satisfied with the recruitment support provided, though the 
satisfaction rate of jobseekers tends to be lower. Concretely, 70% of the jobseekers and 84% of the 
employers  were  satisfied  with  the  information  and  guidance  obtained  in  finding  a  job/employee 
abroad79.  These  results  are  comparable  to  those  of  PES80.  Along  all  participating  countries,  most 
EURES advisers are part of the PES. Therefore, EURES performance is strongly related to national 
PES performance and to the recognition of the local PES service as a relevant and well-functioning 
labour market intermediary.  

Reasons  for  high  satisfaction  are  linked  to  the  personalised  support  provided,  while  negative 
assessments  are  associated  with  the  inability  to  find  a  placement.  In  this  sense,  satisfaction  of 
EURES customers is related to the effectiveness of the recruitment support provided. The difference 
in  the  assessment  of  jobseekers  and  employers  is  aligned  with  the  apparent  effectiveness  of  the 
support  received:  17%  of  the  jobseekers  and  67%  of  the  employers  attributed  finding  a  new 
job/employee directly to EURES81. 

While it is confirmed82 that EURES recruitment support services result in intra-EU placements, the 
number  of  placements  is  probably  higher  than  those  reported  in  the  performance  measurement 

78 Evaluation study, p. 272, annex II.b, case study on 'Support to Mobile workers'. 

79 Evaluation study, p. 459 (2.1.4 EURES evaluation Employers survey analysis) and p. 423 (2.1.3 EURES evaluation 

Jobseekers survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

80 Although there is no aggregate indicator for customer satisfaction across Public Employment Services in the EU, The 
unweighted  average  customer’s  satisfaction  levels  reported  by  those  PES  (between  12  and  20  PES)  that  provided 
them in the years 2010-2019 ranges 79-84% among jobseekers and 83-88% among employers. It is also possible to 
find public information on the level of satisfaction for specific countries. For example, customer satisfaction rates 2.4 
over 5 to the German PES and 79% to the French PES.  https://www.arbeitsagentur.de/zkm/ergebnisse, Résultats du 
Baromètre  de  satisfaction  national  2019  de  Pôle  emploi  auprès  des  demandeurs  d’emploi  https://www.pole-
emploi.org/statistiques-analyses/demandeurs-demploi/satisfaction-des-demandeurs-demploi/les-resultats-du-
barometre-de-satisfaction-national-2019-de-pole-emploi-aupres-des-demandeurs-demploi.html?type=article 

81 Evaluation study, p. 423 (2.1.3 EURES evaluation Jobseekers survey analysis) and p. 462 (2.1.4 EURES evaluation 

Employers survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

82 Internal monitoring, PMS indicator “job placements effected as a result of recruitment and placement activity” along 4 
years:  2016  (28 934  placements),  2017  (26 129  placements),  2018  (64 058  placements)  and  2019  (76 210 
placements). 

29 

 
                                                 
system,  as  not  all  cases  of  successful  recruitment  can  be  monitored  by  EURES  staff  or  the  link 
between a successful recruitment and EURES support is not always clear83. 

Combining  the  results  from  the  performance  measurement  and  estimations  based  on  the  automatic 
customer satisfaction survey of the EURES portal, the EURES network has facilitated at least 84 580 
placements in 2018 and 83 360 placements in 2019. The 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports on Intra-EU 
Labour Mobility84 estimate that 880 000 persons changed country within the EU to work or find a job 
in 2018, and 825 000 in 2019. EURES placements therefore correspond to 9.6% of active movers in 
2018 and 10.1% in 201985. These figures are comparable to PES achievements86. They confirm the 
effectiveness  of  EURES,  favouring  transitions  into  the  labour  market  and  therefore  contributing  to 
the general objectives of enhancing employment and social inclusion. 

Given the transnational nature of EURES, an analysis of the network effectiveness per country has 
to keep in mind the inter-dependencies between countries. Indeed, the success of a country sending 
jobseekers  from  sectors  with  surpluses  is  determined  by  the  activities  in  the  countries  with 
demanding  employers.  The  increasingly  frequent  circular  mobility  –  workers  move  outward  and 
backward to their country of origin – reinforces the network effect. This shows that the beneficiaries 
of EURES are not the Member States, but employers and jobseekers across the EU. 

Still, some measurement at national level is possible and public at the Single Market Scoreboard87. 
The scoreboard shows the performance of EURES countries, but given the inter-dependencies among 
them, it represents rather their different nature, helping to analyse the impact of the national side in 
the network. 

83 Two thirds of the national coordinators who responded to their survey indicated that they are not able to report every 
placement achieved with the support of EURES. Often EURES advisors are not informed about the end result of a 
matching process and do not  have the resources to  follow  up individually. Furthermore, jobseekers do not always 
make  the  connection  that  finding  a  job  could  be  the  result  of  EURES  information  and  guidance  provided.  While 
there are chances to follow up outcomes of EURES recruitment projects, it is unlikely when a jobseeker finds a job 
via the EURES online tools. 

84 2019 and 2020 Annual  Reports on Intra-EU  Labour Mobility, HIVA-KULeuven, IRIS  Ghent University and Milieu 

Ltd. Eftheia for the European Commission. 

85 The ratio EURES placements vs mobility inflows is not accurate because some placements could be considered both in 
the origin and destination country. On the  other  hand, the placements do not count any placement  without proven 
trace of EURES support (e.g. when jobseekers find jobs via the self-service EURES online tools) 

86 The indicator “Share of the unemployed who found a job with the contribution of PES” is based on responses to the 
question in the Labour Force Survey on the contribution at a point in time of the Public Employment Services to the 
finding of the respondents’ current job (WAYJFOUN). The values for years 2018 provide an average value of 8% 
along  all  EU  countries,  with  a  maximum  of  15%.  For  2019,  the  average  is  7%  with  a  maximum  of  17%.  In  both 
years, only 7 countries achieved a value higher than 10%. These values must be used with care because of limitations 
in replies, quality of data and discontinuity of series. 

87  The  Single  Market  Scoreboard  is  a  comprehensive  overview  on  how  Member  States  perform  along  the  different 
programmes implementing the Single Market. It compiles for these programmes, including EURES, the results that 
have  been  achieved,  the  feedback  received  and  conclusions  drawn,  providing  a  basis  for  future  action.  Due  to  the 
delays in compiling information, the latest publication dates back to 2018, the figures used in this evaluation date 
back 
yet 
https://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/scoreboard/performance_by_governance_tool/eures/index_en.htm  

Scoreboard 

accessible 

public. 

2019 

The 

and 

not 

are 

to 

is 

at   

30 

 
                                                 
The  overall  performance88  of  the  EURES  countries  for  the  year  2019  is  summarised  by  the 
scoreboard in the following table (the implementation of the Regulation has still to be completed, as 
described in 3. Implementation/state of play): 

Table 4: EURES overall performance for EURES countries. Source: Single Market Scoreboard 2019 (forthcoming) 

The overall performance is calculated based on five sub indicators, rewarding high scores (green) and 
penalizing both low scores (red) and lack of information (grey): 

 Table  5:  EURES  performance  along  the  5  scoreboard  indicators  for  EURES  countries.  Source:  Single  Market  Scoreboard  2019  
(forthcoming) 

[1] Compliance with the EURES Performance Measurement System (0-11) 

[2] IT compliance for the EURES Portal (0-2) 

[3] Labour market share 

[4] User satisfaction with EURES services (0-10) 

[5] Job placements vs labour mobility 

≥ 7 

2 

4 - 6 

1  

≤ 3 

 0 

> 50%  49-21%  ≤ 20% 

≥ 7 

4 - 6 

≤ 3 

> 4% 

2-4% 

< 2% 

The overall performance Table 4 would suggest that EURES is more effective in 14 countries, while 
6 countries would show the least effectiveness. Table 5 shows that compliance with the performance 
measurement  system  is  widely  achieved,  while  only  half  of  the  countries  score  high  on  IT 
compliance  and  labour  market  share.  The  table  shows  the  poorest  performances  for  indicator  [5], 
Job  placements  vs  labour  mobility.  This  indicator  shows  the  relative89  performance  of  EURES 
placements compared to the volume of the mobility in each country. The detailed values are shown 
in the following graph: 

88 The overall performance in the scoreboard is calculated on the basis of the points for 5 indicators: [1] Compliance with 
the EURES Performance Measurement System, [2] IT compliance for the EURES Portal, [3] Labour market share, 
[4]  User  satisfaction  with  EURES  services,  and  [5]  Job  placements  vs  labour  mobility.  Countries  can  “earn”  100 
points for an indicator marked “green”, 75 points for an indicator marked “yellow”, and 50 points for one marked 
“red”. The colours on the overall table represent the sum of these scores (400 or higher, 301-399, 300 or less). 

89 Indicator [5] -Job placements vs labour mobility- shows the ratio between the number of people who have found a job 
through EURES either locally or in another EU country and the country’s net intra-EU labour mobility rate (the sum 
of inflows and outflows of workers moving from/into the country). 

31 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Graph 6: EURES performance for indicator [5] Job placements vs labour mobility for EURES countries. Sources: Annual Report on 
intra-EU Labour Mobility 2018 and Single Market Scoreboard 2019 (forthcoming) based on EURES harmonised reporting (PMS). 

9,00%

8,00%

7,00%

6,00%

5,00%

4,00%

3,00%

2,00%

1,00%

0,38% 

0,00%

6,06% 

6,30% 

5,42% 

5,20% 

6,29% 

5,72% 

2,10% 

2,04% 

0,96% 

0,68% 

1,21% 

3,12% 

2,75% 

2,23% 

1,56% 

0,66% 

0,34% 

0,14% 

0,26% 

4% 

1,47%  1,99% 
2% 

0,02% 

BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES FR HR IT CY LV LT LU HUMT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK CH IS LI NO

No values displayed for Bulgaria, Croatia, and Slovakia because the ratio of EURES job-finders to the net mobility rate 
reflected  values  higher  than  100%  (due  to  comparatively  higher  values  of  job  finders).  Ratios  of  0%  (e.g.  Denmark, 
Greece)  are  due  to  missing  values  of  incoming  job-finders,  or  values  equal  to  0.  Data  on  labour  mobility  becomes 
available with a 2-year delay. 

In  the  country-based  analysis  countries  with  consistently  big  inflows  (Germany,  UK)  or  outflows 
(Poland, Spain) score low. This suggests that a large number of placements happen without the help 
of EURES when labour mobility is particularly high. This is in line with recent research90 showing 
that  both  national  and  international  movers  use  public  or  private  employment  services  only  to  a 
certain extent. 

No clear pattern can be determined when comparing indicator [5] to national capacities (e.g. number 
of advisers both in absolute numbers and relative to population91, with Poland and Germany having 
high numbers, Spain intermediate and UK among the lowest). This would reinforce the interpretation 
that the network effect plays a role over the national capacities. 

90 A recent analysis confirms that job search method is very similar between nationals and EU movers. The method most 
frequently  used  was  studying  advertisements  in  newspapers,  journals  or  on  the  internet  (63%  nationals,  61%  EU 
movers),  followed  by  asking  friends,  relatives,  trade  unions,  etc.  (60%  nationals,  54%  EU  movers),  contacting  an 
employer  (51%  nationals,  42%  EU  movers),  contacting  the  PES  (34%  nationals  or  33%  EU  movers)  or  a  private 
employment service (20% nationals, 19% EU movers). Report on job search methods, Ad-hoc request for indicators 
(2019), section 1.1. Comparison of use of different methods, HIVA-KULeuven, IRIS Ghent University and Milieu 
Ltd. Eftheia for the European Commission (Forthcoming) 

91 The number of advisers per million of inhabitants in 2019 for these countries was: 24-Poland, 7-Germany, 3-Spain and 

0.3-UK. This figure does not necessarily reflect the availability of EURES services in a given country.  

32 

 
 
 
                                                 
Graph  7  :  EURES  advisors  per  country.  Source:  Single  Market  Scoreboard  2019  (forthcoming)  based  on  EURES  harmonised 
reporting (PMS) 

1 200

1 000

 800

 600

 400

 200

 0

2
8
9

1
7
8

9
7
5

6
6
5

2
6
1

2
6
1

1
4

3
3

0
  4
0

7
  1
9

5
1
  1
4
4

9
8

4
7

0

6

9

7

6

6
0
1

2
  3
8

2

2
1

6
3

2
6

7
3

4
4

4
  3
9

5
3

1
6

2
2

5
2

7

BE BG CZ DK DE EE IE EL ES FR HR IT CY LV LT LU HU MT NL AT PL PT RO SI SK FI SE UK CH IS

Semester 1

Semester 2

No data available for Semester 1 for Czech Republic and France and for both Semesters for Liechtenstein and 
Norway. 

The purpose of the performance scoring is to  encourage countries to improve their service. So, for 
instance,  if  a  country  does  not  provide  information  on  performance,  it  is  penalized  in  the  scores 
without  necessarily  reflecting  a  poor  actual  delivery.  Therefore,  conclusions  concerning  the 
performance based on the scoring should be seen in this context and taken with prudence. 

5.2.2.  The EURES portal as a matching place 

The  EURES  portal  facilitates  recruitment  processes  in  two  ways,  following  the  reform  of  the 
Regulation: 

  First, it collects CVs and job vacancies from EURES Members and Partners and provides search 
options  to  EURES  advisers  and  customers,  helping  them  filter  and  select  relevant  vacancies  or 
profiles.  This  service  is  incomplete  because  even  though  all  EURES  countries  have  set  up  a 
system for transferring job vacancies, seven Member States are not  yet  transferring  yet  CVs to 
the EURES Portal. 

  Second,  the  portal  allows  automated  matching  of  related  CVs  and  job  vacancies.  This 
functionality  will  be  fully  available  only  when  all  EURES  countries  map  their  national 
classifications to the European one (by August 2021). 

The EURES Impact Assessment defined as an operational objective that “75% of the job vacancies 
published by employment services in the EU are accessible through the EURES network”92.  

92  SWD(2014)  9  final  “Impact  Assessment  Accompanying  the  document  Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council on a European network of Employment Services, workers' access to mobility services 
and the further integration of labour markets”, p. 36 

33 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
While  the  data  on  job  vacancies  obtained  from  the  national  level  are  not  fully  consistent  and 
complete93, estimates based on the aggregate indicators on job vacancies for eight countries that have 
submitted complete and valid data have been made94. According to these estimates, 61% of the job 
vacancies available at national level were also available in the portal in 2019. The estimated share of 
vacancies that these eight countries published in the portal ranged from 4% to 80%, most of them at 
ca. 50%. These figures are comparable to the information of the Single Market Scoreboard95 and the 
feedback  from  national  coordinators96,  where  the  majority  indicate  a  share  of  more  than  50% 
vacancies being published in the portal, but 7 countries indicate less than 50%. 

The difficulty to collect all national vacancies is a possible explanation why the benchmark of 75% is 
not  met  by  all  EURES  countries.  The  national  practices  are  different  from  country  to  country  and 
only some countries require that vacancies are reported to the PES. The broadening of the network 
with new Members and Partners is expected to increase the number of organisations contributing to 
the  pool  of  vacancies.  So  far,  only  half  of  the  EURES  countries  have  admitted  new  Members  and 
Partners.  

With  regard  to  the  quantity  of  CVs  accessible  through  the  EURES  portal,  the  Impact  Assessment 
mentions,  “If  all  who  currently  are  registered  (1.1  million)  are  to  be  considered  to  belong  to  this 
group  of  persons  with  "firm  intentions",  the  number  of  CV's  would  be  increased  with  about 
1.9 million to 3 million”97. 

93 In principle, all publicly available job vacancies  should be  made available.  A  few exclusions are, however, possible 
according to Article 17 of the Regulation. The difference between the total number of job vacancies made publicly 
available by EURES Members and Partners and the total number of job vacancies at national level is explained by 
national  networks  not  having  information  or  access  to  data  regarding  all  the  job  vacancies  available  within  their 
country. 

94 Only nine countries that have submitted data for both “Total number of job vacancies in your country (MS level)” and 
“Total  number  of  job  vacancies  made  publicly  available  by  EURES  Members  and  Partners”  and  for  which  the 
number of job vacancies at national level was above the report number of job vacancies transferred to the EURES 
portal  were  taken  into  consideration.  The  8  countries  included  in  the  analysis  are:  Denmark,  Germany,  Spain, 
Cyprus, Latvia, Poland, Slovenia and Norway.  

95 Indicator “[3] Labour market share” shows that the majority (21) of the EURES countries provide more than 50% of 

the vacancies. Single Market Scoreboard 2019 (forthcoming) 

96 In the replies, 26 countries provided an estimation. 13 countries indicate a share of more than 75%. 6 countries indicate 
a  share  between  51%  and  75%.  7  countries  indicate  a  share  of  less  than  50%.  Evaluation  study,  p.  357,  (2.1.1 
EURES  evaluation  National  Coordination  Offices’  survey  analysis),  annex  II.c  Details  of  the  stakeholders’ 
consultation. 

97  SWD(2014)  9  final  Impact  Assessment,  p.  47:  The  number  of  CVs  that  will  be  made  available  for  matching  at 
European level is difficult to assess as all PES do not currently have CV databases and as the transfer will always 
depend of the willingness of jobseekers to make their CVs accessible. Given that the number of workers with "firm 
intentions" to work abroad has been estimated at around 1,2 % of the workforce, the potential number of CVs from 
jobseekers (workers) "planning to move in the following 12 months to work in another Member State" could be some 
3  million  (1,2  %  of  the  241  million  EU  labour  force).  If  all  who  currently  are  registered  (1.1  million)  are  to  be 
considered to belong to this group of persons with "firm intentions", the number of CV's would be increased with 
about 1.9 million to 3 million. 

34 

 
                                                 
The  number  of  available  CVs  at  the  portal  is  below  the  Impact  Assessment  estimates.  In  fact,  the 
actual  number  of  CVs  available  at  the  start  of  the  EURES  Regulation  was  much  lower  than 
1.1 million considered as starting point in the Impact Assessment in 2013, for two reasons: 

  First, the EURES Portal was migrated to a new technical system in 2014. This required the 
migration  of  all  jobseeker  and  employer  accounts,  which  were  deactivated.  The  EURES 
portal  users  had  to  reactivate  their  account  at  the  first  login;  however,  only  15%  of  the 
accounts  were  reactivated  by  March  2015.  The  migration  helped  to  clean  up  numerous 
inactive accounts. 

  Second, in 2014, only 17% of the registered jobseekers had a published CV. 

Since then, the quality of the portal content has been further prioritized rather than the raw figures: 

  Every  month  around  10 800  new  jobseekers98  register  in  the  portal,  however  EURES 
regularly removes users from the portal due to GDPR considerations99 and, recently, also to 
discard profiles from third-country nationals100 who cannot access the EU labour market. For 
instance,  604 622  accounts  were  deleted  in  2020.  This  is  a  stricter  approach  than  in  2013, 
when the Impact Assessment was drafted, leading to 1 million CVs from active jobseekers at 
the  end  of  2020  compared  to  the  1.1 million  users  (with  or  without  a  CV)  considered  as 
starting point in the Impact Assessment. 

  Every day, EURES Members and Partners transfer new CVs from their national databases to 
the portal via the single coordinated channel. However, they also use the channel to remove 
their  CVs,  for  instance  when  the  jobseekers  found  a  job  or  at  the  request  of  the  jobseeker. 
This regular clean-up leads to fewer numbers in stocks of CVs, but of higher relevance. 

Table  8:  CVs  stocks  (inserted  minus  removed)  on  the  EURES portal  in  the  period  2017-2020.  The  single  coordinated  channel  was 
launched in 2018. In 2020, 604 622 portal accounts were deleted. Source: EURES harmonised reporting (PMS). 

 Stocks (inserted minus removed) 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

CVs from the self-service  

287 850 

317 562 

413 036 

123 520 

CVs from the single coordinated channel 

N/A 

321 

259 080 

964 727 

Total annual stock of CVs on the EURES portal 

287 850 

317 883 

672 116 

1 088 247 

In  any  case,  the  number  of  CVs  in  the  EURES  portal  reflects  the  demand  of  jobs  following  the 
business cycle. The evaluation period was marked by “a continued expansion of the EU’s economy, 

98 Average from April 2014 to December 2020. 

99 Currently, any account is deleted after 2 years of inactivity. 

100 Since January 2021, accounts from UK jobseekers are also deleted. 

35 

 
 
 
                                                 
all-time  records  for  high  employment  and  low  unemployment”  as  confirmed  by  the  analysis  in  the 
Employment and Social Developments in Europe (ESDE)101 in 2019 and 2020, reducing the number 
of jobseekers and consequently the number of CVs published. The COVID-19 disruption is reverting 
this tendency, with an increase in the number of CVs published and a reduction of the vacancies, as 
shown in the following table. 

Table  9:  Inflows  (new  insertions)  in  the  EURES  portal  since  the  launch  of  the  single  coordinated  channel  (June  2018-  December 
2020). Source: EURES harmonised reporting (PMS) 

 Inflows (insertions) 

2018* 

2019 

2020 

CVs 

37 285 

325 434 

835 033 

Vacancies 

3 640 875 

19 702 701 

14 035 546 

Private  hiring  platforms  can  be  used  as  a  benchmark  of  the  success  of  EURES  publishing 
vacancies.  Job  postings  in  these  platforms  come  from  the  employers  who  registered  for  premium 
paid  features,  but  also  aggregated  from  company  pages,  associations,  and  listings  from  across  the 
web, including EURES. In the period 2015-2020, the Commission received several complaints from 
employers  and  EURES  members  who  published  their  vacancies  in  EURES  via  their  national  PES 
and who discovered that months after they had completed the recruitment procedure their vacancies 
were still published in some of these platforms without permission102. One Member State complained 
that a private online provider had copied all job vacancies from this country and made them available 
on the private platform.  

This  confirms  that  EURES  reached  the  objective  of  transparency  of  job  vacancies  and,  often  as  a 
bandwagon  effect,  other  online  providers  use  this  information  for  their  own  business  without 
ensuring  the  quality  and  timelineness  of  the  information.  While  for  EURES  any  further 
dissemination of job vacancies is in principle welcome, this must be done respecting employers, who 
do  not  appreciate  being  flooded  with  applications  to  outdated  job  vacancies,  and  jobseekers,  who 
equally  deserve  respect  in  their  job  search.  Private  hiring  platforms  can  apply  to  become  EURES 
Members if they respect the minimum common criteria that guarantee minimum standards of service. 

The  stakeholders  tend  to  agree  that  the  EURES  portal  increases  the  quantity  of  available 
employment  opportunities,  but  in  a  mixed  picture:  a  slight  majority  (61%)  of  employers  who 

101 2019 and 2020 annual editions of Employment and Social Developments in Europe (ESDE), ISBN 978-92-76-08609-
3, http://publications.europa.eu/publication/catalogue_number/KE-BD-19-001-EN-N, ISBN 978-92-76-21510-3, 
http://publications.europa.eu/publication/catalogue_number/KE-BD-20-001-EN-N 

102  EURES  privacy  rules  do  not  authorise  copying  vacancies  from  the  EURES  portal.  The  Commission  contacts  these 
companies breaching EURES privacy rules to request fixing the inappropriate publications as well as reviewing their 
general  webcrawling  policy.  Some  of  these  companies  have  also  requested  to  cooperate  with  EURES,  which  is 
possible  under  the  Regulation,  but  most  of  them  do  not  qualify  as  Members  or  even  Partners  since  they  do  not 
provide the minimal set of services required. 

36 

 
 
                                                 
responded to the survey agreed, compared to only 48% of the jobseekers103. This finding is confirmed 
in the specific case study104 for employers, who consider as essential the support of EURES advisers 
and report that the EURES portal enhances their access to more candidates’ profiles, while they still 
find problems with the usability of the portal. 

Whether the enhanced access to job vacancies and CVs results in intra-EU placements depends  on 
the extent to which the information is complete, of good quality and up-to-date. In spite of the efforts 
undertaken to keep the portal up-to-date, this is not always the case according to stakeholders105. In 
particular,  job  vacancies  and  CVs  occasionally  happen  to  be  out-dated,  incomplete  or  sometimes 
provided  only  in  the  national  language106,  which  is  partially  linked  to  the  portal  (e.g.  lack  of 
mandatory fields), but also caused by incomplete information provided by jobseekers and employers. 
The critical remarks of stakeholders confirm that further work is required on the portal. 

Since the full automated matching functionality will not be available until August 2021107, it is not 
possible  to  assess  its  effectiveness.  However,  the  experience  from  Member  States  shows  that  the 
benefits  outweigh  the  costs108  “in  terms  of  more  regular  employment  and  in  terms  of  more 
sustainable placements that exhibit longer tenures”. The amount of information used to classify and 
match  CVs  and  job  vacancies  rises  constantly,  taking  into  account  preferences,  education, 
qualifications,  competencies,  experience,  and  skills,  including  soft  skills.  Consequently,  matching 
demands  substantial  effort  from  advisors109.  While  the  number  of  vacancies  and  CVs  can  spike 
following  both  periods  of  crisis  and  growth,  the  number  of  advisors  is  unlikely  to  increase  along 
demand. Therefore, any solution that reduces the manual matching effort increases the efficiency of 
EURES advisors, a limited resource, who can devote more time to personal counselling. This is also 
the  viewpoint  of  European  Network  of  Public  Employment  Services110,  and  particularly  of  several 

103 Evaluation study, p. 430 (2.1.3 EURES evaluation Jobseekers survey analysis) and p. 465 (2.1.4 EURES evaluation 

Employers survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

104 Evaluation study, p. 287 (7 Advice and guidance to employers recruiting abroad), annex II.b Case studies. 

105  Analysis  of  the  comments  by  stakeholders,  Evaluation  study,  annex  II.c  (1.1.4  Concluding  questions  of  the  public 

consultation, 2.1.3 EURES evaluation Jobseekers survey analysis) 

106 The EURES portal provides automated translation of job vacancies for registered users 

107  EURES  countries  are  due  to  complete  the  mapping  of  their  national  classifications  systems  to  the  European 
Skills/Competences,  Qualifications  and  Occupations  (ESCO)  classification  by  7  August  2021  according  to  Article 
19(3) of the EURES Regulation and Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2018/1021. 

108  Christoph  R.  Ehlert,  p.  112,  chapter  5.5,  “Evaluation  of  German  Active  Labour  Market  Policies  and  their 
Organisational  Framework”,  ISBN  978-3-658-08112-6.  https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-658-
08112-6  

109  Automated  matching  happens  along  sets  of  pre-defined  attributes.  For  instance,  the  attribute  “driving  licence”  has 
around  15  variants,  while  the  attribute  “competences”  has  the  whole  national  catalogue  of  competences  (around 
15.000) as variants, with the possibility of three different levels of proficiency in every competence. This is hardly 
manageable manually. 

37 

 
                                                 
national  PES  that  are  using  the  same  tool  as  the  EURES  portal  for  their  national  automated 
matching111. 

The  effectiveness  of  the  EURES  portal  depends  also  on  its  visibility  among  target  groups.  The 
consultation112  results  suggest  that  the  portal  is  one  of  the  most  visible  EURES  instruments:  when 
asked  to  indicate  their  interaction  with  EURES,  65%  of  the  respondents  to  the  public  consultation 
confirmed that they have visited the portal to get information and 61% reported to be registered on 
the portal. These were the top two options selected among all EURES interactions. 

The  EURES  portal  provides  information  that  partially  overlaps  with  Europass  and  Your  Europe 
portal, as described in section 5.4.1. External coherence. Given the importance of clear visibility for 
EURES, this partial overlap could hinder EURES effectiveness. 

5.2.3.  Effectiveness of EURES mobility schemes and cross-border partnerships 

The  EURES  cross-border  partnerships  and  mobility  schemes  complement  the  implementation  of 
EURES general services defined by the Regulation and contribute to EURES specific objectives by 
supporting selected target groups, addressing their specific needs and providing financial assistance. 
These  target  groups  (e.g.  young  jobseekers,  cross-border  employers)  are  a  subset  of  the  EURES 
target  groups.  Stakeholders  consulted  (jobseekers,  employers  and  EURES  staff)  for  the  case 
studies113  often  mentioned  the  financial  support  available  through  the  mobility  schemes  as  an 
important service complementing the provision of services by EURES advisers. This is confirmed in 
both the public consultation and the jobseekers survey, where the jobseekers beneficiary of mobility 
schemes or cross-border partnerships expressed their satisfaction with the services received114. Also, 
all 18 national coordinators survey respondents115 who have indicated that they take part in mobility 
schemes  agreed  that  these  schemes  support  the  defined  target  groups  in  alignment  with  EURES. 
Cross-border partnerships mainly contribute to better awareness of labour mobility potential among 
frontier workers and employers in cross-border regions. 

110  A  contribution  to  the  strategy  ‘The  PES  role  in  modernising  the  labour  market  and  managing  structural  change  – 
preparing for post COVID-19 challenges’ 2020, p. 4, Key recommendation 2 - investment in IT infrastructure. Ösb 
consulting 
Services. 
https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=23271  

Employment 

European 

Network 

Public 

ICON 

and 

the 

for 

of 

111 Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany and Slovenia. EURES provides only trans-national matching, that is, 
between  employers  and  jobseekers  in  different  countries.  Matching  between  jobseekers  and  employers  within  the 
same country is performed by the national public or private employment services according to national practices. 

112 Evaluation study, p. 325, annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

113 Evaluation study, p. 257 (Traineeships), 272 (Mobile workers), 289 (Employers), annex II.b Case studies. 

114 Only 18 respondents of the public consultation indicated that they had benefited of a mobility schema or in a cross-
border partnership, all of them expressed satisfaction. The jobseekers survey was completed by 115 beneficiaries of 
these services. Those who had an opinion (55) indicated a level of satisfaction of 87%. 

115 Evaluation study, p. 354 (2.1.1  EURES  evaluation  National  Coordination  Offices’  survey  analysis),  annex  II.c 

Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

38 

 
                                                                                                                                                                    
Performance measurement  data shows that  all EURES mobility schemes have resulted in  intra-EU 
placements  and  contacts  with  employers  and  jobseekers,  thus  contributing  to  EURES  specific 
objectives. A total of 10 300 placements were achieved in the period 2018-2019116, around 6% of the 
EURES total.  

The mobility schemes report their performance using a data collection template different from other 
EURES services. This is due to the reporting requirements from the EaSI programme (providing the 
funding)  and  from  EURES  (defining  the  services).  These  separate  reporting  systems  limit  the 
consolidation  of  results  achieved  by  the  mobility  schemes  and  other  EURES  actions.  The  2018 
Report on Free Movement of Workers by the European Court of Auditors found it difficult to obtain 
aggregate outputs and results from the cross-border partnerships and requested improvements of the 
monitoring117. Therefore, since 2019 cross-border partnerships use a reporting template that closely 
follows  the  Performance  Measurement  System  of  EURES.  This  facilitates  comparability  of 
indicators with other EURES actions. 

5.2.4.  Effectiveness of EURES internal support and organisational set-up 

The  Regulation  specifies  that  the  European  Coordination  Office  (ECO)  has  to  provide  horizontal 
internal support to the EURES network. The level of satisfaction of national coordinators with the 
support  provided  by  ECO  is  high118,  suggesting  that  internal  support  helps  the  functioning  of  the 
network,  even  though  the  respondents  also  saw  the  need  for  further  activities  to  be  undertaken  by 
ECO.  Specific  examples  mentioned  (enhanced  communication  and  promotion  activities,  alignment 
of programming and performance measurement cycles, increased flexibility of training programme) 
imply that there is scope for improving certain support areas.  

Evidence  from  the  desk  research  and  interviews  with  EURES  advisers  and  national  coordinators 
show  that  information  exchange  on  national  labour  market  shortages  and  surpluses  happens  at 
multiple levels across the network: 

  EU  level,  through  the  annual  reports  on  intra-EU  labour  mobility  and  information  on  labour 

market conditions provided on the EURES portal. 

  Strategic  national  level,  through  the  integration  of  labour  market  trends  in  the  planning  of 
activities. The COVID-19 crisis showed also the power of the network collecting information on 
challenges in cross-border regions.  

  Operational level, through direct contact and exchange of information between EURES advisers.  

116 Your first EURES Job July 2018 - June 2020 (4 062 placements), Reactivate Oct 2018 - June 2020 (852 placements), 

cross-border partnerships 2018 and 2019 (5 408 placements) 

117 European Court of Auditors, Special Report, Free Movement of Workers – the fundamental freedom ensured but 

better targeting of EU funds would aid worker mobility. 2018. 
https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=44964 

118 In the survey, 89% of the 27 NCOs who responded, strongly agreed or agreed that the organisation of meetings and 
working  groups  by  ECO  supports  the  implementation  of  the  EURES.  11  out  of  the  26  NCO  survey  respondents 
(42%) indicated that further activities could be undertaken by ECO. 

39 

 
                                                 
In  the  national  coordinators  survey,  21  of  the  25  who  replied  to  this  question  agreed  that  the 
information exchange contributes to a better labour market integration. The case study on Admission 
system/Extension of the network shows119, however, that the information exchange structures are not 
sufficiently developed yet for the new Members. 

Self-reporting by various cooperation projects implemented between EURES countries confirms that 
EURES Members and Partners coordinate their actions. This assessment was also confirmed by 25 
out  of the 26 respondents to  the national coordinators survey  who stated  that they coordinate their 
actions.  Cooperation  activities  reported  in  2018  and  2019  include  cross-border  partnerships, 
participation in mobility schemes, recruitment activities (job fairs, European Job Days), study visits, 
workshops  and  information  events.  All  but  three  countries  reported  carrying  out  multilateral 
recruitment projects in 2018 and 2019.  

National coordinators, Members, and Partners agree that the cooperation and information exchange 
within  the  network  brings  better  knowledge  of  labour  market  dynamics  and  conditions  in  other 
countries, contributing to more targeted and thus, effective, provision of services.  

The EURES Regulation introduced important changes in the organisational set-up of the network, 
such as setting up of admission systems for new Members and Partners.  

The  case  study  on  Admission  system/Extension  of  the  network120  shows  that  the  current 
organisational set-up is considered appropriate for addressing labour market needs. This is confirmed 
also  by  national  coordinators  (69%  or  18  out  of  26  national  coordinators  survey  respondents).  In 
particular, broadening the network is perceived as relevant, since it strengthens knowledge exchange 
about  users’  needs  and  labour  market  developments  and  thus  increases  the  effectiveness  of  the 
network. 

While the organisational set-up is considered adequate and all EURES countries have established or 
started preparing an admission system, only half of them have admitted new Members and Partners. 
Particularly,  non-EU  EURES  countries  have  not  yet  started  the  work  on  admission  because  the 
EURES Regulation was taken over in late 2019 by the EEA Joint Committee and the implementation 
at national level is under way. 

In assessing the positive effects of admitting new Members and Partners it should be noted that, the 
effects  of  the  broadening  of  the  network  take  time  to  materialise  and  that  not  all  Members  and 
Partners  can  contribute  equally  to  the  network.  The  benefits  of  admitting  Members  and  Partners 

119 Evaluation study, p. 244 (4 Admission system / extension of the network), annex II.b Case studies. 

120 Evaluation study, p. 244 (Admission system/Extension of the network), annex II.b Case studies. 

40 

 
                                                 
depends on the national context, as highlighted in the validation workshop121. In any case, the Public 
Employment Services (PES) consider strategic this kind of partnerships122. 

As regards the specific situation in cross-border regions, stakeholders mention some organisational 
aspects that limit the ability to provide support by cross-border partnerships. These are mainly linked 
to the increase in the reporting workload, and the challenge of coordinating a partnership of diverse 
organisations. 

5.2.5.  Visibility 

Increasing  the  visibility  and  awareness  of  EURES  is  not  defined  as  a  specific  objective  by  the 
Regulation. However, knowing about EURES is a precondition likely to influence the effectiveness 
of  all  EURES  actions  and,  thus,  the  achievement  of  the  EURES  objectives.  When  analysing  the 
visibility of EURES, it should be considered that EURES countries often have limited resources in 
this regard, as pointed out in the validation workshop. 

Performance measurement indicators increasingly show that labour market participants are aware of 
EURES  initiatives  (e.g.  social  media  followers123  of  the  EURES  EU  account  increased  by  9% 
between  2018  and  2019,  and  161%  for  national  accounts.  The  EURES  EU  Facebook  account  is 
among the top four in the Commission accounts). However, a significant proportion (40% to 50%) of 
survey respondents across stakeholder groups (National coordinators, Members and Partners, public 
consultation)124 assessed EURES as not sufficiently visible. Also, only 30% of the public consultation 
respondents agreed that EURES is well known among jobseekers and employers. In addition, a small 
share of jobseekers and employers follow EURES social media accounts. For example,  only one in 
four jobseekers who responded to the survey follows EURES on social media. This limited outreach 
might be reducing the impact of EURES communication activities. This is in line with the findings of 
the 2018 Report on Free Movement of Workers by the European Court of Auditors, which indicates 
that there are opportunities to improve awareness of the EU channels used to provide information to 
EU workers about their rights.  

Performance  measurement  indicators  and  examples  of  communication  activities  show  that  both 
EURES countries and the European Coordination Office have been enhancing their promotion  and 
communication  activities125.  Nevertheless,  national  coordinators,  Members  and  Partners  agree  that 

121  Evaluation  study,  p.  479  (3  Documentation  on  the  EURES  validation  workshop),  annex  II.c  Details  of  the 

stakeholders’ consultation. 

122  “Key  recommendation  5:  PES  need  to  further  engage  in  partnership  building  to  increase  their  service  delivery 
capacity and quality”. A contribution to the strategy "The PES role in modernising the labour market and managing 
structural change - preparing for post COVID-19 challenges", Ösb consulting and ICON for the European Network 
of Public Employment Services, 2020, https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=23271&langId=en  

123  In  December  2020,  the  number  of  followers  of  EURES  accounts  was  302 225  in  Facebook,  39 791  in  Twitter  and 

60 100 in LinkedIn. 

124 Evaluation study, annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation, all the consultation activities. 

125 EURES was the backbone of the 2018 Commission’s high-level campaign #EUmovers, celebrating 50 years of free 
movement  and  60  years  of  social  security  coordination.  In  addition,  the  25th  anniversary  of  EURES  in  2019  was 

41 

 
                                                 
 
further  efforts  are  needed.  National  coordinators  mentioned  in  interviews  several  constraints  that 
need  to  be  overcome:  limited  funding;  lack  of  cooperation  with  other  organisations  to  reach  wider 
audiences; and absence of a common promotion approach at local, regional, national and European 
level. The on-going mainstreaming of EURES into the regular PES service offer affects as well the 
EURES visibility. The case study focusing on apprenticeships and internships126 observed that some 
young people knew EURES  mobility schemes,  but  were not  aware of the existence of the EURES 
network, nor that these projects were part of it. This raises questions about the communication of the 
EURES  brand,  and  hints  that  paradoxically  the  further  integration  and  mainstreaming  of  EURES 
services into the PES negatively affects the visibility of EURES while at the same time it increases 
the quality of EURES services.  

The  importance  of  cooperation  with  other  organisations  (social  partners  and  enterprises)  was  also 
highlighted in comments by EURES Members and Partners:  61% of the respondents answered that 
they coordinate awareness raising activities with other national Members and Partners. However, this 
also means that the potential of cooperation in this regard is not exploited by 39% of the Members 
and Partners who responded to the survey. 

Feedback  from  jobseekers  and  employers  suggests  that  internet  search  engines  and  public 
employment offices are the main points that inform them about EURES for the first time. This is in 
line  with  the  EURES  operational  objective  from  the  Impact  Assessment  to  further  mainstream 
EURES services within Public Employment Services (PES). Indeed, feedback from customers from 
interviews in the case studies127 confirmed the importance of the PES as a reference point connecting 
EURES with clients. A specific challenge identified in the case study focusing on employers is the 
fact that in some countries, due to the organisational structure of PES, public employment offices at 
regional  level  are  distant  from  the  work  of  EURES  and  might  not  be  able  to  fully  understand  and 
communicate its services.  

5.2.6.  Sustainability and factors impacting effectiveness 

EURES provides a wide range of services implemented in  multiple ways. The evaluation  does not 
determine  a  single  factor  for  success  but  suggests  that  keeping  a  wide  portfolio  to  cater  for  the 
various needs seems the most appropriate approach. 

Stakeholders’ feedback does not provide evidence to clearly identifying differences in effectiveness 
between  the  EURES  actions.  While  national  coordinators  rate  the  provision  of  information  and 
guidance and support in  matching as most effective (average  grade of 2.35 on a scale of 1 = most 
effective  and  7 = least  effective),  the  opinion  of  customers  differs,  reflecting  their  level  of 

promoted  with  the  #EURES25  campaign.  #EUmovers  produced  35.4  million  impressions  and  the  videos  were 
watched 1.5 million times. #EURES25 produced 13.7 million impressions and the videos were watched 1.6 million 
times. After these campaigns, the number of followers in the EURES social media channels increased by +290K in 
Facebook, +39K in Twitter, and +54K in Instagram. 

126 Evaluation study, p. 259, annex II.b, section 5 - Apprenticeship/traineeship schemes. 

127 Evaluation study, p. 286, annex II.b Case studies. 

42 

 
                                                                                                                                                                    
satisfaction. Among jobseekers, post-recruitment assistance receives the highest share of satisfaction 
(91%  of  44  survey  respondents)  compared  to  62%  of  104  satisfied  with  work  /  apprenticeship  / 
traineeship  offers.  Cross-border  information  is  accorded  the  highest  level  of  satisfaction  among 
employers.  

In addition, according to jobseekers, individual support through EURES advisers is assessed as more 
effective  than  services  via  the  portal,  while  the  provision  of  information  and  guidance  is  the  most 
effective  service  in  a  cross-border  context.  Cross-border  partnership  stakeholders  shared  the 
perception  that  the  most  needed  services,  namely,  the  ones  related  to  the  provision  of  information 
and guidance, are also the most effective in a cross-border context. 

Regarding  the  mode  of  implementation,  each  specific  EURES  action  appears  to  have  its  own 
advantages and disadvantages, which can influence its effectiveness in given situations:  
  Recruitment and information events have broader outreach than individual counselling, but  can 

provide only generic information.  

  Online  events  are  linked  to  lower  costs  and  are  more  accessible,  but  onsite  events  facilitate 

physical contact perceived as vital in the recruitment process.  

The interviews with  employers provided insight on how the  effectiveness of the type of support  is 
linked  to  the  characteristics  of  clients.  For  example,  participation  in  a  recruitment  event  is  more 
effective, compared to individual support, when employers have a higher number of vacancies to fill. 
In addition, it was reported that searching for profiles with more general  skills (e.g. bus drivers) is 
easier  on  the  portal,  while  identifying  profiles  with  specific  expertise  is  more  effective  through 
individual  support  by  EURES  advisers.  With  regard  to  jobseekers,  the  analysis  did  not  identify 
individual 
significant  differences 
characteristics.   

their  assessment  of  EURES  services  depending  on 

in 

The sustainability of EURES actions refers to long-term duration of the employment relationship. It 
is achieved by ensuring fair working conditions and a recruitment outcome that is satisfactory to both 
employers  and  jobseekers.  Employers  consulted  in  interviews  and  workshops  agree128  that  EURES 
actions are sustainable in the long-term, especially due to the careful pre-selection and consideration 
of  individual  preferences  in  the  recruitment  process.  The  survey  for  national  coordinators  also 
confirms (84% agreement) that EURES actions are sustainable in the long-term.  

The  importance  of  individual  contact  and  advice  for  the  sustainability  of  the  results  achieved 
suggests  that  support  provided  through  EURES  advisers  might  lead  to  more  sustainable  results, 
compared to services provided via the portal. In addition, support tailored to individual needs in one-
to-one counselling might be more sustainable than support of more general nature provided in events. 
A stronger focus on post-recruitment assistance and follow up is perceived by national coordinators 
consulted in interviews as a way to increase the overall sustainability of EURES results. 

Based on the feedback from Members, Partners and national coordinators, a number of external and 
internal factors influence the end results of EURES. Factors hindering the effectiveness of EURES 

128 Evaluation study, p. 288 (7 Advice and guidance to employers recruiting abroad), annex II.b: Case studies. 

43 

 
                                                 
actions  include  developments  of  similar  patterns  of  labour  shortages  across  Europe,  preferences  of 
employers to recruit from third countries, differences in EURES structures, limited time and capacity 
of staff, and low visibility of EURES. Facilitating factors include exchange of  expertise across the 
network,  good  understanding  of  target  groups’  needs  and  the  possibility  to  provide  tailor-made 
support free of charge.  

5.3.  Efficiency 

5.3.1.  Cost-effectiveness 

Based  on  available  data,  an  overall  increase  in  cost-effectiveness  can  be  observed  between  2016 
and  2019  along  three  analysed  outcomes:  placements  achieved  with  the  support  of  EURES, 
individual contacts with jobseekers and employers, and number of job vacancies  transferred by the 
national  coordinators  to  the  portal.  The  table  summarises  the  results  of  the  cost-effectiveness 
analysis: 

Table 10: Cost-effectiveness analysis (2019 - 2016, in EUR). Source: Evaluation study. 

EURES outcome indicator 

2016 

2019 

Net saving 

Cost per placement achieved 

Cost per individual contact 

Cost per job vacancy transferred to the portal 

473.53 

288.10 

185.42 

13.60 

2.74 

11.88 

1.24 

1.71 

1.50 

The  cost  decreased  39%  for  placements,  13%  for  contacts  and  halved  for  vacancies.  The  fact  that 
EURES  is  now  more  cost-effective  than  in  the  past  suggests  that  the  results  of  its  activities  are 
increasingly  efficient  in  relation  to  the  costs.  While  the  overall  trend  of  the  evidence  is  clear,  the 
figures should be treated as indicative only. The cross-time design (rather than comparing between 
alternative policies), comparability issues (between the different outcomes and across countries), and 
missing data (e.g. Belgium, Germany, and Liechtenstein are excluded from the calculations) all result 
in strong but necessary methodological assumptions, suggesting caution in interpreting the data. 

The  efficiency  of  the  EURES  portal  could  be  enhanced  by  improving  the  portal’s  tools  and  by 
upgrading its matching function. The analysis of available data and feedback129 on the funding and 
outreach of the portal confirm that improvements are needed in this domain. Investment in the portal 
and corresponding services has been increasing every year between 2016 and 2019. However, over 
the same period, the number of unique visitors to the portal has overall been falling130. This is mainly 
due to the improving conditions in the labour market all over Europe, with decreasing unemployment 
and therefore a declining number of jobseekers. The COVID-19 disruption should have reversed the 
trend, but border closures and other restrictions to the free movement of workers further reduced the 

129 Triangulation from several sources, including internal monitoring data, EURES Portal statistics and interviews with 
the officials in charge of the Portal. In addition, all surveys and the public consultation included questions on user 
perception of the EURES portal. 

130 Unique visitors’ statistics of the EURES portal dropped by 21% between 2016 and 2017, by 8% between 2017 and 

2018 and by further 24% between 2018 and 2019. 

44 

 
                                                 
interest in the portal. In addition, due to GDPR considerations, the Commission changed in 2019 the 
technical  solution  to  collect  statistics  in  the  portal,  which  creates  a  discontinuity  in  the  figures, 
making  it  more  difficult  to  compare  trends.  Regardless  of  the  reasons,  the  increase  in  funding 
combined  with  the  drop  in  the  number  of  visitors  to  the  portal  suggests  a  decrease  in  cost-
effectiveness and efficiency. 

The  numbers  of  CVs  available  from  the  single  coordinated  channel  have  substantially  increased 
from 321 CVs in 2018131 to 964 727 CVs in 2020. The number of job vacancies is steady in the range 
of tenths of millions132. Even though the investments have not increased, it is difficult to determine 
the  cost-effectiveness  of  the  channel  because  the  number  of  available  and  thus  transferred  job 
vacancies also depends on external factors, such as the business cycle.  

Although significant advancements in the use of the single coordinated channel have been made, the 
use of the tool is not yet fully aligned with the requirements set in the Regulation. Out of 26 national 
coordinators  survey  respondents,  only  three  indicated  that  their  countries  transfer  all  of  their 
available job vacancies through the channel to the portal. The case study on the single coordinated 
channel133  also  shows  that  some  national  coordinators  are  experiencing  delays  in  their  transfer  that 
they justify by reasons such as privacy and data protection issues or the impact of COVID-19 on the 
national priorities of PES. 

The table below presents the results of the cost-benefit analysis of EURES activities. 

131 The EURES Regulation (Article 41) delays the need to provide vacancies and CVs by Members and Partners until 13 

May 2018. 

132 Inflows (insertions) of 19 702 701 vacancies in 2019 and 14 035 546 vacancies in 2020. 

133  Evaluation  study,  p.  187,  annex  II.b,  section  1  -  Single  coordinated  channel,  chapter  1.3.1  “State  of  play  in  the 

Member States in focus” 

45 

 
 
 
                                                 
Table 11: Cost-benefit analysis of EURES activities 

Jobseekers  

Employers  

National Administrations 

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary 

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary  

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary  

Cost: Transfer of 
job vacancies 
and CVs through 
the single 
coordinated 
channel and 
introduction of 
ESCO 

Economic. 
One-off and 
recurring. 
Compliance cost. 
Expected. 

No costs for jobseekers 
were detected in relation 
to the transfer of job 
vacancies and CVs from 
national databases to the 
EURES portal. 

N/A 

N/A 

No costs for employers 
were found in relation to 
the transfer of job 
vacancies and CVs from 
national databases to the 
EURES portal. 

Economic. 
Recurring. 
Direct cost. 
Not expected. 

Cost: Insufficient 
contribution of 
the EURES portal 
and 
corresponding 
services to 
correct matching 
of job vacancies 
and CVs 

Unknown 

Medium 
(Jobseeker survey) 
The EURES portal does not 
perform full automated 
matching of job vacancies 
and CVs, therefore, a 
jobseeker has to go 
through the job vacancy 
offer manually with help of 
specific filters. However, 
the filtering function is not 
sufficiently accurate to 
provide the desired 
matches which results in 
jobseekers having to spend 
considerable time checking 
the results. 

Unknown 

Medium 
(employer survey) 
The EURES portal does 
not perform full 
automated matching of 
job vacancies and CVs, 
therefore, an employer 
has to go through the CV 
offer manually with help 
of specific filters. 
However, the filtering 
function is not sufficiently 
accurate to provide the 
desired matches which 
results in employers 
having to spend 
considerable time 
checking the results. 

46 

(Estimation based on 
internal reporting) 
The number of job 
vacancies provided by the 
NCOs to the EURES portal 
increased from 8 million in 
2016 to 14 million in 2020. 
The number of CVs available 
from the single coordinated 
channel increased from 321 
in 2018 to 964 727 in 2020. 

Unknown 

Medium 
(NCO Survey, Case study 
on single coordinated 
channel) 
The costs incurred in 
relation to the transfer of 
job vacancies and CVs 
through the single 
coordinated channel to 
the EURES portal 
depended on the already 
existing infrastructure in 
each EURES country. 
The costs incurred in 
relation to the adaptation 
of ESCO classification in 
the systems of EURES 
countries include 
expenses for staff 
training, replacing the old 
classification in national 
systems, and related 
additional workload. 

Medium 
(NCO Survey) 
Due to unavailability of 
automated matching and 
unreliability of the filtered 
search, EURES staff have 
to match manually job 
vacancies with relevant 
CVs and vice versa. 

 
 
 
 
Jobseekers  

Employers  

National Administrations 

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary 

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary  

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary  

Cost: 
Introduction of 
the admission 
system 

Economic. 
One off and 
recurring. 
Compliance cost. 
Expected. 

Jobseekers did not incur 
any costs related to the 
enlargement of the 
network. 

N/A 

Employers did not incur 
any costs related to the 
enlargement of the 
network. 

N/A 

Cost: 
Compulsory 
reporting and 
monitoring 
system 

Economic. 
One off and 
recurring. 
Compliance cost. 
Expected. 

N/A 

Low 
(Desk research) 
In most countries, a 
jobseeker is asked a 
number of questions 
regarding their profile 
when interacting with 
EURES. Questions typically 
asked refer to jobseekers’ 
level of skills and 
qualifications, work 
experience, sector of 
activity, desired level of 
seniority, motivation to find 
a job in another country 
and expected 
remuneration.  

N/A 

Low 
(Desk research) 
In most countries, an 
employer is asked a 
number of questions 
regarding their profile 
when interacting with 
EURES. Questions asked 
typically refer to 
employers’ financial and 
operational capacity, the 
positions they seek to fill, 
competences required to 
fill these positions and 
proposed remuneration.  

47 

Unknown 

(NCO Survey) 
The majority of surveyed 
NCOs (62%) believe that the 
reporting on EURES 
activities is partially 
proportional to the effects 
they achieved.  

High 
Work related to 
admission, on-boarding, 
monitoring and working 
with new Members and 
Partners caused 
significant additional 
administrative workload 
to EURES staff and 
resulted in additional 
workload.  Since the 
EURES Regulation came 
into force, each EURES 
country admitted at least 
their national PES as a 
Member (in some 
countries due to internal 
PES set up it meant 
admitting even up to 42 
PES Members) and half of 
the countries admitted 
also non-PES 
organisations to their 
network. 

Medium 
(NCO Survey) 
The costs incurred in 
relation to the 
development of a 
monitoring system 
depended on the already 
existing infrastructure in 
each EURES country and 
other national/funding 
requirements. 

 
 
 
 
Jobseekers  

Employers  

National Administrations 

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary 

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary  

Qualitative 

Quantitative / monetary  

Benefit: 
Increased pool 
of job vacancies 
and job 
applications 
available 

Social. 
Recurring. 
Changes in 
employment. 
Expected. 

Medium 
(Interviews and workshops) 
A greater number of 
opportunities available on 
the EURES portal. 

(Estimation based on 
internal reporting) 
The number of job 
vacancies provided by the 
NCOs to the EURES portal 
increased from 8 million 
in 2016 to 14 million in 
2020. 

Medium 
(Interviews and 
workshops) 
A greater number of 
candidates available on 
the EURES portal 
increases the possibility of 
matching with a relevant 
one. 

(Estimation based on 
internal reporting) 
The number of CVs 
available from the single 
coordinated channel 
increased from 321 in 
2018 to 964 727 in 2020. 

Benefit: 
Placements 
achieved with 
the support of 
EURES 

Social. 
Recurring. 
Changes in 
employment. 
Expected. 

High 
(Interviews and workshops) 
Better integration in the 
labour market. 

(Conservative estimation 
based on total EURES 
budget) 
A total of 237 713 job 
placements between 2016 
and 2019.  

Benefit: Cost-
saving generated 
by EURES 
activities as 
opposed to the 
national level 

Economic. 
Recurring. 
Cost-saving. 
Expected. 

N/A 

Low 
Savings as result of reduced 
costs are equivalent to 
additional budget that can 
be invested in activities 
benefitting jobseekers. 

(Conservative estimation 
based on total EURES 
budget) 
A total of 237 713 job 
placements between 2016 
and 2019. 

N/A 

High 
(Interviews and 
workshops) 
Diversification of labour 
and skills, and 
improvement of 
productivity. 

Low 
Savings as result of 
reduced costs are 
equivalent to additional 
budget that can be 
invested in activities 
benefitting employers. 

Medium  
(Interviews and 
workshops) 
Greater possibility for 
matching relevant job 
vacancies and CVs, which 
leads to increased 
placement through EURES 
and higher customer 
satisfaction. 

High 
Increased customer 
satisfaction that has a spill 
over effect on attracting 
future clients. 

N/A 

(Conservative estimation 
based on total EURES 
budget) 
A total of 237 713 job 
placements between 2016 
and 2019. 

High  
Savings as result of 
reduced costs are 
equivalent to additional 
budget that can be 
devoted to further 
employment support, to 
other policy objectives or 
to reduce deficit. 

(NCO survey and interviews) 
Benchmarking of EURES 
with PES activities has 
provided evidence that cost 
of EURES can be interpreted 
as a small top-up to the PES 
cost, expanding in a cost-
effective manner national 
to cross-border placements. 

48 

 
 
 
 
 
 
EURES  staff  spend  a  considerable  part  of  their  time  providing  tailored  and  specialised  services  to 
both employers and jobseekers. If customers are satisfied with the service received, the advisers see 
the  time  spent  as  an  investment  because  a  successful  support  to  a  customer  is  likely  to  create  a 
positive effect  on their network of  contacts.  Taking into account  that the  EURES brand is  still not 
widely known in the EURES countries, word of mouth is very important in increasing the awareness 
about  EURES  services.  Therefore,  in  this  regard,  the  perceived  benefits  outweigh  the  costs  of  the 
services. 

5.3.2.  The national side of cost-effectiveness  

The overall national cost-benefit of EURES activities grew proportionally to the invested amounts, 
as  shown  by  comparing  three  indicators  (vacancies,  contacts  with  customers  and  placements),  and 
their  aggregate  costs  in  the  period  2016-2019.  In  this  period,  the  national  EURES  budget134  grew 
from  EUR 22.1  million  in  2016  to  EUR  24.4 million  in  2019.  The  number  of  vacancies  published 
(from  8  million  to  19.7  million),  total  individual  contacts  between  staff  and  customers  (from 
1.6 million to 2 million) and total placements achieved (from 45 000 to 85 000) grew similarly. 

Since  the  EURES  Regulation  does  not  provide  any  financial  support  and  national  actions  are 
implemented based on financial resources identified by the EURES countries, there are differences in 
national budgets and costs. This is not surprising as each of them caters to a differently defined and 
predominantly national audience in terms of size, skills and needs. 

Therefore,  while  the  requirements  by  the  EURES  Regulation  apply  to  all  countries,  the  operations 
are implemented with some divergences. In addition, with the switch from direct funding of EURES 
activities  by  the  European  Commission  to  national  resources  and  ESF,  national  labour  policies 
became much more prominent as a decisive factor in allocating budgets to EURES activities.  

The  benefit  of  EURES  in  terms  of  efficiency  of  the  services  provided  at  national  level  has  been 
widely recognised by the interviewees.  For example, without the financial support provided by the 
EURES mobility schemes, many of the jobseekers would not be able to accept a job offer in another 
country. 

EURES  also  benefits  to  Public  Employment  Services  (PES)  as  without  it,  to  achieve  the  same 
number  of  placements,  a  considerable  increase  in  financial  and  human  sources  would  be  needed. 
Furthermore,  due  to  the  small  size  of  many  national  networks,  EURES  is  a  gateway  to  innovative 
approaches  and  processes  that  could  be  mainstreamed  into  the  PES  and  its  services.  For  example, 
certain IT developments that are first introduced to EURES are then taken up by the PES135.  

134  ESF  and  national  budgets,  excluding  EaSI  contributions,  as  detailed  in  annex  III  (Methodology),  section  b.  Cost-

effectiveness analysis / EURES budget.  

135 For instance, mobile phones were introduced in EURES Germany well before they were of common use even for PES 
managers, EURES Portugal staff trained their PES colleagues during the COVID-19 disruption on the use of online 
tools which were not yet widespread in the PES but of common use in EURES. Other examples in the Evaluation 
study, p. 270, annex II.b, case study on 'Support to Mobile workers' 

49 

 
                                                 
In  order  to  test  and  quantify  the  benefits  of  EURES  activities  beyond  the  national  level,  PES 
activities  were  benchmarked  with  the  additional  expenditure  on  EURES  by  means  of  a  cost-
effectiveness analysis. Based on the data available, the calculation was performed for 16 countries136 
for the year 2018. 

EURES relies on existing PES structures and benefiting from its initial investment and fixed costs. 
Therefore,  the  EURES  cost  (EUR 219.09)  can  be  interpreted  as  a  top-up  to  the  PES  cost 
(EUR 2 924.70).  The  additional  cost  is  justified  by  the  need  to  expand  the  scope  of  the  activities 
from national to cross-border placements. It follows that, for a relatively small additional investment 
as compared to PES, considerable cost-effective results can be achieved through EURES. 

EURES  activities  were  also  benchmarked  to  the  Targeted  Mobility  Schemes  (TMS)  for  the  year 
2019. The  cost  per placement of benchmarked TMS activities is  considerably  higher than those of 
EURES, both in aggregate terms (EUR 3 219) and for each of the two individual mobility schemes: 
Your First EURES Job (EUR 2 917) and Reactivate (EUR 4 294). These figures are indicative of the 
different  scope  of  EURES  and  TMS  activities.  As  explained  above,  EURES  costs  only  include  an 
additional  investment  over  existing  PES  structures.  By  contrast,  the  costs  of  TMS  include  the  full 
cost  of the programmes  and are, therefore, a more precise proxy of what  a cross-border placement 
actually  costs.  A  precise  benchmarking  is  not  possible  at  present  time  given  the  limited  data 
availability and the fact  that TMS are aimed at target  groups with specific needs (e.g.  youth, long-
term  unemployed).  However,  the  comparison  of  overall  EURES  costs  against  TMS  reinforces  the 
assessment that EURES is an efficient way to expand PES services abroad. 

    Table 12: Costs of a placement by PES, EURES or TMS. Source: Evaluation study 

Placement costs (EUR) 

Cost of a PES national placement 
Combined cost PES+EURES for an international placement 
Cost of a EURES international placement for difficult groups (TMS) 

2 924.70 
3 143.79 
3 219.00 

Nevertheless,  three  key  elements  suggest  caution  in  interpreting  the  data:  There  are  several 
limitations in data availability and in the comparability of the scope of the EURES, PES, and TMS 
activities.  In  addition,  EURES  but  also  TMS  rely  on  existing  PES  structures  and  therefore  should 
benefit from the initial investment and fixed costs being covered under PES. Moreover, the subset of 
countries  analysed  for  the  EURES-PES  benchmark  is  not  necessarily  representative  of  the  whole 
EURES  network.  Lastly,  TMS  display  overlapping  placements  and  budget  figures  with  those 
reported under EURES. Therefore, the comparison of the cost-effectiveness should be considered as 
indicative only137. 

136 Countries included into the sample are: Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, 

Iceland, Lithuania, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Spain 

137  Further  details  on  the  analysis,  methodology,  data  collection  and  elaboration,  and  limitations  in  annex  III, 

Methodology. 

50 

 
 
                                                 
5.3.3.  Increase/decrease of administrative burden 

From  an  administrative  point  of  view,  the  EURES  Regulation  introduced  many  new  features  to 
which  the  national  networks  had  to  adapt.  These  included  the  requirement  to  expand  the  national 
network  by  admitting  new  Members  and  Partners,  the  introduction  of  mandatory  and  more 
harmonised planning, monitoring and reporting requirements, as well as the obligation to establish a 
connection between the national job vacancies and CV databases with the EURES portal through a 
single  coordinated  channel.  The  aim  of  these  changes  was  to  standardise  processes  with  a  view  to 
reducing the administrative burden on the EURES network. 

At the same time, many countries have gone through an internal restructuring of EURES and PES in 
recent  years138. This often translated into a reduction in staff numbers and their time that should be 
allotted to  EURES services and activities. This has led to an increased administrative workload on 
the remaining EURES staff, on top of their expanded areas of operation and service provision.  

The fact that the additional tasks have come accompanied by additional workload is confirmed by the 
majority  of  the  national  coordinators139.  This  is  caused  predominantly  by  the  new  requirements  set 
out in the Regulation and to a much lesser extent by accompanying national procedures. 

Despite  the  workload  increase,  national  coordinators  overall  perceive  the  new  requirements  as 
justified, as consistently concluded in the case studies140: They consider that the results produced by 
the  new  monitoring  system  offer  a  more  accurate  representation  of  the  national  work  and  the 
network. Beforehand, EURES countries used incompatible systems that provided incomplete results 
across the network. The coordinators also agree that a broader EURES network is necessary in order 
to  address  changes  in  a dynamic labour market,  and contributes to  the achievement of the EURES 
objectives.  The  coordinators  also  recall  that  before  the  introduction  of  the  Single  Coordinated 
Channel, the system for transferring job vacancy offers to the EURES portal was much less reliable. 
It  was  also  much  harder  to  ensure  that  all  the  correct  job  vacancies  were  displayed  to  jobseekers 
when searching for job opportunities. 

However, national coordinators also state lack of consistency between the reporting for EURES and 
internal  national  reporting  systems,  which  rely  on  different  indicators  or  use  different  reporting 
periods.  In some cases, data are not  available at national  level  for specific indicators, especially  in 
relation  to  the  number  of  vacancies  available.  In  addition,  the  majority  of  surveyed  national 
coordinators (20 out  of 26 respondents) believe  that the reporting on EURES  activities is not  fully 
representative of the effects they achieved. 

138  2020  Annual  report  of  the  European  Network  of  Public  Employment  Services,  p.  17,  ISBN  978-92-76-28597-7, 

https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=23352&langId=en  

139  Out  of  25  national  coordinators  responding  to  the  survey,  23  consider  that  the  administrative  burden  has  not 
diminished with the adoption of the EURES Regulation. Evaluation study, p. 347 (2.1.1 EURES evaluation National 
Coordination Offices’ survey analysis), annex II.c: Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

140  Evaluation  study,  annex  II.b,  sections  1  –  Single  coordinated  channel,  2  –  IT  platforms  /  Automated  matching  and 

monitoring and  4 – Admission system / extension of the network 

51 

 
                                                 
To  increase  the  efficiency  of  their  efforts,  the  national  coordinators  would  welcome  more 
interoperability  and  automated  options  for  the  reporting,  as  well  as  more  synergies  between  the 
various  reporting  requirements.  For  instance,  two  different  tools  for  planning  and  monitoring  have 
been implemented along the different implementing acts. However, planning and monitoring are two 
phases of the same cycle and these tools could be combined into a single one.  

Nonetheless, a large majority of national coordinators (19 out of 24 respondents) believe that the cost 
of  the  services  and  tools  provided  by  EURES  is  proportionate  and  justified  by  their  results.  The 
possibility  to  apply  for  EaSI  and  in  some  instances  also  for  ESF  funding,  connected  to  the 
development of the single coordinated channel and the mapping to the European Skills/Competences, 
Qualifications and Occupations (ESCO) classification, was seen by Member States representatives as 
beneficial in easing the initial financial burden. The coordinators did not provide suggestions in the 
case studies for reducing administrative workload concerning the Single Coordinated Channel or the 
enlargement of the network. 

5.4.  Coherence 

5.4.1.  External coherence 

The  external  coherence  refers  to  the  coherence  of  EURES  Regulation  with  other  EU  level  policy 
measures and initiatives targeting employment and mobility. 

The table at the end of this section summarises the legal instruments and policies analysed from the 
coherence  point  of  view.  EURES  specific  objectives  are  consistent  and  often  complementary  with 
the  activities  and  purposes  of  legal  instruments  in  the  same  field.  The  analysis  does  not  identify 
inconsistency in the objectives.  

This  result  is  further  confirmed  by  the  stakeholders’  consultation141.  More  than  90%  of  EURES 
Members and Partners that took part in the survey and 20 out of 24 national coordinators agreed that 
EURES  is  complementary  to  other  European  policies  and  initiatives.  Similarly,  more  than  three-
quarters of those who were able to reply to the public consultation agreed that EURES complements 
other EU policies. 

In addition, it is important to assess whether synergies or duplications exist at the operational level 
between  EURES  activities  and  other  European  initiatives  and  policies.  Synergies  were  identified 
with the following initiatives: 

  The European Public Employment Services (PES) network focuses primarily on cooperation to 
improve  PES  performance  and  contribute  to  implementation  of  employment  policies,  while 
EURES activities provide services directly to employers, workers and jobseekers. Thus, there is 
no overlap in activities.  

141 Evaluation study, p. 351 (2.1.1 EURES evaluation National Coordination Offices’ survey analysis) and p. 379 (2.1.2 
EURES evaluation Members and Partners survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

52 

 
                                                 
  European  Skills/Competences,  Qualifications  and  Occupations  (ESCO)  classification:  EURES 
countries  are  in  the  process  of  adopting  the  European  classification  or  mapping  national 
classifications to it, thus moving towards its coherent application.  

  Erasmus+:  focuses  on  the  provision  of  training  opportunities  abroad,  which  could  constitute  a 
duplication  with  the  provision  of  support  services  to  apprenticeships  and  traineeships  within 
EURES.  However,  stakeholders  (national  coordinators  and  advisers)  consulted  identified  only 
synergies in this field, as Erasmus+ opportunities are promoted among EURES clients. 

  Euraxess  facilitates  the  worldwide  mobility  of  researchers  and  it  also  caters  for  their  career 
development  within  the  residence  country.  Euraxess  is  considering  ESCO  for  internal  data 
encoding  and  the  possibility  to  export  their  specialized  vacancies  to  EURES.  National  EURES 
and Euraxess centres keep informal contacts. 

 

  Youth Guarantee: aims at securing a smooth transition from school to work and supporting the 
labour market integration of young European citizens. Within its framework, funding is provided 
to  EURES  countries  for  the  implementation  of  EURES  apprenticeships  and  traineeships,  as 
shown in the case study on the topic142.  
Interreg’s  focus  on  cross-border  and  transnational  cooperation  could  potentially  overlap  with 
EURES  activities  in  cross-border  regions,  although  the  focus  of  Interreg  is  not  on  labour 
mobility. However, most of the participants to the fieldwork interviews had positive experiences 
of  collaboration  with  Interreg  projects.  Some  of  them  mentioned  that  often  Interreg  staff  refer 
jobseekers  that  seek  information  on  cross-border  mobility  to  EURES  staff.  No  duplications  in 
financing have been identified.  

  European Social Fund (ESF): ESF funding is implemented based on country-specific Operational 
Programmes, developed at national and regional level by national authorities and approved by the 
European  Commission.  Within  the  EURES  framework,  ESF  funding  can  be  used  for  national 
EURES structures (e.g. staff and IT costs of the PES, which are EURES Members) as well as for 
transnational EURES activities (e.g. job fairs). A survey among national coordinators was carried 
out in December 2019 to provide insights about the use of ESF funding. The survey showed that 
the largest share of ESF funding was used for staff costs, followed by travel costs. Looking into 
the  advantages  (e.g.  additional  resources,  long-term  planning)  and  disadvantages  (e.g. 
administrative  burden)  of  using  ESF  funding,  the  survey  concluded  that  ESF  and  EURES  are 
compatible.  Furthermore,  the  analysis  concluded  that  ESF  offers  funding  for  essential  EURES 
activities that could be hard to offer at national level without ESF support. 

Only two initiatives have been highlighted as impacting the EURES Regulation: the Single Digital 
Gateway and Europass: 

Europass:  With  the  revamp  of  Europass  launched  in  2018143  and  online  since  1/7/2020,  users 
can  prepare  their  CVs  and  directly  upload  them  to  the  EURES  portal.  Through  increased 
interoperability Europass users interested in finding a EURES job can directly access suitable job 
vacancies on Europass. 

142  Evaluation  study,  p.  254  (5.3.1  State  of  play  in  the  Member  States  in  focus),  annex  II.b,  section  5  - 

Apprenticeship/traineeship schemes. 

143 Decision (EU) 2018/646 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 April 2018 on a common framework for 
the provision of better services for skills and qualifications (Europass) and repealing Decision No 2241/2004/EC 

53 

 
                                                 
Europass  officers  participate  in  EURES  coordination  meetings  to  discuss  and  ensure 
complementarity  with  the  EURES  portal.  However,  national  coordinators  stress  the  risk  of 
confusion for jobseekers and employers as to which portal to use, since both have a job search 
function and a section on living and working conditions in other EU countries.  

A number of other websites provide information on a range of aspects on labour mobility (e.g. 
Your  Europe  website,  Moving  &  Working  in  Europe;  and  national  EURES  websites),  which 
leads to potential overlaps. This can create confusion among EURES customers, and thus limit 
the  quality  of  service  provision.  Moreover,  they  lead  to  additional  administrative  costs  at  EU 
level for the maintenance and update of the same information on multiple websites. Therefore, 
further work is needed to eliminate duplication of information to citizens and businesses on EU 
webpages, as required under the Single Digital Gateway Regulation as of 12 December 2020. 

The  Single  Digital  Gateway  (SDG),  established  by  Regulation  (EU)  2018/1724144,  and 
integrated into Your Europe portal, will provide one access point to information about the living 
and working conditions in the Member States. 

Commission officials in charge of the SDG also participate in EURES coordination meetings to 
present the progresses on its implementation and to discuss its impact on EURES. However, the 
national  coordinators  consulted  stressed  the  risk  of  duplication  in  performance  measurement 
activities and in some sections of the EURES portal. 

In  annex  III  of  the  SDG  Regulation,  EURES  is  listed  as  one  of  the  assistance  and  problem-
solving services that should be part of the Gateway as of  12 December 2020. Article 24 of the 
Gateway Regulation  requires the competent national  authorities and the  Commission  to  ensure 
the  collection  of  statistics  of  users’  visits  to  webpages  accessible  through  the  Gateway.  In 
addition, providers or managers of  the networks of assistance services have to collect statistics 
relating to the use of the service (the number, origin and subject matter of requests, and of their 
response time). While the current  Performance  Measurement System  for EURES collects  most 
of this information, the reporting requirement concerning the response time remains to be added.  

144 Regulation (EU) 2018/17 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 October 2018 establishing a single 

digital gateway to provide access to information, to procedures and to assistance and problem-solving services and 
amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012. The Regulation aims to facilitate access of citizens and businesses to 
information, procedures, and assistance and problem-solving services that they need in order to exercise their rights 
in the internal market 

54 

 
 
                                                 
Table 13: Coherence matrix 

Main field(s) 

Directive/Regulation 

Year 

Single Digital Gateway 

Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 establishing a single digital 
gateway to provide access to information, to procedures and 
to assistance and problem-solving services and amending 
Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1121 on 
the collection and sharing of user statistics and feedback on 
the services of the single digital gateway. 

Euraxess 

Communication from the Commission to the European 
Parliament, the Council, The European Economic and 
Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions 
COM (2012) 392 - A Reinforced European Research Area 
Partnership for Excellence and Growth 

EUROPASS 

Decision (EU) 2018/646 on a common framework for the 
provision of better services for skills and qualifications 
(Europass) and repealing Decision No 2241/2004/EC 

Freedom of mobility for 
workers; integration of 
labour markets 

Directive (EU) 2018/957 amending Directive 96/71/EC 
concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the 
provision of services 

Freedom of mobility of 
workers 

Directive 2014/54/EU of the European Parliament and of the 
Council of 16 April 2014 on measures facilitating the 
exercise of rights conferred on workers in the context of 
freedom of movement 

2018 

2003 

2018 

2018 

2014 

Freedom of mobility for 
workers 

Directive 2013/55/EU amending Directive 2005/36/EC on the 
recognition of professional qualifications 

2013 

Link with EURES specific objectives 
The Regulation established the Single Digital  Gateway  - online platform to provide a single 
point of access to information, procedures and assistance services for citizens and businesses 
who  want  to  get  active  in  another  EU  country.  The  provision  of  information  and  assistance 
constitutes  a  valid  supporting  tool  for  intra-EU  labour  mobility  and  complements  the 
information  provided  on  EURES  portal  on  living  and  working  conditions.  The  Gateway 
Regulation specifies that information already available on the EURES portal and provided by 
Member  States  should  be  used  to  cover  information  aspects  of  the  Single  Digital  Gateway. 
Regulation 2018/1724 also defines a performance statistics to be collected (e.g. response time 
and  visitors  to  websites),  which  should  be  added  to  the  performance  indicators  collected  by 
EURES.  
Euraxess (https://euraxess.ec.europa.eu) started in 2003 on the basis of open cooperation under 
the  European  research  area  (ERA)  framework,  without  a  specific  legal  framework.  It  is  a 
specialised action focusing on researchers and scientists with a worldwide scope, covering 42 
countries.  Euraxess  facilitates  the  international  mobility  of  researchers  but  it  also  caters  for 
career development within the residence country. Its tools include a European portal, national 
portals and physical offices. 
The Decision aims to support the transparency and understanding of skills and qualifications 
across  the  EU.  Synergies  and  cooperation  between  the  Europass  and  EURES  portals  could 
reinforce  the  impact  of  both  services,  as  mentioned  in  the  Decision.  While  the  objectives  of 
the  Decision  to  enhance  transparency  do  not  contradict  the  EURES  objectives,  as  discussed 
above there are certain overlaps in the implementation of both portals.  
The  Directive  aims  at  reinforcing  the  protection  of  rights  of  posted  workers  within  the  EU, 
hence  complementing  and  supporting  EURES  goal  of  facilitating  labour  mobility,  of  which 
posted workers are an important component. 

Both EURES and this Directive have the support of intra-EU labour mobility as a core goal. 
Among the activities identified by the Directive are the transparency of information on labour 
mobility,  hence  it  can  be  considered  coherent  with  EURES  specific  objective  of  enabling 
access to information to all the interested users. 
This Directive is aimed at the operational implementation of the principle of freedom of 
movement of workers within the EU included in the TFEU, by facilitating and allowing the 
recognition of professional qualifications within the EU as stated in recital 4 “For the 
purposes of strengthening the internal market and promoting the free movement of 
professionals while ensuring a more efficient and transparent recognition of professional 
qualifications, a European Professional Card would be of added value”. This goal is 
complementary to the EURES specific goals of facilitating the matching between employers 
and jobseekers across the EU. 

55 

 
Main field(s) 

Directive/Regulation 

Year 

Full employment and 
social progress 

Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on a European 
Union Programme for Employment and Social Innovation 
("EaSI") and amending Decision No 283/2010/EU 

2013 

Full employment and 
social progress 

Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European 
Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) 
No 1081/2006 

2013 

Link with EURES specific objectives 
This  Regulation  launched  EaSI,  a  funding  programme  aimed  at  supporting  the  European 
project and goals in the field of sustainable employment, hence linked to EURES ambition of 
contributing to full and sustainable employment in Europe. 
In particular, the specific objectives for its EURES axis are145: 
 
to achieve transparency of labour market information, and 
 
to provide effective services for the recruitment and matching of workers; 
and are perfectly complementary to EURES’ goals of providing information on labour markets 
to all interested users. Indeed, EaSI is the main funding tool for EURES horizontal activities. 
This  Regulation  defined  the  mission  and  scope  of  the  European  Social  Fund,  namely  to 
promote  high  level  quality  employment  and  jobs  across  the  EU,  with  a  strong  link  with 
EURES  goals  in  the  field  of  full  employment  and  social  progress.  In  particular,  among  its 
specific  goals,  the  objective  to  “facilitate  access  to  employment  opportunities”  complement 
EURES specific objective of enabling access to recruitment and matching services.  

Integration of labour 
markets 

Full employment and 
social progress 

Freedom of mobility for 
workers 

Freedom of mobility for 
workers 

Regulation (EU) No 1299/2013 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on specific 
provisions for the support from the European Regional 
Development Fund to the European territorial cooperation 
goal (Interreg) 

Regulation (EU) No 1301/2013 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European 
Regional Development Fund and on specific provisions 
concerning the Investment for growth and jobs goal  
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1224/2012 of 18 December 
2012 amending Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council on the 
coordination of social security systems and Regulation (EC) 
No 987/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation 
(EC) No 883/2004 
Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament 
and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement 
for workers within the Union 

2013 

Interreg,  by  supporting  cross-border  cooperation  also  aims  at  facilitating  the  integration  of 
labour markets across the EU. Nevertheless, the main focus of Interreg projects is on regional 
development  and  integration  and  not  strictly  on  labour  mobility  and  its  main  goals  are  not 
directly linked to the EURES ones. 

2013 

This Regulation establishes the link between the European Regional Development Fund and 
investment  for  growth  and  jobs,  the  scope  of  which  also  includes  the  investments  in 
sustainable jobs and social progress 

2012 

As  emerged  in  the  Relevance  section  above,  one  of  the  most  important  hindering  factors  to 
labour  mobility  is  heterogeneity  of  rules  to  access  social  security  across  the  EU,  hence 
coordinating  social  security  is  essential  to  support  intra-EU  labour  mobility.  Therefore, 
EURES is aligned to the goals of this Regulation. 

2011 

This  Regulation  aims  at  facilitating  and  supporting  the  freedom  of  movement  of  workers 
across the EU, in line with EURES goals. 

145 European Commission, 2017. “Mid-term evaluation of the EU programme for employment and social innovation  – EaSI. Framework Service  Contract VC/2013/0083. 

Final Evaluation Report”. 

56 

 
 
                                                 
5.4.2.  Internal coherence 

The internal  complementarity of the reformed EURES network has been assessed from 
three  different  perspectives:  EU-level  activities,  internal  national  organisation  and 
EURES activities across the network. 

in 

that  EURES 

that  participated 

their  surveys  agreed 

Looking  into  the  EU-level  activities,  nearly  all  the  Members,  Partners  and  national 
coordinators 
tools  are 
complementary  with  each  other146.  The  surveys  and  interviews  with  jobseekers  and 
employers also highlighted synergies between the general support services to employers 
and  jobseekers  and  the  mobility  schemes.  The  EURES  mobility  schemes  provide 
financial  support  and  additional  resources  for  specific  target  groups  to  complement  the 
advice  provided  by  EURES  advisers.  Such  specific  support  (e.g.  financing  of  language 
courses,  travel  costs)  is  not  available  through  the  EURES  general  services,  but  is  an 
important element to support labour mobility. EURES cross-border partnerships are often 
delivered in areas where EURES advisers are also providing specific support services in 
cross-border  regions  and,  while  in  most  cases  they  are  integrated  into  the  cross-border 
partnerships, resulting in coordination and cooperation, it is however not always the case.  

The  internal  organisation  of  the  individual  EURES  countries  shows  a  different 
picture. 

National Members and Partners work together to achieve EURES goals, but sometimes 
have  different  interests,  priorities  and  ways  of  working,  especially  due  to  the  differing 
nature of private and public organisations. This creates difficulties in the monitoring and 
planning activities by national coordinators and can lead to incoherencies. For instance, 
private Members can charge fees to employers, differently from the services provided by 
EURES staff within the Public Employment Services. 

Stakeholders’ feedback suggests that there could be differences in the quality of service 
provision along countries, which could also be linked to the political priority accorded to 
EURES  at  national  level.  When  asked  about  the  degree  of  standardisation  of  EURES 
services provision across the network, half of the Members and Partners participating in 
the survey rated it as good, and 35% rated it as neutral.  

Concerning the coherence between EURES activities across the network, the majority 
of  EURES  countries  collaborate  with  each  other  in  the  implementation  of  recruitment 
projects.  In  particular,  in  2018  and  2019,  all  but  two  EURES  countries  reported 
cooperation  in  recruitment  activities  with  other  countries  and  all  but  three  countries 
reported  carrying  out  multilateral  recruitment  projects.  In  addition,  25  out  of  the  26 

146 Evaluation study, p. 352 (2.1.1 EURES evaluation National Coordination Offices’ survey analysis) and 
p. 399 (2.1.2 EURES evaluation Members and Partners survey analysis), annex II.b Case studies. 

57 

 
 
                                                 
national  coordinators  replied  in  the  survey  that  they  coordinate  their  actions  across  the 
network.  The  assessment  of  2019  national  work  programmes  highlights  that  national 
coordinators  peer  reviewed  actively  each  other  plans,  which  allowed  them  to  identify 
mutually interesting target sectors and events.  

However,  the  coordination  could  be  further  enhanced.  Both  national  coordinators  and 
Members and Partners147, despite identifying the benefits of cooperation, pointed out that 
the  different  financial  resources  available  in  each  of  the  EURES  countries  may  lead  to 
different  chances  to  quickly  react  to  changes  in  the  labour  markets  and  technological 
context and to adapt the provision of services. Similarly, the allocation and availability of 
human resources may affect the quality of services provided within the network. Finally, 
also  national  employment  policies,  such  as  on  the  prevention  of  brain  drain  may  be 
different from EURES priorities and could influence the provision of services. 

5.5.  EU added-value 

5.5.1.  Effects  of  EURES  operations  that  would  not  have  taken  place 

without EU intervention 

EURES is the only international mobility service that covers all kind of jobseekers and 
employers,  in  their  own  languages,  in  all  the  countries  of  a  large  economic  region. 
Therefore,  there  is  no  baseline  scenario  or  counterfactual  situation  to  quantify  the 
Regulation contribution on intra-EU labour mobility. A comparison base is proposed in 
section 2.2. Baseline and points of comparison. 

As  the  free  movement  of  workers  is  a  founding  principle  of  the  EU,  labour  mobility 
would  have  happened  also  in  the  absence  of  the  EURES  regulation,  and  even  in  the 
absence of the EURES network. However, the evaluation suggests that there is potential 
for  additional  labour  mobility  to  happen  and  help  reduce  imbalances  across  the  EU. 
Hence, the evaluation focuses on the additional fair intra-EU labour mobility facilitated 
as consequence of the Regulation, especially for EURES customers.  

In  this  context,  the  added  value  of  EURES  is  widely  recognised  by  the  stakeholders 
consulted,  though,  notably,  more  by  Members,  Partners,  and  national  coordinators  and 
less  by  jobseekers  and  employers.  EURES  actions  contributed  to  achieving  results, 
especially for those users living in countries with high barriers to mobility148, promoting 
labour market integration. 

The EURES portal is the only online platform providing access to all sorts of vacancies 
and  CVs  throughout  the  entire  Union,  and  offering  information  in  all  EU  languages. 
Approximately 50% of the jobseekers, more than 60% of the employers and around 80% 

147 Evaluation study, p. 363 (2.1.1 EURES evaluation National Coordination Offices’ survey analysis) and 
p. 389 (2.1.2 EURES evaluation Members and Partners survey analysis), annex II.b Case studies. 

148  Evaluation  study,  p.  585  (Step  3  -  Added  value  of  EURES  -  Self-reported  counterfactual), 

III.b: Comparative analysis of the labour market. 

58 

 
                                                 
of  the  Members  and  Partners  that  replied  to  their  surveys149,  found  that  the  portal 
increased  employment  opportunities  and,  thus,  facilitated  the  matching  between  job 
supply and demand for its users.  

When  asked  about  the  various  EURES  support  services  available,  a  significant 
proportion  of  jobseekers  responding  to  the  survey150  deemed  them  essential  to  achieve 
certain outcomes. This applies especially on obtaining post-recruitment assistance (47%), 
finding an apprenticeship or traineeship abroad (36%) and receiving work/apprenticeship 
offers in line with their skills (33%). In addition, over 21% of respondents believed that 
they probably would not have found a job abroad without EURES.  

These  views  are  also  confirmed  in  the  case  study  on  support  services  to  jobseekers151, 
where  the  provision  of  reliable  information  was  deemed  as  central  to  facilitate  and 
support labour mobility, in particular fair mobility. In addition, the provision of training 
and  post-recruitment  assistance  is  considered  as  a  unique  characteristic  of  EURES  that 
provides jobseekers with vital support in building their careers and that cannot be found 
anywhere else. 

survey 

results152, 

employers  deem  post-recruitment 

Employers  have  a  more  positive  view  of  the  contribution  of  EURES  compared  to 
jobseekers; however, the number of total replies collected is much smaller. According to 
the 
finding 
apprentices/trainees  and  accessing  a  wider  selection  of  candidates  as  the  most  useful 
EURES  services  to  achieve  outcomes  that  would  not  be  possible  otherwise.  Moreover, 
from the more in-depth analyses of employers’ responses, it appears that EURES support 
not only made it easier and quicker to obtain any of the outcomes but, in many cases, it 
was  actually  a  determining  factor.  These  results  are  in  line  with  the  feedback  received 
from employers interviewed in the case studies153. 

assistance, 

The  EURES  cross-border  partnerships  and  mobility  schemes  facilitate  labour 
mobility  across  Europe  according  to  the  case  studies154.  The  financial  support  provided 
through  these  services  has  been  deemed  essential  for  the  users  to  take  the  decision  of 

149 Evaluation study, p. 392 (2.1.2 EURES evaluation Members and Partners survey analysis), p. 431 (2.1.3 
EURES evaluation Jobseekers survey analysis) and p. 465 (2.1.4 EURES evaluation Employers survey 
analysis), annex II.c Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

150 Evaluation study, p. 418 (2.1.3 EURES evaluation Jobseekers survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the 

stakeholders’ consultation. 

151 Evaluation study, p. 276 (6 Support to mobile workers), annex II.b Case studies. 

152 Evaluation study, p. 455 (2.1.4 EURES evaluation Employers survey analysis), annex II.c Details of the 

stakeholders’ consultation. 

153  Evaluation  study,  p.  294  (7  Advice  and  guidance  to  employers  recruiting  abroad),  annex  II.b  Case 

studies. 

154 Evaluation study, p. 232 (3 Cross-border collaboration / support services in cross-border regions), annex 

II.b Case studies. 

59 

 
                                                 
working  abroad.  The  case  study  on  cross-border  partnerships  shows  that,  while  certain 
results  concerning  the  provision  of  information  would  have  been  obtained  in  any  case, 
the  enhanced  cooperation  in  cross-border  regions  deriving  from  EURES  allowed  to 
achieve higher quality of information and to build a network of experts in labour mobility 
issues. 

Stakeholders’ feedback from the interviews and workshops shows that EURES general 
support services strongly contributed to the exchange of labour market information and 
statistics across the network. Thus, it enhanced collaboration between countries on labour 
mobility  issues,  providing  an  overarching  framework  for  intra-EU  cooperation.  This  is 
further  confirmed  by  the  replies  to  the  survey,  where  approximately  60%  of  Members 
and Partners agreed that EURES contributed to more coordinated employment strategies. 
Overall,  it  emerged  that  EURES  countries,  especially  in  cross-border  regions,  would 
have  collaborated  in  any  case.  However,  the  EURES  Regulation,  by  providing  a  legal 
framework  for  the  establishment  of  the  network  and  by  introducing  legal  obligations,  
lead to better results than in a situation without EURES. 

EURES  contributes  and  ensures,  in  particular  through  its  direct  services  to  jobseekers, 
fair mobility as agreed in the European Pillar of Social Rights that was the subject of a 
joint proclamation by the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission at the 
Social  Summit  for  Fair  Jobs  and  Growth,  in  Gothenburg  on  17  November  2017  and 
further elaborated in the Action Plan on the European Pillar of Social Rights on 4 March 
2021. The Pillar emphasises the need to put people first in order to further develop the 
social dimension of the Union, including by ensuring fair treatment for all in the Union 
labour market through modernised rules on posting of workers, and by further improving 
cross-border enforcement of Union law. 

5.5.2.  Comparison to bilateral or multilateral cooperation 

The  EURES  Impact  Assessment  concludes  that,  since  co-operation  across  countries 
presupposes  a  common  framework,  the  EURES  objectives  cannot  be  sufficiently 
achieved by Member States alone. This is also confirmed by Members and Partners (95% 
out  of  the  93  respondents),  national  coordinators  (22  out  of  26  respondents)  and  the 
respondents  of  the  public  consultation  (87%  out  of  the  1144  who  replied  to  the 
question)155, who agreed that EURES achieves results additional to the ones that could be 
achieved at national level. 

While  EURES  advisers  and  national  coordinators  interviewed  believe  that  bilateral  or 
multilateral cooperation in the field of intra-EU labour mobility would have existed also 
without EURES, they  agree that the cooperation  has been enhanced by the Regulation. 
This  opinion  is  also  supported  to  some  extent  by  the  results  of  the  survey  of  Members 
and  Partners,  where  77%  of  those  who  had  an  opinion  agreed  that  EURES  facilitates 

155 Evaluation study, p. 328, 355 and 380, annex II.c: Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

60 

 
                                                 
better  cooperation156.  While  a  quantification  of  the  additional  effects  achieved  through 
EURES  is  not  feasible  with  the  available  data,  it  could  be  concluded,  based  on 
stakeholders’  feedback,  that  EURES  provides  added  value  compared  to  less  structured 
multilateral or bilateral collaborations in three areas: 

I. 

European-wide  network  and  provision  of  an  overarching  framework  for 
cooperation:  

-  The Regulation facilitates not only cooperation designed at European 
level,  but  also  enhances  bilateral  cooperation.  The  Regulation  added 
value does not lie in initiating the collaboration but rather in providing 
an overarching strategy for it157.  
In  addition,  in  cases  of  diverging  interests  of  Members  and  Partners, 
the Regulation has created a platform to  discuss and learn  from  each 
other, which in the long-term results in bringing various interests and 
ways of working closer together.  

- 

-  The  provision  of  a  common  vision  and  principles  also  appears  to 
increase  the  motivation  of  EURES  advisers,  as  it  enhances  their 
feeling of belonging to a community that acts towards a common goal. 

II. 

Promotion of fair labour mobility conditions: 

-  The EURES Regulation (Annex I) sets minimum common criteria that 
have  to  be  respected  in  the  service  delivery  by  all  Members  and 
Partners.  It  was  highlighted  in  the  interviews  with  stakeholders  from 
countries that have admitted private organisations that these minimum 
criteria lead to more awareness among private organisations about the 
concepts  of  non-discrimination  and  fair  mobility158.  In  this  context, 
stakeholders  from  the  countries  interviewed  mentioned  that  the 
EURES  network  is  perceived  as  a  label  for  quality  of  services  and 
transparency  of  information.  However,  the  evaluation  did  not  gather 
evidence  on  mechanisms  developed  by  national  coordinators  to 
monitor  whether  newly  admitted  Members  and  Partners  conform  to 
fair mobility. 

-  EURES  advisers  inform  jobseekers  about  the  standards  of  working 
conditions and wages in other countries, helping jobseekers recognise 
conditions  in  vacancies  that  might  be  below  accepted  standards159.  In 
some  instances,  EURES  advisers  mentioned  that  they  perform 
background research on companies to validate their job vacancies.  

156 Evaluation study, p. 402 (2.1.2 EURES evaluation Members and Partners survey analysis), annex II.c 

Details of the stakeholders’ consultation. 

157 For instance, Members organize exchanges of good practice without the support of ECO but under the 
EURES  framework:  EURES  Cross-border  Partnerships  handbook  for  the  transfer  of  good  practices 
(2019),  https://www.eures-andalucia-algarve.eu/wp-content/uploads/eures-buenas-practicas-ingles-v5-
interactivo.pdf 

158 Evaluation study, p. 244 (4 Admission system / extension of the network), annex II.b Case studies. 

159 Evaluation study, p. 227 (3 Cross-border collaboration / support services in cross-border regions), 262 
(5  Apprenticeship/traineeship  schemes)  and  277  (6  Support  to  mobile  workers),  annex  II.b  Case 
studies. 

61 

 
 
                                                 
-  The transfer of the EURES coordination role to the European Labour 
Authority  (ELA)  is  expected  to  reinforce  fair  mobility  by  bringing 
together  under  the  same  umbrella  support  to  mobility  and  legal 
enforcement.  

III.  Exchange  of  information  on  labour  mobility  flows  and  labour  market 
conditions:  The  Regulation  imposes  legal  reporting  requirements  on  the 
Members  and  Partners  of  the  network  (e.g.  information  on  activities,  work 
programmes, information on national, regional and sectoral labour supply and 
demand). The exchange of this information is essential to address changes in 
the labour market and to face increasing labour market imbalances. 

The  COVID-19  disruption  also  showed  the  Regulation  added  value  over  pure  bilateral 
arrangements.  The  overall  structure  of  EURES  facilitated  the  collection  of  information 
on challenges in cross-border regions during the disruption, and the European Online Job 
Days  continued160  thanks  to  their  relative  autonomy  from  national  resources.  The 
disruption equally showed EURES fragility: in the most stressful moments of the crisis, 
some  countries  reassigned  temporary  their  EURES  advisers  to  PES  national  activities. 
This  highlights  the  importance  of  having  a  European  coordinator  independent  from  the 
national priorities. 

6.  CONCLUSIONS 

6.1.  Relevance 

The  EURES  tools  and  services  defined  in  the  Regulation  are  generally  considered  as 
relevant  to  address  intra-EU  labour  mobility  needs,  although  to  different  extents.  The 
support  to  jobseekers  and  employers  is  generally  well  suited  to  address  obstacles  to 
intra-EU  labour  mobility  such  as  lack  of  transparent  information  and  administrative 
barriers.  Tackling  language  barriers,  facilitate  the  recognition  of  qualifications  or  post-
recruitment  assistance  are  services  not  widespread  throughout  the  network,  therefore 
EURES support is considered less relevant in these areas. The EURES portal is seen as 
relevant  to  address  information  gaps  and  to  provide  access  to  a  large  pool  of  job 
vacancies  and  CVs,  thus  responding  to  the  difficulties  that  employers  are  facing  in 
finding profiles with relevant skills. 

The Regulation  makes EURES a public service available to  all workers  and employers 
across  the  Union  without  exceptions,  preventing  creaming  and  parking  effects  (i.e. 
“cherry-picking”).  Whereas  private  hiring  platforms  and  matching  on  social  media 
mainly target qualified customers that pay for their services, are fluent in English and can 
handle  autonomously  relocation  and  administrative  procedures  without  personal 
counselling. 

160  In  2020,  20  online  job  days  were  organized  despite  the  pandemic,  as  described  in  section  5.1.2. 

Adaptability to a changing context 

62 

 
 
                                                 
The actual use of EURES depends on which individuals would like to exercise their right 
of  free  movement.  The  available  evidence  suggests  that  EURES  addresses  to  a  wide 
extent the needs of employers and jobseekers facing obstacles to labour mobility within 
the EU, particularly in cross-border regions, as well as younger jobseekers or jobseekers 
with  higher  qualifications.  Recent  developments  make  returning  and  seasonal  workers 
increasingly relevant groups whose needs should be further monitored by EURES. The 
in  parts unpredictable evolution  of the labour market  would  favour keeping the current 
wide  portfolio  of  EURES  tools  and  services  to  cater  for  the  various  needs  of  different 
existing  or  arising  challenges.  This  corresponds  well  to  the  “raison  d’etre”  of  public 
employment  services  that  at  all  times  are  responsible  for  implementing  active  labour 
market policies and providing employment services in the public interest. 

Overall,  the  reformed  EURES  network  has  been  able  to  adapt  to  changes  in  the 
implementation  context  (i.e.  labour  mobility  trends,  technological  advancements, 
COVID-19  disruption),  albeit  depending  on  national  strategies  and  priorities.  Three 
main  mechanisms  provide  a  platform  for  EURES  countries  to  identify  changes  in  the 
implementation  context:  exchange  of  information;  participation  and  discussions  in 
EURES Coordination Group meetings; and the harmonized programming (Programming 
Cycle). However, these mechanisms have so far not ensured that the network addresses 
the identified changes in a coordinated manner. For example, only half of the countries 
adapt  services  and  activities  based  on  a  thorough  assessment  of  the  labour  market 
conditions.  In  another  instance,  while  recruitment  events  such  as  European  Online  Job 
Days  continued  being  implemented  despite  the  COVID-19  disruption,  EURES  support 
services  in  some  countries  had  to  be  interrupted  because  of  reallocation  of  resources 
following  shifts  in  national  priorities,  impacting  the  availability  of  the  network  as  a 
whole. 

6.2.  Effectiveness 

The  EURES  services  defined  by  the  Regulation  and  provided  through  the  portal, 
advisers  and  mobility  schemes  result  in  intra-EU  placements  and  promote  fair  working 
conditions and higher awareness of intra-EU labour mobility opportunities. However, the 
fact  that  the  enlargement  of  the  network,  the  full  exchange  of  CVs  and  the  automated 
matching  are  not  fully  implemented  yet  reduces  its  overall  effectiveness.  EURES  is 
estimated to contribute to around 10% of the cross-border placements. This is in line with 
the PES share in their national context.   

There is no evidence that EURES is more effective in particular countries over time. The 
network  seems  collectively  more  effective  than  the  sum  of  the  national  contributions 
because  the  inter-dependence  of  national  labour  markets  makes  EURES  national 
success dependent on the support of EURES in other countries. 

Target  groups  and  needs  of  employers  and  jobseekers  evolve  with  the  business  cycle.  
EURES  tools  and  services  have  provided  flexibility  to  adjust  to  these  changing  needs. 
This  apparent  proportionality  of  the  EURES  toolbox  together  with  the  short  time  span 

63 

 
since the Regulation and subsequent implementing acts are in place, suggests that the set 
of tools and services should not be recalibrated. 

Despite an improvement in monitoring, separate reporting systems and data limitations 
still prevent a precise benchmarking of EURES allowing a more complete effectiveness 
analysis. A better monitoring providing richer data in longer series on the use of EURES 
tools and services by different target groups, along countries and at specific phases of the 
recruitment process would allow an optimal and continuous recalibration of the EURES 
toolbox. 

EURES support services provided by EURES advisers are overall assessed as of high-
value, good quality, and leading to sustainable results, as they are tailored to individuals’ 
needs.  However,  there  are  differences  in  the  quality  of  service  provision  across  the 
network, which can be explained by differences in resources available at national level. 
In addition, national differences in the legislation leave traineeships and apprenticeships 
out  of  the  scope  of  PES  in  some  countries,  limiting  the  ability  of  EURES  to  support 
younger workers with employment opportunities.  

EURES  mobility  schemes  and  cross-border  partnerships  complement  the  EURES 
support services by supporting selected target groups. 

While the EURES portal increases the access to job vacancies and CVs, its effectiveness 
is expected to further increase once a fully automated matching will be in place and the 
interface will be more user-friendly. In addition, not all national vacancies are available 
on the portal yet.  

The  organisational  structure  of  EURES  as  defined  by  the  Regulation,  enlarging  the 
network and mainstreaming EURES services within Public Employment Services (PES), 
is  largely  suitable  to  support  intra-EU  labour  mobility  effectively.  The  admission  of 
additional  Members  and  Partners  enhances  knowledge  exchange  and  the  provision  of 
services  to  more  customers.  However,  the  level  of  services  delivered  by  the  various 
Members and Partners depends on their individual interest, which might have a negative 
impact on the quality of service across the network. Mainstreaming EURES services into 
the PES increases the quality of EURES services but reduces the visibility of EURES. 

EURES  is  not  visible  enough  among  labour  market  participants,  which  reduces  its 
effectiveness.  In  this  regard,  employers  appear  less  aware  of  EURES  compared  to 
jobseekers.  Recent  communication  and  promotion  activities  have  raised  awareness  of 
EURES  but  their  effects  were  hampered  by  funding  constraints,  limited  cooperation 
across  stakeholders  and  lack  of  a  common  approach  regarding  the  promotion  of  the 
network. 

6.3.  Efficiency 

The available information suggests that cost-effectiveness of EURES has increased since 
the  introduction  of  the  EURES  Regulation  (from  2016  to  2019).  Benchmarking  of 
EURES  with  Public  Employment  Services’  (PES)  activities  has  provided  evidence  that 

64 

 
the cost of EURES can be interpreted as a small top-up to the PES cost, expanding in a 
cost-effective  manner  the  scope  of  the  activities  from  national  to  cross-border 
placements.  Benchmarking of EURES to  Targeted Mobility Schemes (TMS) reinforces 
this interpretation. EURES efficiency seems more determined by the network effect than 
by national aspects. 

Although  the  investment  in  the  single  coordinated  channel  and  the  EURES  portal  is 
considered  proportionate  by  the  national  coordinators,  the  benefits  are  not  completely 
visible yet. This is underlined by the fact that countries currently do not transfer all the 
available  vacancies  through  the  channel.  Important  efficiency  gains  are  expected  from 
the  full  implementation  of  the  automated  matching  between  vacancies  and  jobseekers' 
the  European 
profiles, 
Skills/Competences, Qualifications and Occupations (ESCO) classification. 

completed  once  Member  States 

integrate 

to  be 

The  EURES  Regulation  brought  new  administrative  requirements,  including:  the 
request to expand the national network by admitting new EURES Members and Partners 
(and, therefore, the need to develop new admission procedures and in some instances also 
new legislation); mandatory and more harmonised monitoring and reporting requirements 
(which  meant  developing  new  procedures  and  tools);  and  the  obligation  to  establish  a 
connection between the national job vacancies and CV databases with the EURES portal 
through  a  single  coordinated  channel.  The  Regulation  did  not  provide  additional 
resources  to  implement  these  changes.  In  addition,  the  need  to  avoid  of  overlaps  with 
related  EU  initiatives  require  increasing  coordination  efforts.  As  a  result,  the 
administrative workload has increased. While the benefits of a more consistent and better 
functioning  network  are  expected  to  outweigh  the  costs  of  these  changes,  the  network 
will commonly explore ways of simplification and administrative workload reduction. 

6.4.  Coherence 

that, 

to  a 

large  extent, 

initiatives  found 

the  EURES  regulation 

With  regard  to  external  coherence,  the  analysis  of  the  objectives  and  actions  of  other 
European 
is 
complementary  and  consistent  with  such  initiatives  in  supporting  labour  mobility,  full 
employment and integration of the labour markets. Synergies between EURES activities 
and other European initiatives are in place, such as Erasmus+ (e.g. promotion of Erasmus 
opportunities  by  EURES  staff),  Interreg  (e.g.  provision  of  additional  advice  in  cross-
border  regions),  and  ESF  (e.g.  funding  EURES  staff  that  would  not  be  available 
otherwise).  However,  for  the  following  two  tools,  the  evaluation  recommends  a  better 
and closer cooperation: 
 
 

the Europass portal (which also has a job search function); 
the Your Europe portal (which also provides information relevant to mobile workers).     

With  regard  to  internal  coherence,  the  EURES  services  and  tools  defined  by  the 
Regulation  have  been  developed  in  a  consistent  manner,  with  particular  synergies 
emerging between EURES general support services and mobility schemes. The majority 
of  EURES  countries  coordinate  their  activities  across  the  network,  especially  on 
recruitment  projects,  although  to  a  lesser  extent  on  promotion  and  communication 

65 

 
activities. While the objectives of all EURES actions are coherent and no overlaps were 
found  in  their  implementation,  EURES  Members  that  are  part  of  a  cross-border 
partnership  and  the  national  EURES  network  face  reporting  overlaps.  Furthermore, 
differences  in  financial  and  human  capital  resources  available  to  EURES  countries  can 
lead  to  inconsistencies  in  the  quality  and  type  of  services  delivered.  At  national  level, 
there is also a potential risk of inconsistencies between Members and Partners, especially 
between public and private organisations that are characterised by different priorities and 
ways of working. 

6.5.  EU added value 

Overall,  the  stakeholders  consulted  recognised  the  EU  added  value  of  the  EURES 
regulation, as Member States alone could not have achieved the current level of EURES 
service  provision.  This  refers  especially  to  the  provision  of  information  and  post-
recruitment  assistance, the support services to  apprenticeships and traineeships, and the 
mobility schemes and cross-border partnerships.  

The scale of EURES actions is relatively small, covering approximately one tenth of the 
total  intra-EU  labour  mobility  flows.  Therefore,  it  is  not  possible  to  conclude  that  its 
actions  are  the  only  way  to  support  intra-EU  labour  mobility  in  general.  However,  the 
evaluation  findings  show  that  the  EURES  regulation  resulted  in  quicker  or  better 
outcomes  for  customers  who  used  EURES  services,  contributing  to  labour  market 
integration. 

The EURES regulation  provides an overarching framework and common vision for the 
collaboration and coordination of EURES countries in the field of labour mobility. It also 
ensures  and  promotes  the  protection  of  fair  labour  conditions  and  standards.  The 
exchange of information on labour mobility and markets would have not happened in a 
structured way and with the same level of coordination without EURES. 

The COVID-19 disruption also showed that overall structure defined by the Regulation 
facilitated the collection of information on challenges in cross-border regions during the 
disruption,  and  that  the  relative  autonomy  of  the  European  Online  Job  Days  from 
national resources allowed the continuity of this service. 

6.6.  Lessons learnt 

The  conclusions  of  this  evaluation  lead  to  lessons  learnt  that  could  be  considered  for 
actions  improving  the  implementation  of  the  Regulation.  All  these  suggestions  would 
require initiatives at both European and national levels that can be implemented without 
changing the legal framework. The Commission could use the opportunity of the regular 
reporting foreseen in Article 33 of the Regulation to complement the information of this 
evaluation when the EURES reform has had time to materialize in full. 

The lessons learnt include:  

66 

 
Complete  the  implementation  of  automated  matching.  All  Members  and  Partners 
should ensure the transfer of job vacancies and CVs to the EURES portal, and complete 
the  mapping  or  adoption  of  the  European  Skills/Competences,  Qualifications  and 
Occupations (ESCO) classification, to facilitate better matching results.  

Align  EURES,  Europass  and  Your  Europe  portals.  The  European  Commission  and 
the  European  Labour  Authority  could  contemplate  performing  an  analysis  of  potential 
overlaps of information and services provision on Your Europe portal (implementing the 
Single Digital Gateway Regulation), the Europass portal and the EURES portal. 

Strengthen  communication  to  ensure  EURES  visibility.  The  European  Coordination 
Office could develop a new communication strategy achieving unified communication at 
all  levels  (regional,  national,  EU),  identifying  additional  communication  channels, 
defining  targeted  communication  actions,  linking  communication  outputs  to  EURES 
outcomes, and raising the visibility of the EURES portal among search engines.  

Enhance the quality of service delivery. The European Commission and the European 
Labour Authority could consider supporting the harmonisation of the minimum level of 
quality of services across the network, particularly post-recruitment assistance. 

Improve and simplify monitoring and data collection. The European Commission and 
the  European  Labour  Authority  in  cooperation  with  the  National  Coordination  Offices 
could further integrate the programming and monitoring processes, improve and simplify 
data  collection,  and  streamline  monitoring  deriving  from  EURES,  the  Single  Digital 
Gateway, and the Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI). 

Strengthen enlargement efforts. The National Coordination Offices could enhance their 
efforts in identifying, attracting and admitting new Members and Partners. The European 
Coordination  Office  could  facilitate  the  process  with  guidance,  support  and  knowledge 
exchange. 

67 

 
 
I. 

ANNEX - PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 

Lead Directorate General  (DG), Decide  Planning/Commission Work Programme (CWP) 

references 

The Directorate-General (DG) for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion (DG EMPL) is the lead 
DG for the ex-post evaluation of the operation and effects of Regulation 2016/589 of the European 
Commission and the Council on a European network of employment services (EURES), following 
article 35 of this Regulation. 

The  evaluation  is  identified  with  roadmap  reference  Ares(2019)4609873  and  agenda  planning 
PLAN/2019/5596. 

Organisation and timing 

The evaluation  started with the publication of the Evaluation  Roadmap161 and was carried out  with 
the support of the Inter-Service Steering Group (a group of expert officials from several Commission 
services)  chaired  by  DG  EMPL  to  which  the  following  DGs  had  been  invited:  DG  Education  and 
Culture;  DG  for  Internal  Market,  Industry,  Entrepreneurship  and  SMEs;  DG  Regional  and  Urban 
Policy; and the Secretariat-General. The first one declined to participate. The group met six times: 

  01/10/2019 - evaluation roadmap and terms of reference for the external study 

  28/01/2020 - inception meeting for the external study 

  15/06/2020 - draft interim report of the external study 

  14/10/2020 - draft final report of the external study  

  03/11/2020 - written consultation on the draft final report of the external study 

  14/12/2020 - draft Staff Working Document (SWD) 

Exceptions to the Better Regulation Guidelines 

The Commission’s Better Regulation Guidelines162 were followed to carry out the evaluation without 
deviations. 

Consultation of the Regulatory Scrutiny Board (RSB) 

The  evaluation  was  scrutinized  by  the  RSB  on  03/03/2021,  which  issued  a  negative  opinion  with 
recommendations that where addressed as follows: 

161 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/11866-European-network-of-employment-

services-EURES-evaluation-2016-2020 

162 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/better-regulation-guidelines.pdf 

68 

 
 
                                                 
Board's findings 
(A) 
The  report  does  not  clearly  explain  the 
scope  and  purpose  of  the  evaluation  and 
what success should look like at this point 
in time. 

(B) 
The  report  does  not  analyse  if  EURES  is 
useful  for  all  sectors,  qualifications  and 
target  groups  and  if  all  services  and 
features are effective and still relevant. 
It  does  not  sufficiently  discuss  how 
emerging  private  labour  matching  services 
affect the added value of EURES. 

Modifications 

evaluation  has  been 

The 
reviewed 
integrally  to  make  clear  that  it  addresses 
Regulation  (EU)  2016/589  (the  EURES 
regulation) and not the EURES network, as 
required  by  article  35  of  the  Regulation. 
Specifically,  sections  1. Introduction  and 
2.1. Description  of  EURES  and 
its 
objectives  define  clearly  the  scope  and 
purpose of the evaluation. 
Since  the  Regulation  is  only  a  means  to 
improve  the  functioning  of  EURES,  the 
outcomes  of  the  reformed  network  are 
report. 
explained 
throughout 
section  2.2.2.  Points  of 
Particularly, 
comparison  provides  benchmarks 
to 
measure  the  actual  success  of  the  reform 
undertaken by the EURES regulation. 

the 

Response to finding (A) clarifies the scope 
and purpose of the evaluation.  
Section  2.1. Description  of  EURES and its 
objectives has been redrafted to clarify that 
the Regulation defines EURES as a public 
service  to  facilitate  freedom  of  movement 
and available to all workers and employers 
across 
the  Union,  without  exceptions, 
avoiding creaming (cherry-picking) effects. 
Taking  into  account  this  context,  section 
5.1.3. Alignment  with  needs  of 
target 
groups  has  redrafted  to  analyse  the  actual 
coverage of different groups. 
The  main  services  and  features  introduced 
(broadening  of  the  network,  exchange  of 
job  vacancies 
automated 
matching  and  harmonised  planning  and 
performance  measurement)  have  been 
further  explained  and  their  effectiveness 
and  relevance  discussed,  particularly  in 
intra-EU 
sections  5.1.1. Relevance 
labour market mobility, 5.2.4. Effectiveness 
of 
and 
internal 
organisational  set-up,  5.2.2. The  EURES 
portal  as  a  matching  place, 
and 
5.1.2. Adaptability to a changing context. 
The  relationship  between  EURES  and 
private employment services is  clarified in 

and  CVs, 

support 

EURES 

for 

69 

 
 
 
 
Board's findings 

(C) 
The conclusions do not make balanced use 
of  all  available  evidence  and  the  views  of 
all stakeholders. 

Board's recommendation 
(1)  
the 
The  report  should  clarify  upfront 
intended  level  of  ambition  of  EURES’ 
actions in border-crossing labour mobility. 
It  should  explain  that  the  Regulation’s 
various  components  are  not  yet  fully 
implemented and the limits this might pose 
on the evaluation. 
The report should also better introduce the 
scope  and  purpose  of  the  evaluation.  It 
should  clarify  the  implications  for  the 
evaluation  that  it  was  designed  to  focus 
more  on  the  EURES  Regulation  than  on 
the EURES network/services. 

Modifications 
sections  2.2.2. Points  of 
comparison, 
4.1.1. Adaptability  to  a  changing  context 
and  5.2.2. The  EURES  portal  as  a 
matching place. 

The assessment and conclusions have been 
the 
ensure 
reviewed 
stakeholders’  views  have  been  taken  into 
account along the evaluation. 

that 

all 

to 

Modifications 

Sections 2.1. Description of EURES and its 
objectives  and  2.2.2. Points  of  comparison 
have  been  redrafted  to  clarify  how  the 
Regulation  defines  EURES  as  a  service 
with  broad  goals  but  without  pre-defined 
targets, to facilitate voluntary mobility and 
open  to  all  workers  and  employers  across 
the Union.  
The limited implementation  and its impact 
in the evaluation are explicitly described in 
sections  3. Implementation/state  of  play, 
5.1.2. Adaptability  to  a  changing  context, 
5.1.3. Alignment  with  needs  of 
target 
groups,  5.2.2. The  EURES  portal  as  a 
matching  place,  5.2.4. Effectiveness  of 
and 
EURES 
organisational  set-up,  and  5.3.1. Cost-
effectiveness.  
The  scope  and  purpose  of  the  evaluation 
have  been  clearly  defined 
in  section 
1. Introduction, to clarify that the object is 
not  EURES,  but  the  EURES  Regulation, 
describing  the  implications.  This  is  also 
highlighted  in  2.2.1 Baseline.  Response  to 
finding  (A)  also  clarifies  the  scope  and 
purpose of the evaluation.  

internal 

support 

(2) 
The  report  should  clarify  the  underlying 
intervention  logic.  It  should  specify  what 
EURES was supposed to have delivered by 
now  and  acknowledge  where  expected 
results as outlined in the intervention logic 
have not been achieved. 

The intervention logic has been redrafted in 
section  2.1. Description  of  EURES  and  its 
objectives,  simplified  (moving  elements  to 
the annex) and complemented with section 
2.2.2.  Points  of  comparison,  providing 
benchmarks  to  measure  the  actual  success 

70 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Board's recommendation 

Modifications 
of  the  reform  undertaken  by  the  EURES 
regulation. 
Chapter  5  provides  additional  information 
on  achievements  or  lack  of  achievements 
particularly  in  sections  5.1.2. Adaptability 
to  a  changing  context,  5.1.3. Alignment 
with  needs  of  target  groups,  5.2.2. The 
EURES  portal  as  a  matching  place, 
5.2.4. Effectiveness  of  EURES 
internal 
support  and  organisational  set-up,  and 
5.3.1. Cost-effectiveness.  

(3) 
The  report  should  give  a  more  balanced 
account of all stakeholders’ views. While it 
prominently  reflects 
the  views  of  the 
national  co-ordinators,  the  analysis  should 
explore  in  more  detail  also  the  dissenting 
views  and  particularly  the  experiences  of 
jobseekers  and  employers  who  have  used 
EURES services. 
(4) 
The  report  should  more  clearly  assess  the 
relevance  of  EURES  for  different  target 
groups, sectors and qualifications. It should 
identify  which  target  groups  have  mostly 
used EURES’ services and discuss how the 
situation  is  likely  to  evolve.  The  report 
could explain to what extent young people 
and  medium-  to  high-skilled  job  seekers 
are  expected  to  use  EURES  over  social 
media  or  web-ads.  It  should  also  analyse 
whether EURES is more relevant for some 
groups than others. 
The  report  should  assess  whether  EURES 
is  considered  equally  effective  across  the 
EU  labour  market  given  that  the  extent  of 
supporting  services  and 
the  share  of 
vacancies 
the  EURES  portal  vary 
in 
significantly across participating countries. 
(5) 
The  report  should  critically  discuss  and 
substantiate  whether  a  fully  automated 
matching  would  increase  the  number  of 
placements  and  better  explain 
the 
expectations for an increased labour market 
integration are justified. 

if 

The  assessment  based  on  stakeholders’ 
views  have  been  reviewed  along 
the 
evaluation.  Specifically,  any  assessment 
based 
is 
contrasted  with  at  least  one  additional 
source,  except  when  the  coordinators  are 
the  only  stakeholder  (e.g.  administrative 
burden).  

coordinators 

national 

on 

this 

Response  to  finding  (B)  clarifies  that 
EURES services are not discriminatory and 
open  to  all  workers  and  employers  across 
the Union. 
section 
Under 
5.1.3. Alignment  with  needs  of 
target 
groups  analyses  the  coverage  of  different 
groups,  and  section  5.2.1. Provision  of 
services  to  employers  and  jobseekers  has 
been  complemented  with  analysis  along 
national data. 

context, 

The evaluation clarifies that the automated 
matched  will  not  be  available  before 
August  2021  but  that  the  experience  from 
Member  States  using  these  technologies 
shows  its  benefits.  To  these  end,  chapters 
5.2.2. The  EURES  portal  as  a  matching 

71 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Board's recommendation 
It  should  look  into  the  reasons  for  the 
continuously  decreasing  number  of  unique 
EURES portal visitors. 
The  report  should  also  analyse  more 
prominently  how  EURES  compares  to  its 
private competitors. 

to  a 

and  5.1.2. Adaptability 

Modifications 
place, 
changing context have been enriched. 
The  decreasing  number  of  unique  visitors, 
linked  to  the  evolution  of  the  labour 
market,  is  analysed  in  section  5.3.1. Cost-
effectiveness. 
comparison 
Section 
clarifies  now  that  EURES  is  not  intended 
to  compete  with  other  private  or  public 
employment 
the 
evaluation  uses  them  as  a  benchmark, 
particularly  in  sections  4.1.1. Adaptability 
to  a  changing  context  and  5.2.2. The 
EURES portal as a matching place. 

services,  but  how 

2.2.2. Points 

of 

(6) 
The  report  should  better  explain 
the 
introduction  and  modification  of  EURES 
components during the evaluated period. It 
should  critically  assess  whether  they  have 
been equally successful. 
It  should  better  examine  whether 
the 
profile of EURES users  is  in  line with  the 
intended 
the 
comprehensiveness 
services. The report should discuss whether 
its 
remains  proportionate 
EURES 
current  form,  and  whether  the  scope  of  its 
actions  or 
target  groups  could  merit 
recalibration. 

of 

in 

and 

their 

and  CVs, 

The  main 
introduced 
components 
(broadening  of  the  network,  exchange  of 
automated 
job  vacancies 
matching  and  harmonised  planning  and 
performance  measurement)  have  been 
further  explained  and 
level  of 
achievement  clearly  stated,  particularly  in 
sections  3. Implementation  /  state  of  Play, 
internal 
5.2.4. Effectiveness  of  EURES 
set-up, 
organisational 
support 
5.2.2. The  EURES  portal  as  a  matching 
place, 
to  a 
and  5.1.2. Adaptability 
changing context. 
The  document  explains  that  no  single 
EURES  tool  or  service  stands  out  but  that 
the 
seems 
appropriate to cater for the various groups’ 
needs and their future evolution in sections 
5.1.1. Relevance 
labour 
for 
market  mobility,  5.2.6. Sustainability  and 
and 
factors 
6.2. Effectiveness 

current  wide 

effectiveness 

impacting 

intra-EU 

portfolio 

(7) 
The  report  has  identified  a  number  of 
in  data  collection  and 
shortcomings 
standardisation  of  reporting.  It  has  also 
identified potential burdens associated with 
new reporting requirements imposed by the 
Regulation  and  information  overlaps  with 
other  EU  initiatives.  The  report  should 
summarise 
the 
conclusions  and  discuss  whether  there  is 

findings 

these 

in 

5.3.3. Increase/decrease 

Section 
of 
administrative  burden  has  been  redrafted 
section 
conclusions 
and 
the 
6.3. Efficiency  and 
learnt 
the 
(6.6.1. EURES  portal  in  the  digital  age, 
6.7.2. Planning 
monitoring, 
6.7.3. Working  in  an  enlarged  network) 
have been complemented accordingly. 

in 
lessons 

and 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
 
for 

simplification  and 

Board's recommendation 
any  potential 
administrative burden reduction. 
(8) 
The  executive  summary  should  be  revised 
and  give  a  more  balanced  account  of  the 
evaluation.  It  should  provide  all  critical 
aspects,  elaborate  further  on  the  lessons 
learned and provide convincing answers to 
the five evaluation criteria. 

Modifications 

taking 

into  account 

The Report of the operation and effects  of 
the EURES Regulation (EU) 2016/589 has 
been  drafted 
this 
suggestion. The Report is accompanied by 
this  Staff  Working  Document,  which 
therefore  does  not  include  an  executive 
summary according to the better regulation 
principles. 

The  reworked  evaluation  was  scrutinized  again  by  the  RSB,  which  issued  a  positive  opinion  on 
19/05/2021 with recommendations that where addressed as follows: 

Board's findings 
(1) 
The  report  does  not  sufficiently  assess 
EURES  services’  effectiveness  across 
participating  countries  and  it  does  not 
explain  clearly  which  EURES  services  are 
most effective. 

(2) 
The report does not adequately discuss why 
its 
remains  proportionate 
EURES 
current  form  and  whether  the  scope  of  its 
actions merit recalibration. 

in 

Board's recommendation 
(1)  
The  report  provides  evidence  on 
the 
performance  and  use  of  EURES  services 
across  participating  countries.  Based  on 
this  evidence,  it  could  further  discuss 
EURES  services’  effectiveness  in  these 
labour markets. 
(2) 
The  report  argues  that  (a)  the  cost  of  the 
services  and  tools  provided  by  EURES 
the 
remains 

proportionate 

and 

(b) 

Modifications 

Sections  5.2.1. Provision  of  services  to 
and 
employers 
jobseekers 
and 
5.1.3. Alignment  with  needs  of 
target 
groups have been adapted to better address 
EURES 
the 
participating  countries,  to  recall  its  link  to 
the 
PES  performance,  and 
complementarity of the services portfolio. 

performance 

to  clarify 

along 

redrafted 

Sections  5.1.3.  Alignment  with  needs  of 
target  groups  and  6.2. Effectiveness  have 
been 
the 
proportionality of the services portfolio and 
the  lack  of  evidence  supporting  the  need 
for a recalibration at this stage. 

to  better  explain 

Modifications 

Section  5.2.1. Provision  of  services 
to 
employers and jobseekers has been adapted 
to  discuss  EURES  performance  along  the 
participating countries. 

Sections  5.1.3.  Alignment  with  needs  of 
target  groups  and  6.2. Effectiveness  have 
been redrafted to clarify the argumentation 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Board's recommendation 
the  single  coordinated 
investment 
in 
channel  and 
is 
the  EURES  portal 
considered  proportionate  by  the  national 
coordinators,  although  the  benefits  are  not 
completely  visible  yet.  The  report  should 
be clearer about which EURES services are 
the  most  effective  and  substantiate  the 
argument  (including  from  an  efficiency 
point of view) that “the current approach of 
providing  a  wide  portfolio  to  cater  for  the 
labour  market 
evolving  needs  of 
remains proportionate”. 
(3) 
the 
report  should  explore  more 
The 
dissenting  views  of  stakeholders  and  not 
use only those, which back up the findings 
of the evaluation. 
(4) 
The  conclusions  should  discuss  how  to 
address  the  data  limitations  found  in  this 
exercise  to  allow  for  a  more  complete 
effectiveness  analysis in the future (e.g. in 
relation  to  how  far  EURES  has  been  used 
by different target groups). 

the 

Modifications 
on proportionality of the available portfolio 
of services. The present approach provides 
flexibility  to  adapt  to  changing  labour 
market needs, covers reasonably employers 
and jobseekers overall needs and fulfils the 
obligation of EURES to provide a universal 
service.  Considering  the  short  period  in 
which the new regime is  fully operational, 
a recalibration would be premature. 

The report has been reviewed to give more 
prominence to dissenting opinions. 

The  most 
limitation 
important  data 
encountered  during  the  evaluation  was  the 
short  time  span  since  the  Regulation  and 
the according monitoring arrangements are 
in  place.  Section  6.2. Effectiveness  has 
been  redrafted  to  clarify  the  impact  of  the 
the 
limitations 
data 
suggested improvements.  

identified 

and 

Evidence, sources and quality 

An external study was carried out by Deloitte, VVA and FGB163.  

The study applied a mix of evaluation methods including desk research, statistical analysis, a public 
consultation, surveys, workshops, case studies and interviews with stakeholders and Member States’ 
officials. 

The EURES coordination group, gathering Member States representatives, was regularly informed of 
the study development and findings.  

According to the quality assessment of the study done by the Inter Service Steering Group, the study 
was  conducted  in  line  with  the  related  Request  for  Services  and  the  agreed  inception  report,  with 
adaptations  for  interviews  and  workshops  due  to  the  COVID-19  disruption.  It  includes  all  agreed 

163 Study supporting the ex-post EURES evaluation and the second biennial EURES report, Deloitte, VVA and FGB for 

the European Commission, 2020. ISBN 978-92-76-22093-0, 
http://publications.europa.eu/publication/catalogue_number/KE-02-20-720-EN-N 

74 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
components and is based on relevant qualitative and quantitative data, although the data to support 
efficiency  analysis  was  limited.  The  analysis  and  conclusions  are  sound  while  methodology  and 
limitations are clearly outlined. The lessons learnt outlined are relevant. 

75 

 
 
 
 
II. 

ANNEX - STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION 

1.  Consultation strategy 

1.1. Objectives 

This  Synopsis  Report  outlines  the  consultation  activities  organised  to  evaluate  the  EURES 
Regulation and presents the main findings.  

To ensure transparency and involve the stakeholders, the process followed the standards and methods 
set out in the Better Regulation guidelines. The various consultations have followed the roadmap and 
consultation strategy. The roadmap164 of the evaluation itself was published on the Better Regulation 
website  and  open  for  public  feedback  between  16 July  2019  and  13 August  2019165.  The  seven 
contributions received were overall positive towards labour mobility and the need for EURES. They 
provided  suggestions  to  improve  the  consultation  process,  such  as  topics  to  evaluate,  which  were 
addressed in the consultation tools. 

1.2. Consultation stakeholders, methods and tools 

The stakeholders targeted by the consultation activities were individuals or organisations that had: 
  an interest in or received services provided by EURES; 
  expertise in the subject; and 
 

run or been involved in running EURES actions. 

The table shows the stakeholder groups targeted through the consultation activities: 

Type of stakeholder 
Private citizens (including 
Jobseekers/workers); 
Companies/employers  

ECO officials; DG EMPL; Other 
Commission officials  

NCOs staff 

EURES Members and Partners 

Public and Private Employment 
Services, Public Authorities, 
Employers’ and trade associations, 
Academic institutions, Civil 
Society/NGOs  

Interest 

They can provide feedback on the services received, whether they corresponded to 
their needs, and how they could be improved. 

The European Coordination Office (ECO) provides the background for specific 
decisions taken during the implementation. DG EMPL can assess whether EURES 
activities targeted the needs of the labour market. Other DGs and agencies may 
assess how EURES contributed to areas related to the labour market. 
National Coordination Offices (NCOs) oversee the implementation of EURES at 
national level. 
EURES Members and Partners provide an insight into EURES activities and their 
coherence with other national and international policies. 

Other stakeholders provide insight of their experience with EURES. They can 
compare services provided by EURES with similar services from other 
Employment Services.  

164 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/11866-European-network-of-employment-

services-EURES-evaluation-2016-2020.  

165  Feedback  on  the  roadmap:  https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/11866-European-

network-of-employment-services-EURES-evaluation-2016-2020/feedback?p_id=5704929. 

76 

 
 
 
                                                 
The figure illustrates the type of consultation tools used per category of stakeholders. 

Overview of consultation tools per stakeholder group 

77 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.3. Stakeholder participation 

The total reach of the consultation activities is shown below.  

Type of stakeholder consultation 

Timeframe 

Number of responses/ consultation activities 
carried out 

Public consultation 
Online 
survey 

Jobseekers 
Employers 
Members and Partners 
NCOs 
Interviews 
Workshops 

Case 
studies 
Ad-hoc interviews 
Validation workshop 
COVID-19 workshop 
Total individual responses 
Total workshops 
Stakeholder participation 

March – June 2020 

May – June 2020 

May – September 2020 

April – September 2020 

March – September 2020 
September 2020 
October 2020 

1 434 
2 055 
164 
96 
26 
76 
12 
2 
1 
1 
3 853 
14 

No  ad-hoc  contributions  outside  of  the  consultation  context  or  campaigns  trying  to  influence  the 
responding  participants  in  their  feedback  were  detected.  The  public  consultation  and  the  online 
surveys  were  advertised  through  the  EURES  portal  and  newsletter.  This  had  an  impact  on  the 
responses  to  the  online  surveys  for  jobseekers  and  employers  as  many  respondents  indicated  that 
they  interacted  with  EURES  online  via  the  portal  so  could  provide  feedback  only  on  its 
functionalities  and  not  on  other  services.  To  balance  this,  the  case  studies  focused  on  gathering 
feedback  from  EURES  staff,  and  jobseekers  and  employers  who  benefitted  from  individualised 
support. 

2.  Results of the consultation 

This part presents the results of the completed consultations per consultation activity.  

2.1. Public consultation 

The  public  consultation  focused  on  audiences  with  no  or  minimal  knowledge  of  EURES  but  there 
were also questions for those with knowledge of EURES. The questionnaire comprised closed and 
open questions. It provided information on EURES for those unfamiliar with it. 

The graph shows the distribution of the 1 434 respondents into stakeholder categories. The majority 
of ‘Other’ respondents identified themselves as EURES Advisors, EURES Staff or an employee of 
their national Public Employment Service. 

78 

 
 
 
 
 
Category of respondents (n=1 434) 

1% 

4% 

8% 

9% 

80% 

EU citizen

Public authority

Non-EU citizen

Company/business
organisation

Other

From  the  1 326  respondents  who  indicated  they  originated  from  one  of  the  32  EURES  countries; 
most responses came from Italy (29%, 380) and Spain (28%, 373). Given that more than half of the 
responses came from only two relatively similar countries in socio-economic terms, they have been 
interpreted with prudence and triangulated with other findings to ensure representativity. 

The extent of familiarity with EURES is provided in the graph below. 

How familiar are you with EURES? (n=1 434) 

7% 

26% 

67% 

Very familiar

Somewhat familiar

I have never heard of
EURES

More than two thirds of respondents agreed (68%, 836) that EURES provides relevant and modern 
employment  services  in  line  with  the  needs  of  European  workers  and  employers.  Only  23%  (277) 
disagreed with this statement and 10% (127) had no opinion. 

The respondents tended to agree that EURES is effective in contributing to the mobility of workers 
(76% (949) either strongly agree or somewhat  agree) and providing useful and quality information 
(70% (871) either agree or strongly agree). At the same time, a considerable number feels that it is 
not well known among jobseekers (53%, 659) and employers (43%, 532), as it is not visible enough. 

79 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Agreement with statements on the effectiveness of EURES (n=1 240) 

 0

 200

 400

 600

 800

1 000

1 200

EURES contributes to the mobility of workers

536 

413 

125 

52 

114 

EURES offers useful support and information to
jobseekers/employers in their search for jobs/candidates

423 

448 

162 

84 

123 

EURES provides quality information on living and working
abroad (such as employment conditions)

337 

424 

195 

79 

205 

EURES is well known among jobseekers

90 

300 

394 

265 

191 

EURES is well known among employers

76 

273 

306 

226 

359 

I strongly agree

I somewhat agree

I somewhat disagree

I strongly disagree

I do not know

In  terms  of  efficiency,  45%  (601)  of  the  respondents  somewhat  or  strongly  agreed  that  EURES 
achieves the best possible results given the resources invested; 18% (241) of respondents disagreed 
with this statement, 9% (118) strongly disagreed and 28% (378) did not have an opinion.  

For  coherence,  about  half  of  the  respondents  (49%)  agreed  that  EURES  complements  other 
European  (611)  and  national  (613)  initiatives,  14%  (177)  and  18%  (218)  of  the  respondents 
correspondingly  (strongly)  disagree  that  EURES  complements  other  EU  and  national  initiatives. 
About  one  third  were  unsure  about  EURES’s  complementarity  with  other  EU  (36%,  452)  and 
national (33%, 409) initiatives. 

Agreement with statements on the coherence of EURES (n=1 240) 

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

EURES complements other European initiatives on
employment and mobility without duplicating them

258 

353 

122 

55 

452 

EURES complements other national initiatives on
employment and mobility without duplicating them

252 

361 

141 

77 

409 

I strongly agree

I somewhat agree

I somewhat disagree

I strongly disagree

I do not know

80 

 
 
 
  
When asked about the EU added value of EURES, three quarters of respondents agreed (43% (536) 
strongly, 32% (391) somewhat) that more can be done with EU resources than just national ones to 
promote mobility and jobs. 

72% (956) see the need to improve EURES, its tools and services, 4% (53) did not see such a need, 
while  24%  (326)  did  not  know.  More  than  1 200  respondents  provided  suggestions  for 
improvements.  The  majority  concerned:  (1)  the  EURES  website  and  mobility  portal  (modernising 
and improving their user-friendliness); (2) the EURES staff (more upskilling and training for EURES 
staff); (3) cooperation and visibility (increase the visibility of EURES and expansion of the network). 

Overall,  the  respondents  see  free  movement  of  workers  positively.  However,  there  were  some 
respondents for whom the free movement of workers is not always a positive thing. They believe that 
free  movement  of  workers  leads  to  decreasing  wages  for  certain  jobs  in  their  countries.  Similarly, 
few respondents expressed a concern that the benefits of labour mobility are not straightforward and 
are  not  well  known  to  the  majority  of  Europeans.  They  believe  that  more  should  be  done  to 
familiarise  the  EU  citizens  with  the  advantages  of  moving  abroad,  as  well  as  with  employment 
opportunities in other countries. This is in line with responses of the online surveys and also the case 
studies  where  respondents  felt  that  in  this  area  EURES  could  step  up  its  efforts  to  ensure  that 
European citizens and businesses are informed about their rights connected to the free movement of 
workers. 

While  all  contributions  were  taken  into  account  from  statistical  point  of  view,  about  1%  (15)  of 
contributions to the open questions were not usable as they contained inappropriate language through 
which  the  respondents  expressed  their  frustration  either  with  a  specific  employment  or  EURES 
service or individual national labour policies. Four of these inputs were marked as inappropriate for 
using hate language or specific insults to specific groups or EURES Members. 

Twenty-eight  (2%)  respondents  submitted  additional  suggestions,  most  often  unusable  for  the 
purposes  of  the  consultation:  a  proposal  on  how  to  turn  waste  into  energy,  company  promotion 
material,  registration  certificate  of  an  EU  citizen  in  another  EU  Member  State,  23  CV,  a  note 
discussing limitations of free movement between Italy and Switzerland, a screenshot from the portal 
in German showing need to improve the portal’s search function. 

2.2. Online surveys 

Four  online  surveys  were  launched  for  stakeholders  particularly  involved  with  EURES,  which 
addressed  broad  target  groups:  (1)  National  Coordination  Offices;  (2)  employers/companies;  (3) 
jobseekers/workers;  (4)  EURES  Members  and  Partners.  The  surveys  contained  closed  and  open 
questions.  The  questionnaires  were  aligned  with  the  public  consultation  to  ensure  coherence  and 
avoid duplication. 

The  graph  provides  an  overview  of  the  responses  to  the  online  surveys  per  EURES  country.  The 
NCO survey is not included to maintain anonymity as one response per country was collected. 

Overview of residence per survey 

81 

 
 
25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

a
i
r
t
s
u
A

i

m
u
g
e
B

l

i

a
n
o
t
s
E

d
n
a
n
i
F

l

e
c
n
a
r
F

k
r
a
m
n
e
D

y
n
a
m
r
e
G

e
c
e
e
r
G

y
r
a
g
n
u
H

d
n
a
e
c
I

l

d
n
a
e
r
I

l

y
l
a
t
I

a
i
v
t
a
L

a
i
r
a
g
u
B

l

a
i
t
a
o
r
C

s
u
r
p
y
C

c
i
l

b
u
p
e
R
h
c
e
z
C

i

n
e
t
s
n
e
t
h
c
e
i
L

i

a
n
a
u
h
t
i
L

g
r
u
o
b
m
e
x
u
L

a
t
l
a
M

s
d
n
a
l
r
e
h
t
e
N

y
a
w
r
o
N

d
n
a
o
P

l

l

a
g
u
t
r
o
P

i

a
n
a
m
o
R

a
i
k
a
v
o
l
S

i

a
n
e
v
o
l
S

i

n
a
p
S

n
e
d
e
w
S

d
n
a
l
r
e
z
t
i

w
S

i

m
o
d
g
n
K
d
e
t
i
n
U

Jobseekers' survey (n=2 055)

Employers' survey (n=164)

Members and Partners' survey (n=96)

The overview of survey results is provided below. 

2.2.1.  Respondent profiles 

Most jobseekers stated to be either unemployed (39%, 796) or employed but looking for a new job 
(35%, 712). The majority were male (64%, 1 305) between 30 to 49 years old (32%, 663). A large 
majority held a university level degree (72%, 1 601). Responses were mostly provided by jobseekers 
from  Italy  (19%,  398),  Spain  (13%,  277),  and  France  (9%,  194).  This  is  similar  to  the  residency 
profile of the respondents in  the public  consultation,  however, in  this  survey  the  respondents  were 
spread a bit more equally among the responding countries, i.e. the top 2 countries make up only 32% 
as opposed to the 57% in the public consultation. Given that the survey was promoted through the 
EURES portal, the representativeness of the profiles is also aligned with those who are registered on 
the portal. 

In  the  employers’  survey,  micro  companies  formed  about  one  third  of  the  respondents  (33%,  54), 
followed  by  small  companies  (24%,  40).  The  most  mentioned  NACE  sector  of  activities  was  ‘S. 
Other service activities’ (14%, 23). The country with the most employers responding was Germany 
(14%,  24),  followed  by  Italy  (11%,  18)  and  Ireland  (8%,  13).  This  is  partially  aligned  with  the 
profiles of those who are registered on the portal as there the most employers come from Germany, 
Netherlands and France. 

Members  and  Partners  from  20  countries  answered  the  survey.  Most  were  from  Romania  (18%, 
17),  Poland  (16%,  15)  and  Norway  (11%,  11)  which  are  some  of  the  countries  with  the  greatest 
number of Members and Partners in their network. Majority identified themselves as Members (78%, 
75) of the national EURES networks, only 21% (20) were Partners. 

Out of the 32 National Coordination Offices (NCOs), 26 answered the survey. 

82 

 
 
 
 
 
2.2.2.  Relevance 

From 460 jobseekers who used EURES services, 57% (258) indicated the lack of job opportunities 
in the country of residence as the main reason to use EURES services; 55% (251) of jobseekers use 
EURES services due to better working and salary conditions in another country; and 43% (194) use 
EURES services as moving to work abroad would help them improve their foreign language skills.   

Among the 128 employers who visited the portal or are registered on it, 62% (78) agree it increased 
employment  opportunities,  while  18%  (23)  disagree  with  this  statement.  Some  employers 
commented  that  EURES  offered  them  good  matches  for  their  job  vacancies  and  were  able  to  find 
good new employees or trainees. Others mentioned that the search did not produce good matches due 
to poor filter options. 

Members and Partners believe that EURES helps addressing the current needs of jobseekers (92%, 
84)  and  employers  (81%,  75),  offers  relevant  support  and  guidance  to  jobseekers  (94%,  87)  and 
employers (85%, 78), and increased employment opportunities for jobseekers across Europe (93%, 
85). 

From the 26 NCOs, 23 agreed that the objectives of the EURES Regulation are aligned to the needs 
and problems of the intra-EU labour mobility; 21 agreed that EURES objectives and tools have been 
responsive to the changes on the labour market. With the exception of three respondents, all agreed 
that EURES targets the correct audience in order to achieve its objectives. 

2.2.3.  Effectiveness 

Among  the  1 868  jobseekers  who  use  the  portal,  48%  (905)  (strongly)  agree  with  the  portal 
contributing  to  increased  employment  opportunities,  24%  (447)  (strongly)  disagree  and  28%  (516) 
have no opinion. 69% (1 287) of the respondents (strongly) agree that information the portal provides 
is easy to understand, 25% (476) (strongly) disagree and 9% (105) have no opinion on the question. 
55%  (1 106)  of  the  respondents  think  it is  easy  to  find  out  about  EURES  and  the  various  services 
while  45%  (919)  do  not  think  so.  63%  (1 288)  of  respondents  would  recommend  EURES  to  other 
jobseekers  but  21%  (431)  of  respondents  would  not,  of  these  majority  assigned  it  largely  to 
unsuccessful job search on the Portal. 

Slightly more than half  (56%, 92) of  employers think it is  easy to find  out  about  EURES and the 
services it provides, while 44% (71) do not think so. The majority of respondents (60%, 99) would 
recommend EURES to other employers, while 17% (28) would not recommend EURES. Nearly one 
quarter (23%, 37) was undecided on this. The alignment on this question between the employers’ and 
jobseekers’ respondents is visible in the graph below as is the agreement of whether it is easy to find 
information about EURES. 

83 

 
 
 
 
Would you recommend EURES to other jobseekers/employers? 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Jobseekers' survey (n= 2 054)

Employers' survey (n= 164)

60% 

63% 

17% 

23% 

21% 

17% 

Yes

No

I cannot asses

Do you think it is easy to find information about EURES and the services it provides? 

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Jobseekers' survey (n= 2 025)

55% 

Employers' survey (n= 163)

56% 

45% 

44% 

Yes

No

Nearly all Members and Partners believe that EURES is effective in informing jobseekers (97%, 
91)  and  employers  (88%,  81)  about  mobility,  helping  jobseekers  find  employment  (93%,  87)  and 
employers find candidates (85%, 78), and is effective in matching employers with jobseekers (84%, 
75). 

All  NCOs  agreed  that  EURES  contributes  to  labour  market  transparency  by  ensuring  relevant 
information  is  available  to  potential  applicants  and  employers.  18  respondents  agreed  that  the 
promotion  and  communication  activities  of  EURES  help  make  it  a  widely  known  brand  among 
jobseekers  and  employers.  15  respondents  agreed  that  labour  market  participants  are  aware  of 
EURES  services  and  tools,  while  8  respondents  (strongly)  disagreed  with  this  statement.  19 
respondents agreed with EURES tools being effective in matching labour supply with demand across 
Europe. 24 respondents agreed that EURES mobility schemes effectively contribute to its objectives. 

2.2.4.  Efficiency 

From  the  365  jobseekers  who  indicated  receiving  guidance  on  finding  a  job  abroad,  32%  (219) 
responded that they would have found a job without the help of EURES, with 29% (104) indicating 

84 

 
 
 
 
 
that it would have taken more time; 18% (63) of the respondents believe that they would probably 
not and 7% (25) that they would definitely not find a job without EURES. 

From the 62 employers who indicated having received guidance in finding employees abroad, 37% 
(23)  responded  that  they  would  have  been  able  to  find  the  correct  candidates  but  not  as  quickly; 
while 24%  (15) said that they would probably not have been able to find the right candidates without 
support from EURES. Yet, 19% (11) of employers said they would have been able to find employees 
even without the help of EURES. This is because they see the EURES database as containing very 
few good candidates with the necessary skills for their job vacancies and the filters on the portal as 
showing too many irrelevant candidates. 

From the 34 Members and Partners who indicated that they use the EURES portal for matching, 26 
(76%)  think  that  automated  matching  function  will  save  them  time  in  comparison  with  manual 
matching and searching once it is fully implemented, while 8 (24%) are not convinced of that. 

22 NCOs agreed that costs of EURES services and tools are justified by their results. However, 23 
found that the administrative burden has had increased compared to the previous Regulation. Nearly 
half  of  the  respondents  (12)  think  that  there  is  a  scope  for  more  efficient  use  of  the  EURES 
resources, while 10 do not know. 

2.2.5.  Coherence 

Similarly to  the public consultation,  some  jobseekers (2%, 41) drew similarities with  the Erasmus 
initiative and its brand, from which they feel EURES can learn.  

The  vast  majority  of  employers  (81%,  58)  who  received  EURES  services  believe  that  EURES 
services  are  complementary,  while  19%  (14)  disagree.  This  is  also  aligned  with  the  feedback 
received through the public consultation and the case studies. 

99% (90) of Members and Partners believe that the consistency of the activities and target groups 
of the initiatives they participate in is good or very good. Only one respondent said it was poor. 

Most of the NCOs agree that EURES is complementary to other EU (17) and national (20) initiatives 
and that the EURES tools are complementary (25). However, 11 NCOs find that the EURES tools 
are  overlapping  with  other  EU/national  level  policy  measures/initiatives,  e.g.  Single  Digital 
Gateway, European Labour Authority or Europass. 

2.2.6.  EU added value 

The  view  of  jobseekers  and  employers  is  divided  on  the  extent  to  which  they  would  be  able  to 
achieve the same results without EURES as is seen in the efficiency section above. 

The  Members  and  Partners  agreed  that  EURES  complement  other  European  (88%,  81)  and 
national  (95%,  87)  initiatives  on  employment  and  mobility  and  that  more  can  be  done  to  promote 
jobs and mobility through EURES than with national resources only (95%, 88). This echoes, albeit 
slightly less strongly, the feelings of the public consultation respondents. 

85 

 
 
Among NCOs, there is agreement that EURES has produced effects that would have not taken place 
without EU intervention (22) and that they have more reached groups (23). 

2.2.7.  Summary 

While overall, in the jobseekers’ survey a considerable number of respondents (35%, 714) is neutral 
about  their experience with EURES, about  the same number of respondent  are satisfied (9% (177) 
very  satisfied  and  27%  (547)  satisfied)  or  dissatisfied  (9%  (186)  very  dissatisfied  and  15%  (301) 
dissatisfied)  with  it.  The  dissatisfaction  might  stem  from  the  respondents  not  being  able  to  find 
relevant employment opportunities through EURES or being of an opinion that employers do not use 
EURES services on a regular basis which results in a poor job vacancy offer. The biggest criticism of 
the  respondents  was  directed  towards  the  EURES  Portal.  There  the  respondents  highlighted  that  it 
needs further considerable development to be able to keep up with the technical developments. The 
replies are more positive for specific EURES services. For instance, over two-thirds (70%, 249) of 
those who received information and guidance in finding a job abroad were satisfied with the service, 
where 24% (87) were satisfied and 46% (162) very satisfied. 

In the employers’ survey, also about one third (30%, 46) of respondents were  neither satisfied nor 
dissatisfied with EURES. However, nearly half (47%, 73) were satisfied (17% (26) very satisfied and 
30% (47) satisfied). Here, similarly to the jobseekers’ survey, dissatisfaction (23%, 36) with EURES 
stemmed  from  the  inability  to  find  relevant  candidates  for  their  job  vacancies.  This  criticism  was 
again  mainly  focused  towards  the  portal  as  the  respondents  did  found  little  return  for  their  efforts 
while sifting through the irrelevant results produced by the search function. This is aligned with the 
sentiments  of  jobseekers,  providing  also  more  positive  replies  for  specific  EURES  services.  For 
instance, most of those who received information and/or guidance in finding employees from abroad 
were either satisfied (53%, 33) or very satisfied (34 %, 21) with the service (all respondents except 
8). 

No Member or Partner were dissatisfied or even very dissatisfied with EURES. The majority of the 
(56%, 54) were satisfied. 5% (5) of the respondents would not recommend to other organisations to 
join the EURES network with only one respondent providing a reasoning for this which was that due 
to the withdrawal of the UK from the European Union, the future of EURES within their country is 
uncertain. Some respondents felt that EURES has undergone many changes in a short period of time 
which  might  hamper  the  objectives  of  these  reforms.  Particularly  due  to  the  introduction  of  the 
European Labour Authority and the establishment of the Single Digital Gateway. Another area where 
the  respondents  would  welcome  more  efforts  was  the  development  of  closer  cooperation  with  the 
European  Coordination  Office  (ECO)  not  only  for  the  National  Coordination  Offices  (NCOs)  but 
also for, at least, all EURES Members. This could be done by involving ECO in local meetings of 
the network to bring in more overarching views and vice versa. 

Overall, the direct  EURES clients and its service providers seem to be satisfied with EURES or at 
least neutral about their satisfaction as can be seen in the graph below. 

How satisfied are you with EURES and its services? 

86 

 
 
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Jobseekers' survey (n= 2 054)

9% 

27% 

35% 

15% 

9% 

6% 

Employers' survey (n= 164)

17% 

31% 

30% 

12% 

11% 

Members and Partners' survey (n= 96)

31% 

56% 

13% 

Very satisfied

Satisfied

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

I cannot assess

About one third (8) of responding NCOs while viewing their relationship with ECO as good said that 
they  would  welcome  more  interaction  and  improvement  of  the  relationship.  A  barrier  to  a  closer 
cooperation within the EURES network is the way the national networks are set up as it is not always 
possible to apply the same principles across the network. The internal political pressures were also 
mentioned as a challenge because of it some countries are only able to offer limited EURES services 
in some areas. The fact that there is no common consensus on the purpose of the Regulation and its 
demands for action is also seen as a barrier to a better functioning cooperation. The fact that many 
EURES countries are experiencing same shortages and surpluses has been highlighted throughout the 
survey  particularly  with  regard  to  a  shortcoming  of  EURES  being  able  to  come  up  with  a  unified 
approach towards this issue. 

2.3. Case studies 

The seven case studies  were used to  gather more qualitative feedback on EURES. The majority of 
interviewees  were  selected  among  EURES  staff  as  they  have  experience  of  the  introduction  and 
impact  of the  EURES Regulation. Overall, no major differences between countries were identified 
across the case studies. 

In  terms  of  relevance,  the  respondents  agreed  that  in  recent  years  the  network  has  adopted  digital 
tools  that  accompany  one-on-one  counselling  sessions  such  as  webinars  and  European  Online  Job 
Days which help in reaching a wider number of candidates and spreading awareness about EURES. 
The jobseekers and employers appreciate the extent of information EURES is able to provide about 
all topics on working in another country. 

The stakeholders agreed that focusing on ensuring fair labour mobility across EURES countries led 
to  the  development  of  a  broad  network  of  EURES  advisers  who  are  experts  in  intra-EU  labour 
mobility  which  contributes  to  effective  delivery  of  EURES  services.  Post-recruitment  services  are 
seen as less effective since they are not sufficiently developed across the network. 

87 

 
 
 
The new monitoring and reporting requirements of the Regulation are seen as necessary to provide a 
more  comprehensive  picture  of  EURES  activities  than  in  the  past  but  they  lead  to  more 
administrative  burden.  The  fact  that  not  all  EURES  staff  work  fully  only  on  EURES  activities 
decreases the efficiency of the service provision. 

EURES countries are increasingly facing the same skills shortages and surpluses, which is seen as an 
obstacle  needing  resolving  as  this  leads  to  conflicting  priorities  at  national  level  regarding  the 
promotion of labour mobility. This may affect the coherence of EURES service provision across the 
network.  The  impact  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic  on  national  labour  markets  is  yet  to  be  seen. 
Respondents widely recognised that it would affect national priorities which may lead to taking away 
resources from EURES to other areas. Similar sentiments were expressed also in the online surveys 
in this regard. 

The main added value of EURES is in ensuring fair mobility and free provision of services. 

In comparison with the online surveys and the public consultation, the stakeholders consulted as part 
of the case studies focused more on the services tailored to individuals’ needs rather than the services 
offered through the EURES Portal. Nonetheless, respondents also highlighted the same shortcomings 
in  terms  of  the  search  and  matching  functions  and  overall  user-friendliness  of  the  Portal  as  in  the 
surveys and the public consultation. 

2.4. Validation and COVID-19 workshops 

The validation and COVID-19 workshops gathered key stakeholders and experts in labour mobility 
to verify the findings of the ex-post evaluation. The feedback gathered was used to fine-tune the final 
findings.  Overall,  the  participants  confirmed  the  presented  findings  and  further  developed  some  of 
them. 

The  greatest  insistence  is  on  highlighting  better  that  the  different  realities  of  each  of  the  national 
networks  are  taken  into  account  when  interpreting  the  findings  as  it  is  an  influential  factor  when 
assessing  the  implementation  of  the  Regulation,  particularly  with  regard  to  the  relevance, 
effectiveness  and  efficiency.  Going  forward,  it  is  important  that  the  newer  EU  initiatives  (e.g. 
Europass, Single Digital Gateway) ensure coherence with EURES. 

In the COVID-19 workshop, the participants highlighted that EURES managed well the transition to 
online  service  provision.  As  remote  working  is  likely  to  become  more  prominent,  the  European 
Labour Authority should look into harmonising the national regulations so that EURES can develop 
this  aspect  better  in  the  information  provision.  Nonetheless,  the  workshop  validated  the  overall 
results of the consultation showing that despite of the changing context, the results obtained are still 
relevant. 

88 

 
 
 
 
III. 

ANNEX - METHODS AND ANALYTICAL MODELS 

The ex-post evaluation of the operation and effects of EURES Regulation (EU) 2016/589 applied a 
mix of evaluation methods including desk research, statistical analysis, public consultations, surveys, 
case studies, workshops and interviews with stakeholders and Member States’ officials.  This annex 
describes the methodological tools selected to carry out the evaluation. 

a.  Intervention logic 

The intervention logic of EURES derives from the general objectives of EURES as set out in Article 
6 of Regulation (EU) 2016/589: 

f)  facilitating the exercise of the rights conferred by Article 45 TFEU and by Regulation (EU) No 

492/2011; 

g)  implementing the coordinated strategy for employment and, in particular, for promoting a skilled, 

trained and adaptable workforce as referred to in Article 145 TFEU; 

h)  improving  the  functioning,  cohesion  and  integration  of  the  labour  markets  in  the  Union, 

including at cross-border level; 

i)  promoting  voluntary  geographical  and  occupational  mobility  in  the  Union,  including  in  cross-
border regions, on a fair basis and in compliance with Union and national law and practice; 

j)  supporting  transitions  into  the  labour  market,  thereby  promoting  the  social  and  employment 

objectives referred to in Article 3 TEU. 

The intervention logic defines four main challenges:  

1.  Technology  is  modifying  jobseekers’  and  employers’  behaviours  concerning  recruitment 

activities and job searching; 

2.  The presence of barriers to intra-EU labour mobility limits the exploitation of the opportunities 

deriving from the free movement of workers; 

3.  Growing  interdependencies  of  labour  markets  may  negatively  affect  vulnerable  groups  and 

specific regions; 

4.  Labour market imbalances across European countries may lead to economic losses and decreased 

productivity. 

89 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
To  properly  address  these  challenges,  EURES  builds  its  actions  along  the  following  specific 
objectives defined in the EURES Regulation Impact Assessment166: 

-  To achieve a nearly complete pool of job vacancies and CVs on the EURES portal; 
-  To  enable  the  EURES  portal  to  carry  out  automated  matching  between  job  vacancies  and 
CV's,  in  all  EU  languages,  and  understanding  skills,  competences,  occupations  and 
qualifications; 

-  To make available basic information on the EURES network to any jobseeker or employer; 
-  To assist any interested person with matching, placement and recruitment; 
-  To  support  the  network  through  information  exchange  on  national  labour  shortages  and 

surpluses and the co-ordination of actions across Member States.  

EURES  develops  activities  for  achieving  these  objectives  that  can  be  measured  via  their  expected 
outputs, results and impacts. 

The  following  figure  presents  the  intervention  logic  of  EURES  action.  A  full  description  of  the 
intervention logic and the evaluation question matrix supporting this intervention logic can be found 
in annex I of the supporting study. 

166  SWD(2014)  9  final  “Impact  Assessment  Accompanying  the  document  Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European 
Parliament and of the Council on a European network of Employment Services, workers' access to mobility services 
and the further integration of labour markets” 

90 

 
 
 
                                                 
91 

 
 
 
The  evaluation  was  based  on  evaluation  questions  linked  to  the  five  criteria  defined  by  the  Better 
Regulation Guidelines (Relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and EU added value). These 
questions  were  broken  down  into  30  sub-questions  in  agreement  with  the  Inter-Service  Steering 
group of experts from different Commission services, as follows (the links to the intervention logic 
are mentioned in italics): 

Relevance 

EQ1: To what extent the needs and problems in the labour market and intra-EU labour mobility (e.g. 
language  and  cultural  issues,  matching  supply  and  demand)  and  the  objectives  of  the  EURES 
Regulation fit? To what extent are the EURES tools fit for the needs of businesses and job seekers in 
the digital age? Related challenges: 1, 2 & 4 

EQ2:  To  what  extent  was  EURES  flexible  and  able  to  adapt  to  changes  in  the  implementation 
context, notably the evolution of mobility patterns, technological changes, new types of recruitment 
channels in the labour market, and new regulatory requirements (e.g. those stemming from the single 
digital gateway Regulation)? Related challenges: 1 & 3 

EQ3:  To  what  extent  were  the  most  relevant  groups  (e.g.  cross-border  workers,  young  people 
searching for international experience, EU mobile workers) targeted and their most important needs 
addressed? Related challenges: 2 & 3 

Effectiveness 

EQ1:  To  what  extent  the  EURES  portal  contributed  to:  Facilitating  intra-EU  placements  thanks  to 
job seekers all over Europe having instant access to nearly complete supply of job vacancies on the 
EURES  portal  and  registered  employers  recruiting  from  an  extensive  pool  of  CVs  available? 
Effective  and  smooth  recruitment  process  due  to  highly  automated,  user-friendly  and  effective 
matching  between  job  vacancies,  job  applications  and  CVs,  translating  in  all  EU  languages  and 
understanding  skills,  competences,  occupations  and  qualifications  acquired  at  national  level? 
General objectives 2, 4 & 5; Specific objectives 1 & 2 and related outputs and results 

EQ2:  To  what  extent  the  provision  of  services  to  employers  and  jobseekers  contributed  to:  1) 
increasing  awareness  of  intra-EU  labour  possibilities  by  providing  relevant  information  of  good 
quality on job vacancies and living and working conditions throughout the Union to any job seeker 
or employer seeking client services for recruitment, and by granting any person interested access to 
the  EURES  network?  2)  improving  the  accessibility  of  intra-EU  job  opportunities  by  assisting 
interested people with matching, placement and recruitment?  General objectives 3, 4  & 5; Specific 
objectives 3 & 4 and related outputs and results 

EQ3: To what extent the EURES internal support and cooperation contributed to EU labour market 
integration and collaboration across countries by supporting information exchange on national labour 
shortages and surpluses and coordination of actions across Member States?  General objectives 3 & 
5; Specific objective 5 and related outputs and results 

92 

 
 
EQ4: To what extent the EURES mobility schemes and projects contributed to achieving the EURES 
specific objectives? Specific objectives 1 - 5 and related outputs and results 

EQ5:  How  visible  were  EURES  actions  and  the  EURES  initiative  to  labour  market  participants. 
Specific objective 3 and related outputs and results 

EQ6: Which types of actions were the most and the least effective and most sustainable, for which 
groups and in  which contexts  (e.g. specific cross-border partnerships,  specialized targeted mobility 
schemas)? What main factors had a bigger impact (either positive or negative) on the effectiveness of 
EURES actions? Specific objectives 1 - 5 and related outputs and results 

EQ7: How appropriate is the current EURES organisational set-up to meet the current labour market 
needs, including in cross-border regions? How effective is the mainstreaming of the EURES service 
delivery  within  PES  and  other  EURES  members  and  partners,  in  order  to  contribute  to  the 
objectives? General objective 1; Specific objectives 1- 5 and related outputs and results 

EQ8: To what extent Member States complied with EURES regulation? How this level of Member 
States compliance affected the effectiveness of EURES regulation? General objective 1 and related 
outputs and results 

EQ9: To what extent the outputs and effects of the EURES actions facilitate: the free movement of 
workers  in  the  Union?  the  implementation  of  a  coordinated  employment  strategy?  improve  the 
functioning,  cohesion  and  integration  of  the  labour  markets  in  the  Union?  promote  voluntary 
geographical  and  occupational  mobility  in  the  Union  on  a  fair  basis?  support  transitions  into  the 
labour market? General objectives 1 - 5 and related outputs and results 

Efficiency 

EQ1:  To  what  extent  were  EURES  actions  cost-effective  (compared  over  time)?  What  types  of 
actions  were  more  and  less  cost-effective?  Is  there  scope  for  a  more  efficient  use  of  EURES 
human/financial/technical  resources?  Particularly:  I.  How  justified  are  the  running  costs  of  the 
EURES portal and IT infrastructure in terms of online users and job matches? II. To what extent was 
direct funding and associated costs proportionate to the benefits generated? III. How timely and cost-
efficient  were  the  procedures  for  reporting  and  monitoring?  IV.  To  what  extent  were  the  costs  of 
final services to stakeholders (e.g. counselling to individual job seekers and business) proportionate 
to the benefits generated? Inputs; Expected outputs 1 - 4 

EQ2:  To  what  extent  has  administrative  burden  increased/decreased  compared  to  the  previous 
EURES regulation? Inputs; Expected outputs 1 - 4 

EQ3:  Are  there  significant  cost  differences  between  countries  in  the  implementation  of  the 
operations? What are these differences related to? Inputs; Expected outputs 1 - 4 

93 

 
 
 
 
Coherence 

EQ1:  How  coherent  is  the  EURES  Regulation  with  other  EU  policy  measures  and  initiatives 
targeting employment and mobility at EU level? All Objectives & Activities 

EQ2: How complementary were the EURES tools and services to each other? Activities 1 - 4 

EU added value 

EQ1: To what  extent did the EURES operations produce effects  (quantified to  the possible extent) 
that would not have taken place without the EU intervention? Impacts 1- 5 

EQ2: How significant are these effects compared to the results obtained by bilateral or multilateral 
Member State cooperation in this area? Impacts 1- 5 

b.  Cost-effectiveness analysis 

The  cost-effectiveness  analysis  performed  for  the  evaluation  is  composed  of  two  complementary 
parts. First,  the  cost-effectiveness  of EURES across  time for three indicators (placements,  contacts 
and  vacancies).  Second,  the  cost-effectiveness  of  EURES  to  two  different  benchmarks:  Public 
Employment Services (PES) and Targeted Mobility Schemes (TMS). 

The cost-effectiveness analysis is detailed in annex I of the supporting study, while the full analysis 
of methodology, results and limitations are provided in annex III.a. 

The remaining part of this section describes the selection and operationalisation of the indicators, the 
logic behind time period under analysis, and the expected results. 

  EURES budget 

The EURES budget has components at EU and national level: 

At EU level, ECO is supported by the EURES axis of the Programme for Employment and Social 
Innovation  (EaSI)  that  provides  the  financing  of  the  horizontal  support  activities,  such  as  the 
development  and  maintenance  of 
training  programme, 
the  EURES  portal, 
communication,  analytical  and  network  activities.  EaSI  also  funds  specific  projects  such  has  the 
cross-border partnerships and the mobility schemes, which are managed nationally but funded after 
calls for proposals launched by the European Commission. 

the  common 

The annual EURES budget under EaSI is public as Commission Implementing Decisions167. 

167  For  instance,  Commission  Implementing  Decision  C(2019)7630  final  of  30/10/2019  adopts  the  EaSI  2020  work 
programme, defining a EUR 23 018 174 budget for the EURES axis. All annual work programmes and amendments 
are 
at 
available 
https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?advSearchKey=easi+annual+work+programme&mode=advancedSubmit&catId
=1307&policyArea=0&policyAreaSub=0&country=0&year=0 

94 

 
 
                                                 
At national level, the functioning of EURES used to be financed through annual grants deriving from 
a separate EU budget line, but as of 2015, EURES countries became in charge of securing their own 
budget. 

In  this  framework,  the  financial  resources  used  by  EURES  countries  can  derive  from  three  main 
sources: national budgets, the European Social Fund (ESF) and the EURES axis of EaSI for specific 
projects as the mobility schemes mentioned above. 

The composition of the budget and its volume differs from one EURES country to another. The exact 
breakdown of funding per source cannot be obtained due to imprecise data reporting. 

The data on the total annual budgets for 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 for each EURES country were 
primarily  obtained  from  the  Work  Programmes  and  Activity  Reports  of  the  Programming  Cycle. 
Since this information was not always available in the reports, a corresponding question was added 
to  the  NCO  survey,  thus  allowing  for  data  triangulation  and  adjustment.  The  aggregate  EURES 
budget at national level is calculated based on the total budget of the EURES countries included in 
the analysis168.  

The total EURES budget is displayed in the following table: 

Indicative EURES total budget (in million EUR) 

EURES axis of EaSI 
ESF and national funds 
Total 

2016 
11.6 
22.1 
33.7 

2017 
23.1 
22.8 
45.9 

2018 
24.3 
23.2 
47.5 

2019 
33.8 
24.4 
58.2 

  EURES outcome indicators 

Given the complexity of EURES activities, the numerous changes that occurred over time, and the 
lack of data availability, it is not possible to define and gather data for one indicator for each EURES 
action. Therefore, the analysis was restricted to a limited number of key indicators.  

These  key  indicators  aim  to  capture  the  bulk  of  the  activities  and  goals  performed  by  EURES,  in 
compatibility with data availability: 

 
 
 

the number of total placements achieved with the support of EURES; 
the number of total individual contacts between EURES staff and EURES users; 
the number of job vacancies provided by the national coordinators to the EURES portal.  

The indicators have been selected with precise and distinct rationales: 

168  The  NCO  survey  was  completed  by  21  countries.  Belgium,  Germany,  and  Liechtenstein  are  excluded  from  the 
aggregate figure because of missing data. The full details are described in section 2.1 “EURES  costs” of the Study 
supporting the ex-post EURES evaluation and the second biennial EURES report, annex III.a  – Cost-effectiveness 
analysis. 

95 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
  The  number  of  total  placements  achieved  with  the  support  of  EURES  is  one  of  the  key 
indicators of employment results, which belong to the main EURES operational objectives. In 
general, the number of total placements achieved with the support of EURES is likely to be 
underestimated. The main reason for this is the under-reporting, due to the lack of obligation 
to do so, on the part of jobseekers and employers. However, this indicator is the single most 
important measure of comprehensive EURES achievements.  

  The  number  of  total  individual  contacts  between  EURES  staff  and  EURES  users  measures 
the  fulfilment  of  the  following  objectives:  (a)  to  inform,  guide  and  provide  advice  to 
potentially mobile EU workers; (b) to provide advice and guidance to workers and employers 
in cross-border regions.  

  The  number  of  job  vacancies  provided  by  national  coordinators  to  the  EURES  portal 

measures how well the system of information sharing works.  

  EURES costs per indicator 

As  specified  in  the  Better  Regulation  Toolbox  57,  the  cost  component  of  a  cost-effectiveness 
analysis  should  refer  as  accurately  as  possible  to  the  resources  disbursed  for  the  specific  outcome 
under analysis. This is necessary in order to make the cost of that outcome comparable to that of a 
similar  programme  or  to  other  activities  under  the  same  programme.  Therefore,  for  each  of  the 
indicators selected, there would ideally be a specific and different subset of the total budget.  

Nevertheless,  in  the  context  of this  evaluation,  three  main  issues  emerge.  First,  the  ability  to  track 
and  gather  comprehensive  and  consistent  data  across  time  on  the  sources  of  EURES  funding  is 
limited. Second, data breakdowns on how the resources are spent, detailing individual activities and 
specifying  quantitative  outputs,  are  rarely  available  for  individual  countries.  Third,  the  three 
outcomes under analysis, that were selected as  an operational  second-best,  as explained above, are 
horizontal to different EURES activities. 

For  these  reasons,  the  available  data  do  not  allow  to  estimate  a  specific  budget  breakdown  for 
corresponding  indicators  of  EURES  actions.  Therefore,  the  only  option  available  was  to  apply  the 
same cost to all the indicators selected, which is the total annual budget spent on EURES activities in 
each country. 

  Benchmarking EURES 

Public Employment Services (PES) are a natural benchmark for EURES activities. The activities and 
goals  of  both  PES  and  EURES  are  similar,  the  main  difference  being  the  international  interest  of 
EURES. 

To  measure  the  cost-effectiveness  of  PES  activities,  the  selection  of  the  indicators  is  straight-
forward.  The  main  outcome  indicator  of  PES  activities  and  goals  is  the  total  number  of  job 
placements in a country in a given year. This indicator is in line and comparable to the corresponding 
indicator selected for EURES, although possible inconsistencies exist. 

96 

 
 
On  the  cost  side,  following  the  same  logic  applied  to  EURES  for  purposes  of  comparability,  one 
indicator is considered: the total national budget assigned to PES activities in each country in a given 
year. As for the outcome, possible inconsistences could arise. 

Targeted  Mobility  Schemes  (TMS)  are  also  another  natural  benchmark  for  EURES  activities.  As 
EURES  general  services,  the  specialised  schemes  support  international  mobility,  even  though 
devoted to particularly difficult-to-place groups. 

In  terms  of  indicators,  the  selection  follows  the  same  logic  as  PES.  The  total  number  of  job 
placements  is  a  good  overall  indicator  of  the  activities  and  goals  of  TMS,  while  also  allowing  for 
comparability to the main EURES indicator. 

On  the  cost  side,  the  picture  is  slightly  different.  In  fact,  the  total  budget  of  all  active  projects 
combined is considered, rather than national budgets. This is more in line with the type of activity of 
TMS,  while  still  allowing  for  comparability  with  EURES.  Again,  for  both  costs  and  outcome, 
possible inconsistencies with EURES exists. 

All the potential inconsistencies and limitations are detailed in annex III.a of the supporting study. 

  Time period and sample for the benchmark 

The time period for comparison was chosen based on data availability: years 2016, 2017, 2018, and 
2019.  

The inclusion of two years before and after the full implementation of the Regulation (2018) allows 
to appreciate the effect on the cost-effectiveness of EURES activities.  

The choice to exclude further years is due mainly to data availability issues. Before 2016, an average 
of only 50% of EURES Advisors were filling the monthly EURES Advisors Reports, which were the 
main  data  source  before  2018.  In  addition,  there  was  no  standard  in  the  methodology  of  data 
reporting before, thus creating comparability issues.  

As for 2019, while figures are available for EURES, they are not for PES, which will, therefore, be 
limited  to  three  years  (2016,  2017,  and  2018)  out  of  which  only  one  (2018)  is  selected  for 
comparison with EURES based on data completeness. By contrast, 2019 is the first  year for which 
data are reported on an annual basis for TMS. The data for 2020 was not complete at the moment of 
performing the evaluation. 

The aggregate unit costs for both EURES and PES were re-calculated for a sub-set of countries in 
order to reflect the availability of data in a PES sample. Given data availability, 2018 was selected as 
the comparison year, as it is the most recent year with the highest data availability. As a result, the 
calculations could be performed for a sample of 16 countries169. 

169 Countries included into the sample are: Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, 

Iceland, Lithuania, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia and Spain. 

97 

 
 
                                                 
Regarding  the  TMS  benchmark,  the  cost  per  placement  of  TMS  are  considered  for  the  year  2019, 
given that this is the first and latest year for which yearly figures are available. Thanks to the wide 
data availability, the aggregate figures can be compared to the scope of EURES activities without re-
calculating the figures for a smaller sample. 

  Results of the benchmark 

The figures below compare the total estimated EURES costs to the number of placements achieved, 
the number of individual contacts, and the number of vacancies provided. 

The total  EURES budget  is  considered for the purposes of the cost-effective analysis for the  years 
from 2016 to 2019. EURES budget grows continuously every year from around EUR 22 million in 
2016 to almost EUR 24.5 million in 2019. 

The figures also show the evolution in the number of total placements achieved with the support of 
EURES and the number of total individual contacts between EURES staff and EURES users. Both 
indicators follow a similar path.  

Total EURES budget (in EUR) and number of placements (2016-2019) 

90 000

80 000

70 000

60 000

50 000

40 000

30 000

20 000

10 000

 0

25 000 000

24 500 000

24 000 000

23 500 000

23 000 000

22 500 000

22 000 000

21 500 000

21 000 000

20 500 000

2016

2017

2018

2019

n placements

EURES budget

98 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total EURES budget (EUR) and number of contacts (2016-2019) 

2 500 000

2 000 000

1 500 000

1 000 000

 500 000

  0

25 000 000

24 500 000

24 000 000

23 500 000

23 000 000

22 500 000

22 000 000

21 500 000

21 000 000

20 500 000

2016

2017

2018

2019

n contacts

EURES budget

The  number  of  job  vacancies  transferred  to  the  EURES  portal  grew  from  8 million  in  2016  to 
19.7 million in 2019. The numbers for the intermediate years follow a growing path but their values 
are  not  accurate  because  of  reporting  changes,  particularly  in  2018.  The  2016-2019  increase  is 
consistent with the upward trend in the number of placements and the number of contacts between 
EURES staff and EURES users observed.  

To  sum  up,  a  first  comparison  between  the  time  trend  of  the  aggregate  costs  and  three  indicators 
representative  of  the  benefits  generated  by  EURES,  provides  evidence  that  the  benefits  grow 
proportionally to the costs. 

After  the  available  data  were  collected  and  examined,  three  ratios  were  produced,  quantifying  the 
unit costs for the three examined outcomes: 

Cost-effectiveness analysis (2019 - 2016, in EUR) 

EURES OUTCOME INDICATORS 

Cost per placement achieved 

Cost per individual contact 

Cost per job vacancy transferred to the portal 

2016 

2017 

473.53 

627.00 

13.60 

2.74 

15.37 

2.98 

2018 

332.95 

12.32 
N/A170 

2019  Net saving 2016-2019 
185.42 

288.10 

11.88 

1.24 

1.71 

1.50 

The net costs compare the aggregate171 cost-effectiveness of EURES activities in 2019 to the status 
quo  of  2016.  The  unit  cost  in  2019  is  smaller  than  2016  across  the  three  outcomes,  meaning  that 
there has been a net cost saving172.  

170 The extent of missing data does not allow calculating a EURES aggregate figure for 2018.  

99 

 
 
 
                                                 
The  fact  that  EURES  is  now  more  cost-effective  than  in  the  past  suggests  that  the  results  of  its 
activities  are  increasingly  efficient  in  relation  to  the  cost  and,  thus,  EURES  is  increasingly  able  to 
deliver satisfactory results. 

The benchmark results show that the cost per placement of EURES is considerably and consistently 
lower  than  PES,  both  at  the  aggregate  and  the  country  level.  As  EURES  relies  on  existing  PES 
structures,  and  thereby  benefiting  from  the  initial  investment  and  fixed  costs  being  covered  under 
PES, the EURES cost (EUR 219.09) can be interpreted as a top-up to the PES cost (EUR 2 924.70). 
The additional burden over PES  is  justified by the need to  expand the scope of the  activities from 
national  to  cross-border  placements,  which  entail  more  complex  information  and  advice  activities 
given the differences in languages and cultures, social security and tax-benefit regimes, and working 
conditions.  It  follows  that,  for  a  relatively  small  additional  investment  as  compared  to  PES, 
considerable cost-effective results can be achieved through EURES. 

Cost-effectiveness of TMS placements (in EUR), 2019 

Name 

Total budget 

No. of placements 

Cost per placement 

Your First EURES Job  
Reactivate 
Total TMS 

EUR 5 030 000 
EUR 2 074 000 
EUR 7 104 000 

1 724 
483 
2 207 

EUR 2 917 
EUR 4 294 
EUR 3 219 

The cost per placement of benchmarked TMS activities is considerably higher than those of EURES, 
both in aggregate terms (EUR 3 219) and for each of the two individual targeted mobility schemes: 
“Your First EURES Job” (EUR 2 917) and “Reactivate” (EUR 4 294). In line with these results, the 
figures available for the whole period indicate that the cost per placement remained on a similar scale 
across the whole period: EUR 2 503 for Your First EURES Job (February 2015 to December 2019) 
and EUR 3 096 for Reactivate (November 2016 to December 2019). 

These figures are indicative of the different scope of EURES and TMS activities. EURES costs only 
include  an  additional  investment  based  on  existing  PES  structures.  By  contrast,  the  costs  of  TMS 
include  the  full  cost  of  the  programmes  and  are,  therefore,  a  more  precise  proxy  of  what  a  full 
investment  on  cross-border  placements  actually  costs.  It’s  worth  noting  that  the  combined 
PES+EURES costs are similar to the TMS costs. A precise benchmarking is not possible at present 
time  given  the  limited  data  availability173  and  the  fact  that  TMS  are  aimed  at  target  groups  with 
specific needs (e.g. youth), but this analysis reinforces the assessment of EURES efficiency. 

171  The  EURES  total  is  calculated  based  on  the  total  number  of  placements  and  total  budget  of  all  EURES  countries 
included in the analysis. Belgium, Germany, and Liechtenstein are excluded from the aggregate  figure because of 
missing data. 

172 Because of methodological reasons explained above, the three figures cannot be added together. 

173 The sample of countries and the years under exam for PES and TMS do not correspond. 

100 

 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                    
Given the nature of the programmes, the above cost figures should be viewed with caution. In fact, 
placements  and  budget  figures  reported  under  Your  First  EURES  Job  and  Reactivate  schemes 
partially  overlap  with  those  reported  under  EURES.  Nevertheless,  the  results  confirm  what  was 
underlined  under  the  first  benchmark,  namely,  that  the  small  investment  in  EURES  activities 
generates comparatively good results, as shown by the relatively stronger cost-effectiveness.  

c.  Comparative labour market analysis 

The Impact Assessment prior to the adoption of the EURES Regulation identified a range of issues 
linked to the role played by intra-EU labour mobility, including: 

  Great  potential  of  intra-EU  labour  mobility  but  insufficient  impact  on  reducing  labour  market 

imbalances, with evidence of: 

-  persisting unemployment gaps across EU Member States; 
-  high job vacancy rates coupled with high unemployment rates;  
- 

employers indicating difficulties in finding employees with the skills they need. 

  Weak mobility flows with respect to  international benchmarks and surveys of people declaring 

firm intention to move. 

  Contextual factors such as the ageing workforce likely to compound labour market imbalances 

due to skills obsolescence.  

The  aim  of  the  comparative  analysis  of  the  evolution  of  the  labour  situation  throughout  the  EU  in 
relation to EURES activities is to identify, to the extent possible, factors that (still) have contributed 
(either positively or negatively) to  the effectiveness,  efficiency  and added-value of EURES-related 
operations. The comparison needs to be performed against:  

  The situation before the EURES Regulation entered into force in 2016;  
  A hypothetical situation where there would not be any EURES intervention.  

Thus, the task has been structured in three steps:  

  Step 1: based on socio-economic as well as labour mobility data, to contextualise EURES 
implementation through a description and analysis of the evolution of the labour market and 
labour  mobility,  with  the  help  of  clusters  of  countries  based  on  their  level  of  barriers  to 
mobility. This helps guide the analysis and paves the way to the next steps; 

  Step 2: based on EURES data, to assess EURES implementation in the different contexts, to 

understand whether this is in line with the evolution of labour mobility needs; 

  Step  3:  based  on  survey  data,  try  to  understand  EURES’s  specific  contribution  to  its 

objectives, i.e. what would have happened in case EURES had not existed. 

The methodology for the comparative analysis is detailed in annex III.b of the supporting study. 

  Step 1 – evolution of the labour market and labour mobility 

The first part of the comparative analysis, relies on descriptive statistics of trends in groups of similar 
countries over time, analysing socio-economic data related to the labour market, existing evidence on 
the main barriers to labour mobility as well as observed mobility flows. 

101 

 
 
The analysis of socio-economic data related to the labour market uses clusters of countries grouping 
together those with similar determinants (push-pull factors) of labour mobility and trends, and with 
similar  levels  of  barriers  to  labour  mobility.  Clustering  countries  helps  the  analysis  and  the 
understanding of data and trends in relation to the context in which EURES operates, but should not 
be  viewed  as  creating  strict  categories  of  countries.  In  fact,  not  all  relevant  drivers  and  barriers  to 
mobility  are  observable  (such  as  cultural  barriers)  and  therefore  the  clusters  are  merely  used  and 
considered as they simplify and organise the analysis.  

Operationally, two macro clusters are built first, based on the level of barriers to mobility identified 
through a standardised indicator built using three indicators: 

  The average percentage of the population being  "Proficient" in the foreign language reported as 

best known in the country174; 

  The  number  of  other  countries  or  regions  where  the  national  language  of  a  country  is  also  an 

official language (assigning 1 point for each country an 0.5 for each region); 

  The alignment of the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) with the European Qualifications 

Framework (EQF)175, assigning -1, 0 and 1 based on the level of alignment176. 

The  standardised  indicator  for  barriers  is  built  as  a  weighted  average  of  the  three  standardised 
indicators. In fact, foreign language proficiency and geographical spread of the national language are 
a more precise measure of one of the main barrier to mobility – language.  The alignment of the NQF 
with EQF is not a precise measure, and thus it was assigned a lower weight. 

Countries with a score below 0 are considered to have barriers below average (“low barriers”),  and 
those with a score above 0 are considered to have barriers above average (“high barriers”). 

Next,  four other sub-clusters are built  to  take into account  the level  and  variation over time of the 
economic context indicators in relation to labour mobility used: GDP PPP per capita, unemployment 
rate  and vertical  mismatches177. To build the four  clusters, two separate standardised indicators  are 
used: 

  The average value over the period 2012-2018 of the GDP PPP per capita, unemployment rate and 

vertical mismatches for each country; 

174 Eurostat edat_aes_l54 

175 National Qualification Framework and European Qualification Framework. Available online at 

https://www.cedefop.europa.eu/en/events-and-projects/projects/european-qualifications-framework-eqf. 

176  Based  on  the  categorisation  made  by  Cedefop.  It  is  assigned  -1  to  countries  where  the  NQF  takes  a  more 
comprehensive  approach  and  respects  countries’  specificities  more;  0  to  countries  where  the  NQF  is  mostly 
influenced  by  EQF  but  not  completely  aligned;  1  to  countries  where  the  NQF  is  closely  aligned  to  EQF,  thus 
facilitating cross-country comparisons of qualifications.  

177 Vertical mismatches indicate the share of individuals who are either underqualified or overqualified for their jobs. In 
particular, the indicator used for the analysis is the overqualification rate, based on EUROSTAT, available online at 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/experimental-statistics/skills  

102 

 
 
                                                 
  The average annual growth rate of the same indicators over the period 2012-2018. 

The indicators are assigned weights to reflect the relative importance of each indicator as a driver for 
labour mobility.  Indicators are built  in  such  a way  that lower values of the average level indicator 
correspond to a better than average economic context in relation to labour mobility (i.e. higher GDP, 
lower  unemployment,  lower  vertical  mismatch);  lower  values  of  the  average  annual  growth  rate 
indicator correspond to a higher than average improvement of the context.  

It should be noted that references to “worsening, improving” are in comparative terms and relate to a 
few key drivers for labour mobility only178 rather than the overall socio-economic context.  

By  combining  the  barriers  indicator  and  the  two  indicators  of  the  economic  context  in  relation  to 
labour mobility drivers,  one should in  principle  obtain eight clusters179. However, there are no low 
barrier countries with worse than average socio-economic condition, thus Member States are present 
only in six clusters. However, to better assess the data a further simplification is needed: it would be 
impossible to meaningfully test differences among clusters, if these are too many or too much alike. 
Thus, in the analysis that follows in step 2 and step 3, only four clusters are considered:   

Definitive clustering of countries based on their level of barriers and economic context trends 

CLUSTER 

COUNTRIES 

HIGH BARRIERS 

Finland, Greece, Spain, Cyprus, Slovenia, France, Italy, Slovakia 

Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Portugal, Romania, Poland, Croatia, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia 

LOW BARRIERS 

Ireland, Malta, UK, Germany 

Luxembourg, Switzerland, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway 

Worsening/stable 
economic 
conditions 
Improving 
economic 
conditions 

Improving 
economic 
conditions 
Worsening/stable 
economic 
conditions 

In fact, among low barriers countries the level of economic context indicators is always higher than 
average  and  therefore  does  not  add  a  relevant  dimension  to  the  analysis.  Among  high  barriers 
countries  all  countries  except  Czech  Republic180  and  Finland  had  a  level  of  economic  context 
indicators below average. However, on closer inspection, both of them should rather be considered 
as average economic context, with values just slightly above the average in mere quantitative terms. 

178 These are also oversimplifications for the purpose of clustering and based on data availability. 

179 3 dimensions, 2 modalities (above average or below average), thus the number of resulting clusters equals 23 -> 8 

180 In addition, despite the low unemployment rate, Czech Republic is a comparatively low-income country, especially in 
nominal terms, which is not directly used in the cluster for simplicity but might be used qualitatively to re-classify. 

103 

 
 
                                                 
So, they have been grouped together with countries will less favourable socio-economic context and 
high barriers, as their main feature is the presence of high barriers to labour mobility.  

  Step 2 - EURES alignment with the evolution of labour mobility needs 

The second part makes  use of the clusters being created to  understand the comparative position of 
countries with respect to push-pull factors as well as barriers to labour mobility.   

In  particular,  the  goal  of  the  second  part  is  to  try  to  understand  if  EURES  implementation  shows 
signs  of  alignment  with  the  trends  identified  in  the  labour  market,  to  gather  some  insights  into  its 
relevance and adaptability.  

A selection of indicators from the internal EURES monitoring (PMS) includes:  

  Individual contacts with workers; 
  Individual contacts with employers; 
  Job placements. 

The  main  judgement  criteria  to  assess  whether  EURES  implementation  is  aligned  to  aggregated 
labour market needs is to test whether: 

  EURES  is  covering  a  higher  share  of  mobility  where  barriers  are  higher  (both  incoming  and 
outgoing) or offering more support (proxied as number of contacts) to jobseekers and employers 
in the same areas; 

  EURES is covering a higher share of incoming mobility in countries with better than average or 
improving conditions (i.e. mostly low barriers countries with higher than average GDP per capita, 
lower  unemployment,  lower  vertical  mismatch)  and  a  higher  share  of  outgoing  mobility  from 
countries with lower than average or worsening conditions. 

It  should  be  kept  in  mind  that  other  factors  could  be  at  play  in  determining  EURES’s  relevance.  
Results from this trend analysis can also be triangulated with the opinions of jobseekers/employers in 
the various clusters of countries to identify if any interesting trends appear (e.g. better appraisal of 
EURES services in countries most in need and with increasing values of EURES output and results).   

  Step 3 - EURES specific contribution to its objectives 

The third part aims to measure the added value of a EURES intervention. This part of the analysis is 
based  on  self-reported  counterfactual  through  survey  questions  directed  at  EURES  participants  – 

104 

 
 
 
 
jobseekers  and  employers  (‘counterfactual  as  self-estimated  by  program  participants’  method181, 
CSEPP).  

The  hypothetical  counterfactual  questions  were  included  in  the  surveys,  asking  jobseekers  and 
employers if in the absence of EURES, the same outcome would have been achieved. 

The potential biases associated with this method were mitigated by triangulating different sources of 
evidence  and  statistical  tests  to  explore  whether  significant  differences  in  the  opinion  of  the 
respondent existed per relevant target group (e.g. by educational attainment, by cluster of country). 

  Comparative labour analysis results 

The  majority  of  EURES  beneficiaries182,  both  jobseekers  and  employers,  broadly  confirm  that 
EURES  made  a  difference  to  them,  either  by  allowing  labour  mobility  which  would  have  not 
otherwise occurred or by facilitating it.  

There is some (statistically significant) evidence that jobseekers from countries with high barriers 
to labour mobility attribute slightly higher added value to the support they received than those 
in low barrier countries. A statistically significant and positive correlation is also found between the 
number of services offered to jobseekers and the probability that they declare to have found a 
job thanks to EURES.  

Overall, one in five of the respondents being employed at the time of the survey declared to be so 
thanks to EURES, which indicates a significant contribution of EURES to increasing the chances 
of jobseekers of finding a job abroad.  

In  terms  of  differences  between  the  services,  the  provision  of  employment  offers  (profiles)  in  line 
with  jobseekers’  skills  (employers’  needs),  post  recruitment  assistance  and  the  development  of 
integration programmes have been considered as those with higher added value.   

181 A recently introduced approach, denoted as the  “counterfactual as self-estimated by program participants” (CSEPP; 
Mueller, Gaus, & Rech, 2014; Mueller & Gaus, 2015), capitalises on people’s ability to think counterfactually (e.g., 
Roese & Olson, 2014) and builds on the idea that intervention participants are capable of directly estimating their 
counterfactual scenario, that is, the state they would have been in after an intervention without having participated. 
In  previous  studies  it  was  found  that  CSEPP  worked  relatively  well  for  assessing  the  effects  of  communicative 
interventions  on  various  types  of  self-reported  attitude  and  behavioural  intention  (Mueller,  Gaus,  &  Rech,  2014; 
Mueller and Gaus, 2015). 

182  Between  approximately  50%  to  70%,  depending  on  the  form  of  support  they  received.  Employers,  on  average, 
believed EURES made a greater difference to them then jobseekers, although such differences could not be studied 
statistically, so they should be treated with caution.  

105 

 
 
 
                                                 
  Made no difference   Don’t know      Made it easier     Would not be possible without EURES 

The figure shows the different average opinion of jobseekers regarding EURES added  value to find a job abroad for  the various clusters of 
countries.  The  ANOVA  test  suggests  that  there  is  a  statistically  significant  difference  in  means  between  these  four  clusters  of  countries. 
Average  “counterfactual”  opinion  of  respondents  in  relation  to  finding  a  job  or  apprenticeship/traineeship  abroad  after  having  received 
information and guidance through EURES – answering to the question: “For “support to finding a job abroad”, could you please specify if the 
same outcome would have been achieved without EURES support?” 

106 

3.02.72.42.81.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.55.0High barriers but improving contextHigh barriers and worsening contextLow barriers and improving contextLow barriers but worsening context 
 
 
d.  Desk research, case studies, public consultation and surveys 

Part of the data collection phase was implemented with a public consultation, as set out 
in the Better Regulation guidelines, but also on additional targeted surveys. 

The public consultation  was open to any interested person and was intended mainly on 
audiences  with  no  or  minimal  knowledge  of  EURES.  The  questionnaire  provided 
information on EURES for those unfamiliar with it. 

Four additional online surveys were launched for stakeholders particularly involved with 
EURES: 
(3) 
jobseekers/workers;  and  (4)  EURES  Members  and  Partners.  The  questionnaires  were 
aligned with the public consultation to ensure coherence and avoid duplication. 

(1)  National  Coordination  Offices; 

employers/companies; 

(2) 

Annex  II.c  of  the  supporting  study  describes  in  detail  the  stakeholder  consultation 
activities. 

In  addition  to  the  surveys,  a  substantial  list  of  legislation,  studies  and  reports  was 
consulted.  The  bibliography  and  the  full  list  of  questions  in  the  questionnaires  can  be 
found in annex I of the study.  

Finally,  the  study  included  seven  case  studies,  carried  out  in  ten  Member  States 
(Belgium,  Estonia,  Germany,  Hungary,  Italy,  Netherlands,  Poland,  Portugal,  Spain  and 
Sweden)  to  investigate  specific  topics  (the  single  coordinated  channel,  IT  platforms  / 
matching  and  monitoring  tools,  cross-border  collaborations,  extension  of  the  network, 
and support services to employers and to workers). The case studies are detailed in annex 
II.b of the study. 

107