REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Evaluation of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training based on Article 32 of the CEPOL Regulation (EU) 2015/2219 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) and replacing and repealing Council Decision 2005/681/JHA
Date: 2022-04-06
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: CEPOL, EU Member State, European security, application of the law, fight against crime, in-service training, operation of the Institutions, prevention of delinquency, public safety, third country

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 6.4.2022  COM(2022) 153 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Evaluation of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training      based on Article 32 of the CEPOL Regulation (EU) 2015/2219 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) and replacing and repealing Council Decision 2005/681/JHA           {SWD(2022) 103 final}  
 
 
1.  CONTEXT 

The European Union Agency for  Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) is an Agency of the 
European Union dedicated to training law enforcement officials, based in Budapest, Hungary. 
This  is  a  crucial  role  that  is  intended  to  ensure  European  law  enforcement  officials  are 
equipped to protect human rights, prevent and fight serious crime and terrorism, and maintain 
public  order,  with  a  view  to  creating  a  common  EU  law  enforcement  culture.  It  was 
established  in  2000  as  the  European  Police  College  and  it  became  an  Agency  in  2005.  Its 
current legal mandate entered into force on 1 July 2016, resulting from the 2015 Regulation 
(EU) 2015/2219 on the  European  Union Agency for  Law Enforcement Training1 (‘CEPOL 
Regulation’).  As  per  Article  3  of  the  Regulation,  CEPOL’s  mandate  includes  supporting, 
developing, implementing, and coordinating training for law enforcement officials. 

More specifically, the Agency is: 

  Supporting Member States in the provision of training to law enforcement officials, in 
particular on elements of cross-border and European law enforcement cooperation; 
  Supporting  Member  States  in  developing  bilateral  and  regional  cooperation  through 

the delivery of multilateral training; 

  Developing, implementing and coordinating training on specific thematic areas; 
  Developing, implementing and coordinating the training of law enforcement officials 
when preparing for participation in EU missions and in capacity building activities in 
non-EU countries; 

  Providing  training  to  law  enforcement  trainers  and  supporting  the  development  and 

exchange of best practice; 

  Developing, upgrading, and evaluating learning tools and methodologies that support 

the learning and development of law enforcement officials2. 

Article 32 of the CEPOL Regulation requires the Commission to carry out an evaluation by 1 
July  2021  and  every  five  years  thereafter,  assessing,  in  particular,  the  impact,  effectiveness 
and  efficiency  of  CEPOL  and  of  its  working  practices.  The  external  study  supporting  this 
evaluation was conducted by a consortium of RAND Europe and Ernst & Young3.  

The external study was based on a number of data collection activities: 

(1) A documentary review; 
(2) A public consultation of EU citizens; 
(3)  Online  surveys  of  CEPOL  National  Units  and  National  Contact  Points,  Framework 
Partners, third countries, and training participants; 
(4) Interviews with stakeholders from CEPOL, EU institutions, Member State organisations, 
international organisations and third countries; 
(5) Virtual ‘visits’ to CEPOL’; 
(6) Three case studies; 
(7) Workshops. 

1 Regulation (EU) 2015/2219 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on the European Union Agency for Law 
Enforcement Training (CEPOL). 
2 Article 3 of Regulation (EU) 2015/2219. 
3 The final report of the supporting study is available online at https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2837/540159. 

1 

 
 
                                                
 
The  research  approach  ensured  the  gathering  of  information  from  a  wide  range  of 
stakeholders,  including  in  CEPOL,  other  EU  agencies,  Member  States  and  third  countries, 
which strengthens the balance and breadth of perspectives. 

This  evaluation  has  two  main  objectives:  (1)  To  assess  the  effectiveness,  efficiency, 
relevance,  coherence  and  EU  added  value  of  CEPOL  and  of  its  working  practices  since 
20154; and (2) To describe lessons learned and elaborate recommendations to better respond 
to  the  challenges  posed  by  the  constantly  changing  environment  against  the  background  of 
the  currently  authorised  financial  and  human  resources  for  CEPOL.  The  evaluation  covers 
CEPOL’s  activities  over  the  period  2015  to  2020  with  all  EU  Member  States  (except 
Denmark5),  third  countries  with  which  CEPOL  has  working  arrangements,  cooperation 
agreements and similar arrangements, and international organisations and EU agencies.  

This  report will be submitted to  the European  Parliament and the Council as well as to  the 
Management  Board  of  the  Agency.  The  Staff  Working  Document,  which  accompanies  this 
Commission Report, provides a detailed analysis of the outcomes of the external evaluation. 

2.  KEY FINDINGS OF THE EVALUATION 

In terms  of effectiveness, the  evaluation found that CEPOL’s key programming documents 
consider and reflect the objectives of its legal basis and the priorities  as set out in the 2015 
EU  Agenda  on  Security.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  stakeholders  who  overwhelmingly 
perceived  that  CEPOL’s  actions  and  activities  over  the  2015  to  2020  period  have  duly 
reflected the objectives laid out in its mandate. CEPOL is engaged to fulfil its mandate when 
it  comes  to  cross-border  and  European-level  policing  and  invests  its  resources  accordingly, 
with appreciable results.  

Moreover,  the  introduction  of  the  EU-Strategic  Training  Needs  Assessment  methodology, 
developed  to  identify  gaps  in  knowledge,  skills  and  competencies  and  training  needs,  has 
strongly  improved  the  prioritisation  of  training  needs.  The  methodology  identifies  training 
priorities  and  aims  at  coordinating  available  training  activities  to  prevent  overlaps  and 
duplication,  while  indicating  emerging  law  enforcement  trends.  Yet,  the  evaluation  pointed 
out that CEPOL’s ‘train-the-trainers’ offer, an activity enabling trainers to implement modern 
delivery  methods  and  blended  learning  techniques  to  ensure  quality  police  training  in  a 
multicultural  environment,  is  comparatively  smaller  than  that  the  offer  of  other  EU  Justice 
and Home Affairs agencies and consideration should be given to expanding it. 

The  evaluation  concluded  that,  given  CEPOL’s  relatively  small  size  (96  staff  members  in 
2020) and annual budget (EUR 10.6 million in 2020), CEPOL cannot be expected to directly 
reach a sizeable proportion of the target audience through residential training activities.  The 
idea  encompassed  in  the  CEPOL  Regulation  is  for  the  Agency  to  broaden  the  reach  of  its 
target  audience  through  a  cascading  effect,  multiplying  the  outreach  as  a  result  from  the 
training  of  trainers  and  peer-to-peer  transfer  of  knowledge.  In  its  current  form,  cascading 
relies heavily on the actions of Member States and is not consistently monitored by CEPOL. 
Also, CEPOL’s use of the train-the-trainer delivery approach is limited, delivering only five 
sessions  in  2019  and  two  in  2020  before  the  pandemic.  CEPOL’s  investment  in  upgrading 
and  expanding  its  online  training  offer  emerged  as  a  positive  strategy  for  extending  its 
outreach, which became paramount in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

4 These are the five criteria used as a basis in the evaluation. 
5 Denmark is not considered a Member State in accordance with Protocol 22 on the position of Denmark. 

2 

 
 
                                                
Participants selected for CEPOL’s residential training do not always have a suitable profile in 
terms of level of expertise and seniority. Activity Managers within CEPOL have the power to 
vet  and  decline  participants’  applications,  but  the  evaluation  finds  that  this  power  is  hardly 
ever used, as it is an established practice to accept the first candidate presented by Member 
States,  regardless  of  his/her  profile.  This  is  a  well-known  issue,  which  is  often  discussed 
among the CEPOL National Units in their regular meetings. However, stakeholders reported 
that CEPOL Activity Managers are now reported to be reviewing more carefully participant 
applications. 

In terms of efficiency, the evaluation found that the benefits stemming from participating in 
CEPOL’s  activities  outweighed  the  costs  for  Member  States,  and  that  CEPOL’s  resources 
were  managed  well.  The  evaluation  also  concluded  that  there  were  some  inefficiencies 
related  to  the  Management  Board’s  decision-making  process,  CEPOL’s  planning  processes 
and  monitoring  procedures.  CEPOL’s  internal  structure  appears  to  operate  efficiently, 
although CEPOL’s staff turnover might have affected the Agency’s overall efficiency during 
the  2015  to  2020  period.  CEPOL  now  operates  under  a  hybrid  business  model,  which 
combines  the  traditional  grant  approach,  consisting  in  tendered  topics  among  the  eligible 
Framework  Partners,  and  the  ‘new’  CEPOL  Knowledge  Centre  method,  consisting  in  a 
cluster  of  experts  specialised  in  a  topic.  This  mixed  method  is  meant  to  streamline  and 
simplify  the  grants  management  and  has  been  put  in  place  after  the  Management  Board 
rejected  the  complete  abolition  of  the  grant  system.  CEPOL  was  generally  capable  of 
absorbing the EU funding it received. 

The  yearly  development  cycle  for  CEPOL’s  training  activities  is  deemed  to  be  too  short, 
jeopardising  quality.  Prior  to  CEPOL’s  development  of  training,  the  Management  Board  is 
required  to  make  decisions  about  topics,  guidelines  are  drafted,  and  Framework  Partners 
undergo  selection  procedures.  Once  these  processes  are  complete,  according  to  some 
stakeholders, there is little time left for quality content development, as the yearly cycle has 
come to an end. Consequently, Framework Partners with no ‘off-the-shelf’ training solutions 
that could be offered during this limited timeframe are discouraged from applying to organise 
a  course.  The  result  is  that  the  number  of  grant  applications  from  Framework  Partners  is 
constantly decreasing. 

Training  activities  that  have  been  outsourced  to  CEPOL’s  Framework  Partners  for 
development  and delivery  are less exposed to  CEPOL’s quality  assurance mechanism. This 
results in training activities of variable quality. CEPOL has a quality assurance mechanism in 
place to control its training activities from development to delivery, which was found to be 
effective  in  guaranteeing  high-quality  content  and  trainers  when  CEPOL  is  responsible  for 
both  developing  and  delivering  training.  Training  activities  outsourced  to  Framework 
Partners,  while  still  appreciated  by  participants,  are  sometimes  of  variable  quality  as  they 
have not always been systematically screened by the CEPOL’s quality assurance mechanism. 

CEPOL’s Cybercrime Academy is perceived to be an important step taken by the Agency to 
address  emerging  needs  but  should  be  further  improved.  The  establishment  of  CEPOL’s 
Cybercrime  Academy  received  mixed  reviews  from  stakeholders.  While  covering  a  very 
relevant  topic  and  where  demand  is  high,  questions  were  raised  on  its  actual  mission,  its 
limited size and the ability to attract experts to deliver trainings with relevant knowledge and 
skills.  The  activities  delivered  through  the  Cybercrime  Academy  have  also  been  negatively 
affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, as the on-site residential activities using the specialised 
facilities  could  not  take  place.  More  generally,  some  Member  State  and  EU-level 

3 

 
 
stakeholders were critical of CEPOL’s cybercrime training offering, questioning the quality, 
consistency and breadth of the training provided. 

The evaluation found that, while there is a good relationship between the CEPOL Executive 
Director and the Management Board, Management Board meetings are hampered by the low 
engagement  by  some  Members  and  the  disproportionate  focus  on  administrative  matters. 
Furthermore,  some  representation  issues  in  relation  to  the  CEPOL  Management  Board 
emerged  (i.e.  low  engagement  of  several  Member  States;  gender  imbalance;  no  customs  or 
border  officials;  the  levels  of  seniority  of  representatives  are  varied).  Board  Meetings  are 
attended by large numbers of delegates per Member State, not always properly representing 
the  full  spectrum  of  the  law  enforcement  bodies  and  their  inputs.  Several  stakeholders 
observed that, while most Management Board decisions are related to  content and strategy, 
the agenda of Board meetings is cramped with administrative items, leaving  relatively little 
room for strategic discussion. 

The number of CEPOL staff increased steadily over the period 2015 to 2020 (from 45 to 96). 
It  however  emerged  from  the  evaluation  that  the  relocation  of  CEPOL  from  the  United 
Kingdom  to  Hungary  and  the  subsequent  salary  correction  coefficient  applied  to  Budapest 
seems  to  play  a  key  factor  in  CEPOL’s  difficulty  in  attracting  and  retaining  staff.  This  is 
however not an isolated complaint among the decentralized Agencies. The turnover of staff 
has resulted in a shift in corporate culture and challenges in attracting appropriately qualified 
staff. 

It  was  confirmed  that  CEPOL’s  objectives  are  relevant  to  the  EU  needs  and  challenges 
defined  by  key  strategic  documents  and  CEPOL’s  training  offer  is  relevant  to  the  needs  of 
EU  Member  States.  The  evaluation  showed  that  CEPOL’s  objectives  respond  to  or  are 
aligned to key elements included in the Stockholm Programme6, the EU Agenda for Security7 
and  the  European  Law  Enforcement  Training  Scheme8.  Training  participants  across  the  27 
EU Member States also indicated that over the 2015 to 2020 period, CEPOL’s training offer 
adequately  addressed  the  needs  and  expectations  of  their  countries.  The  relevance  of 
CEPOL’s  objectives  and  training  activities  is  attributed  to:  (1)  the  alignment  of  CEPOL’s 
Annual Work Programmes with the European Agenda on Security9 (as mentioned above); (2) 
the introduction of the EU Strategic Training Need Assessment, which has allowed CEPOL 
to  link  training  priorities  to  the  needs  of  its  target  groups;  and  (3)  the  embedding  of  the 
European Multidisciplinary Platform Against Criminal Threats’ priorities into its residential 
and  online  training  activities.  Furthermore,  CEPOL  activities  are  widely  recognised  for 
building  trust  and  facilitating  the  development  of  cooperation  among  law  enforcement 
services. Indeed, the introduction of EU Strategic Training Need Assessment and Operational 
Training Need Assessments was an important step forward in ensuring a stronger alignment 
of  training  topics  and  activities  to  stakeholders’  needs.  Nevertheless,  there  were  mixed 
findings in relation to CEPOL’s ability to adapt its training offer to scientific, technological 
and socio-political developments. 

CEPOL’s  remit  and  activities  appear  to  be  coherent  with  and  complementary  to  other 
relevant actors at the EU level. Stakeholders from other Justice and Home Affairs Agencies 
were generally positive about their relationship with CEPOL. Yet, the extent of coordination 

6 Council of the European Union. 2009. The Stockholm Programme – An open and secure Europe serving and protecting the citizens. 
7  European  Commission  (2015).  The  European  Agenda  on  Security.  COM(2015)  185  final.  Retrieved  from:  https://ec.europa.eu/home-
affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/e-library/documents/basic-documents/docs/eu_agenda_on_security_en.pdf 
8 COM(2013) 172 final, Establishing a European Law Enforcement Training Scheme. 
9  European  Commission.  (2015).  The  European  Agenda  on  Security.  COM(2015)  185  final.  Retrieved  from:  https://ec.europa.eu/home-
affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/e-library/documents/basic-documents/docs/eu_agenda_on_security_en.pdf 

4 

 
 
                                                
is ad hoc, varies by Agency and by CEPOL’s level of engagement with JHA agencies and EU 
institutions.  This  means  that  there  is  some  room  for  improvement;  CEPOL  could  therefore 
adapt  its  working  approach  to  maximise  potential  synergies.  The  JHA  Training  Matrix,  a 
spreadsheet  which  Agencies  were  expected  to  feed  manually,  intended  to  ensure  structured 
coordination, was abandoned in 2019 due to reasons mainly linked to a lack of awareness and 
engagement  of  the  tool  among  JHA  agencies.  However,  no  structured  methodology  has 
replaced the JHA Training Matrix; instead, CEPOL undertakes coordination through a peer-
to-peer approach, notably through interaction in meetings of the Network of the Justice and 
Home Affairs Agencies10 and/or involvement in specific projects, which does not  guarantee 
the achievement of full synergies. 

The  evaluation  concluded  that,  regarding  the  EU  added  value,  all  consulted  stakeholder 
groups were of the view that CEPOL indeed provides added value with regard to training on 
specific  crime  areas  compared  to  what  is  offered  at  the  national  level.  CEPOL’s  objectives 
and  tasks  helped  to  improve  the  ability  of  Member  States  to  train  their  law  enforcement 
officials  compared  to  what  they  could  have  done  at  the  national  level.  Some  consulted 
officials stated that CEPOL usefully offered training on EU-level instruments and tools and 
provided insights into the EU dimension of cross-border tools, such as cross-border exchange 
of  electronic  evidence  and  international  law  enforcement  cooperation,  which  were  seldom 
covered in national training. As a by-product of that training, CEPOL’s activities are widely 
recognised  for  building  trust  and  facilitating  the  development  of  cooperation  among  law 
enforcement services. The majority of consulted stakeholders agreed that CEPOL’s activities 
as  a  whole  contribute  to  an  increase  in  mutual  trust  among  law  enforcement  organisations. 
Moreover, stakeholders confirmed that CEPOL’s activities have facilitated an increase in the 
number of opportunities for cooperation  and in  the quality  of  cooperation between national 
law  enforcement  services  at  EU  level  as  well  as,  to  a  smaller  extent,  on  a  bilateral  and 
regional  basis.  The  majority  of  training  participants  agree  that  CEPOL’s  training  activities 
provide concrete opportunities to establish networking with their European counterparts and 
that  CEPOL  adds  unique  value  to  develop  cooperation  that  would  not  have  otherwise  been 
achieved  through  national  means.  This  outcome  is  particularly  attributed  to  CEPOL’s 
exchange programme and residential activities. The evaluation found that CEPOL’s work in 
third  countries  is  highly  valued  by  informed  stakeholders,  though  some  within  CEPOL’s 
governance are not aware of these activities. In pursuit of its mandate, CEPOL extended its 
support  to  the  EU  external  policy  by  developing  the  law  enforcement  capacity  in  partner 
countries  in  the  EU  neighbourhood.  CEPOL  capacity  building  projects  in  third  countries 
effectively  contribute  towards  improving  the  stability  in  the  EU  neighbourhood  and  in 
building trust with neighbouring countries. Although training in third countries is a crowded 
market, CEPOL is praised for its commitment to provide training responding to the needs of 
partner  third  countries.  As  per  mandate,  CEPOL  manages  dedicated  Union  External 
Assistance funds to fulfil its objectives in third countries. 

10 The Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) agencies’  Network includes nine agencies: CEPOL, EASO, EIGE, EMCDDA, eu-LISA, Eurojust, 
Europol,  FRA  and  Frontex.  Since  2010,  the  JHA  agencies  have  in  turn  hosted  the  Network.  In  2021,  Frontex  hosted  the  network, 
coordinating its activities and carrying out the secretariat function. In 2022 it will be CEPOL’s turn to chair the Network. The agencies work 
on a wide range of important areas, including migration and border management, drug trafficking and combating organised crime, human 
trafficking and gender equality. Since these areas have a lot in common, the Network was established to make use of the synergies and share 
information.  The  hosting  agency  reports  to  the  Council’s  Standing  Committee  on  Operational  Cooperation  on  Internal  Security  (COSI) 
regarding the Network’s progress and achievements. 

5 

 
 
                                                
3.  LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The evaluation highlights the importance for CEPOL to streamline its activities to focus on 
key priorities within the European Multidisciplinary Platform Against Criminal Threats, the 
Security  Union  Strategy  and  recent  internal  security  strategies,  while  remaining  open  to 
assessing  and  catering  for  the  specific  training  requests  of  Member  States  within  this 
framework.  In  that  regard,  CEPOL  should  increase  its  cooperation  with  other  Agencies  in 
general, and with Europol in particular, in order to maximise synergies as widely as possible. 
In  this  context,  CEPOL  has  accepted  to  take  the  lead  in  the  coordination  of  the  common 
horizontal strategic goal on “capacity building through training, networking and innovation” 
during  the  upcoming  cycle  2022-2025  of  the  European  Multidisciplinary  Platform  Against 
Criminal  Threats.  Likewise,  CEPOL  should  increase  its  coordinating  role,  also  when 
contributing to implement all the internal security strategies, including the Counter Terrorism 
Agenda, adopted in December 202011, and both EU Strategies on Organised Crime12 and on 
Trafficking13, adopted in early 2021. 

Linked  to  this,  it  is  paramount  for  CEPOL  to  play  a  central  role  in  coordinating  law 
enforcement training among all different  stakeholders, and notably the other JHA agencies. 
Rather than being in competition with other EU training stakeholders, CEPOL should aim to 
become “the” EU hub for law enforcement training. While the Agency is not in a position to 
cater for all training needs itself, it has a unique role in mapping and monitoring the catalogue 
of  existing  law  enforcement  training  offers  provided  by  all  JHA  agencies  and  other 
stakeholders  and  to  act  as  a  portal  for  law  enforcement  practitioners  looking  for  suitable 
training opportunities at the EU level. 

At  the  same  time,  it  is  equally  important  for  Member  State  representatives  to  further 
strengthen  coordination  within  their  countries,  with  a  view  to  gathering  the  views  and 
addressing the needs of the entire law enforcement community. In particular, the evaluation 
highlighted  the  importance  of  the  role  of  CEPOL’s  Management  Board,  as  a  body  which 
should reflect and relay all inputs and demands beyond the academic world, notably from the 
operational level in their Member States, to be fed into the Board’s strategic decisions. In this 
context, attention should also be paid to gender representation within the Management Board, 
as also highlighted by the European Parliament, which – in the context of the 2019 discharge 
procedure – urged CEPOL to ensure gender balance when nominating their members. 

In  the  same  vein,  CEPOL  should  aim  to  reinforce  the  outreach  and  impact  of  the  Agency. 
This could be achieved, for instance, by integrating cascading (i.e. multiplying the outreach 
as  a  result  from  the  training  of  trainers  and  peer-to-peer  transfer  of  knowledge)  more 
systematically into all activities, stepping up the  train-the-trainer programme, with a special 
focus  on  law  enforcement  senior  managers,  and  continuing  to  develop  and  strengthen  its 
online offer.  This  would help  CEPOL to  better  address  its target  audience, as broadened in 
the  legal  basis  in  force  since  2016,  now  including  prosecutors,  customs  officials,  and  other 
persons involved in law enforcement (e.g. forensic lab personnel). 

Another  sphere  needing  attention  is  the  Cybercrime  Academy,  and  more  generally,  the 
training  offers  addressing  specific  technical  skills,  such  as  cryptocurrency,  access  to  (big) 
data and encrypted data, which can hardly be covered by single Member States alone. 

11 
12 
13 

COM(2020) 795 final. 
COM(2021) 170 final. 
COM(2021) 171 final. 

6 

 
 
                                                
Finally, as regards the activities carried out by CEPOL in third countries, it is confirmed that 
these should continue, where possible, and in  line with  the EU’s  external  policy. However, 
considering the resources available to the Agency, they should not deflect attention from the 
core priorities referred to above, while ensuring that they meet concrete needs and have a real 
added value. 

4.  CONCLUSIONS 

The  evaluation  recognised  the  overall  positive  contribution  of  the  Agency  to  the  policy 
needs,  objectives  and  values  of  the  Security  Union  and  their  valuable  activity  in  third 
countries.  In  all  five  criteria  evaluated,  CEPOL  was  globally  found  to  score  well,  being 
effective  in  carrying  out  relevant  activities  contributing  to  a  European  law  enforcement 
culture, providing added value compared to the national level, utilising resources efficiently 
and in a coherent manner within the EU security architecture. 

While  acknowledging  CEPOL’s  contribution  to  enhancing  security  through  training  of  and 
building  a  common  culture  among  law  enforcement  actors,  the  evaluation  identified  some 
issues  deserving  attention.  Those  concern  the  internal  functioning  of  the  Agency,  its 
corporate  image  and  culture,  and  the  relationship  with  the  Management  Board.  Based  on 
these, the evaluation issued the recommendations outlined in chapter 3 above, which do not 
require  changes  affecting  either  the  budgetary  resources  or  the  legal  framework,  and  are 
therefore relatively easy to implement. 

As  envisaged  in  Article  32  of  the  CEPOL  Regulation,  the  next  five-year  evaluation  will 
assess how these recommendations have been addressed. 

Looking  at  the  medium  to  long  term,  key  questions  will  have  to  be  raised,  as  to  the  very 
future of training of EU  law enforcement and the role of the Agency, in  a rapidly evolving 
security environment and in a digital age. 

Notably, consideration should be given to how the Agency should best play its role given its 
mandate and resources. 

7