P9_TA(2024)0007 – Implementation of the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027 – European Parliament resolution of 16 January 2024 on the implementation of the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027 (2023/2002(INI))
Date: 2024-01-16
Institutions: Committee on Culture and Education, European Parliament
Subjects: EU programme, access to education, cooperation in the field of education, education, educational exchange, sport, vocational education, vocational training, young person, youth policy








C_202405701EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/5701


17.10.2024






P9_TA(2024)0007

Implementation of the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027


European Parliament resolution of 16 January 2024 on the implementation of the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027 (2023/2002(INI))

(C/2024/5701)



The European Parliament,







—


having regard to Articles 165 and 166 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 establishing Erasmus+: the Union Programme for education and training, youth and sport and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013 (1),










—


having regard to its resolution of 15 September 2020 on effective measures to ‘green’ Erasmus+, Creative Europe and the European Solidarity Corps (2),










—


having regard to its resolution of 11 November 2021 on the European Education Area: a shared holistic approach (3),










—


having regard to its resolution of 23 November 2021 entitled ‘EU sports policy: assessment and possible ways forward’
                   (4),










—


having regard to its resolution of 19 May 2022 on establishing the European Education Area by 2025 – micro-credentials, individual learning accounts and learning for a sustainable environment (5),










—


having regard to its resolution of 23 June 2022 on the implementation of inclusion measures within Erasmus+ 2014-2020 (6),










—


having regard to the study entitled ‘EU funding programmes 2021-2027 in culture, media, education, youth and sports: first lessons, challenges and future perspectives – Erasmus+’ published by its Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union on 11 September 2023
                   (7),










—


having regard to the study entitled ‘Early implementation of four 2021-2027 EU programmes: Erasmus+, Creative Europe, European Solidarity Corps and Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (Strand 3)’ published by its Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union on 20 July 2023
                   (8),










—


having regard to Rule 54 of its Rules of Procedure and Article 1(e) of, and Annex 3 to, the decision of the Conference of Presidents of 12 December 2002 on the procedure for granting authorisation to draw up own-initiative reports,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Culture and Education (A9-0413/2023),










A.


whereas Erasmus+ (‘the programme’) is an EU flagship programme supporting education, training, youth and sport in Europe and beyond;










B.


whereas Erasmus+ is crucial in fostering a European sense of belonging and understanding between diverse cultures, enabling the strengthening of a European identity that exists alongside national identities;










C.


whereas the 2021-2027 programme has an estimated overall budget of EUR 26.2 billion and places a strong focus on inclusion, the green and digital transitions, and promoting young people’s participation in democratic life;










D.


whereas the European Universities initiative has been much more successful and far-reaching than initially envisaged; whereas the ambition is to have 60 European Universities Alliances involving more than 500 higher education institutions by mid-2024;










E.


whereas demand for the programme largely exceeds the available financial resources, negatively affecting participation and the number of projects that can be funded;










F.


whereas the programme contributes to reducing inequalities and improving social cohesion and gender equality at European and Member State levels by increasingly focusing on learning mobility that is accessible for all, in particular for people with fewer opportunities and small-scale organisations;










G.


whereas inclusion officers play an important role in promoting diversity and inclusion in Erasmus+;










H.


whereas the participation of individuals with fewer opportunities, adult learners, young people, third-country nationals and small-scale partnerships and organisations is still hindered by heavy administrative requirements;










I.


whereas the programme’s objectives are being pursued through three key actions (KAs), namely ‘Learning mobility of individuals’ (KA1), ‘Cooperation among organisations and institutions’ (KA2) and ‘Support to policy development and cooperation’ (KA3);










J.


whereas the rising costs of living, high inflation rates and other challenges are putting additional pressure on the programme’s budget;










K.


whereas students with fewer resources face greater obstacles to enjoying Erasmus+ student mobility; whereas the increase in housing rental prices and the scarcity of student accommodation make it difficult for students to find affordable accommodation and the problem has worsened in recent years;










L.


whereas uncertainties or delays in the timing of contracting and payments to beneficiaries add to their administrative burden and complicate financial planning, which is particularly detrimental to small organisations and newcomers, thereby undermining the ambitions to achieve inclusion and diversity;










M.


whereas the programme has been a driving force for the European Education Area and should continue to respond to future trends in education to keep up with societal and technological change;










N.


whereas the professional development of youth workers positively impacts the quality of projects in Erasmus+ and the disparities in youth workers’ status in different Member States hinders the development of projects in the youth sector of the programme;







State of affairs and successes










1.


Highlights that the programme focuses on an increasing variety of measures, including lifelong learning, better inclusion of people with fewer opportunities (9) and the removal of barriers to learning mobility, in particular the lack of automatic recognition of qualifications, and financial barriers;












2.


Acknowledges that the existing structure works well, successfully bringing together formerly separate programmes, thus providing a good funding ecosystem;












3.


Acknowledges the importance of a sufficient variety of actions rather than a one-size-fits-all approach;












4.


Values the ‘learning community’ that Erasmus+ has managed to create, made up of participants, beneficiaries, stakeholders, National Agencies (NAs) and EU institutions;












5.


Welcomes the signing of a memorandum of understanding between the European Education and Culture Executive Agency and NAs; highlights the importance of improving and maintaining a constructive and cooperative communication between these two parties;












6.


Expects the memorandum of understanding between the European Education and Culture Executive Agency and NAs to produce tangible improvements, leading to the exchange of good practices and the clarification of roles and responsibilities to achieve consistency, coherence and effective communication by NAs;












7.


Points out that learning mobility and small-scale partnerships have proven to be highly effective activities to reach out to the wider public across Europe, providing excellent value for money considering the number of individual participants;












8.


Recognises that learning mobility and training of staff is a powerful multiplier for mobility among learners;












9.


Is aware that the programme’s horizontal priorities have been very well received by different sectors and stakeholders;












10.


Welcomes the ambition to bring about a digital transformation of the programme, and digital learning opportunities;












11.


Emphasises that these formats may be used as a valuable complement to physical mobility in specific situations, but do not provide the same quality of experience and benefits, nor do they act as a substitute for meaningful interaction on the ground;












12.


Appreciates the steps being taken to increase the amount of green travel and the higher funding rates being paid for more environmentally friendly ways of travelling; encourages even more efforts to achieve this goal, though this should not become a barrier for access to the programme in areas where green options are not yet accessible;












13.


Recognises that the new flagship actions have demonstrated their added value;












14.


Acknowledges the warm welcome of the European Universities initiative by higher education institutions and its centrality in facilitating efforts to remove obstacles to international cooperation in higher education; highlights that mobility projects, the creation of common curricula and research cooperation between universities in Europe are instrumental to address needs in strategic areas; stresses the importance of the initiative to the European strategy for universities;












15.


Welcomes the steps taken towards a joint European degree label and common European diplomas;












16.


Welcomes the new opportunities provided by Teacher Academies;












17.


Welcomes the newly established Centres of Vocational Excellence and notes that their successful roll-out plays a key role in modernising vocational education and training (VET) provision in Europe;












18.


Notes that DiscoverEU, which was initiated by Parliament, has become a well-established, popular and easy-to-access informal learning activity which brings young people, including those with fewer opportunities, closer to the EU, encouraging their future involvement in other EU projects;












19.


Highlights that centralised actions in sport managed by the European Education and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) proved useful to promote the European dimension in sport; recognises that the introduction of mobility in 2023 as a decentralised action boosts the exchange of sports staff and coaches;












20.


Recalls that the 2021-2022 budget absorption was almost 100 % despite a delayed start to the programme;












21.


Notes the necessary adjustments owing to the pandemic, with a temporary reduction in funding for learning mobility and increased funding for cooperation and innovation partnerships;












22.


Appreciates the swift reaction and enhanced flexibility of the programme to support Ukrainian students, teachers, educators and educational institutions;












23.


Notes that some processes for applying have improved, by being made simpler and more efficient;












24.


Highlights the very low error rates in comparison with other EU funding programmes, especially considering the programme’s complexity;












25.


Highlights that all interested countries meeting the requirements of the programme, including Switzerland and the UK, are welcome to join the programme and thus contribute to European learning mobility; supports the participation of civil society organisations from associated countries;






Challenges and problems










26.


Points out that insufficient grants to cover the costs of learning mobility and delays in payments are among the biggest deterrents to participants in mobility projects;












27.


Regrets that many young people with fewer opportunities are kept from spending longer periods of time abroad by financial or other obstacles;












28.


Acknowledges that the process of NAs drawing up national plans for inclusion and diversity has been difficult;












29.


Regrets the fact that complicated administrative processes at all stages considerably hinder the participation of newcomers and small-scale organisations, particularly in the school, youth, VET and sports sectors, as well as in adult education;












30.


Regrets that it remains time-consuming to apply for Erasmus+ funding and that applicants often cannot apply without external support, discouraging the participation of small organisations and benefiting project-writing consultancies;












31.


Is concerned by the fact that almost a third of students in higher education mobility reported that they did not receive full credit recognition and calls for action to align with the objectives laid down in the Erasmus Charter for Higher Education; underscores that this hinders the creation of a genuine European Education Area and forms a significant barrier to students who depend on completing their degree in a timely manner;












32.


Regrets the lack of encouragement of partnerships between schools and non-profit organisations which have the knowledge to help teachers access quality learning mobility;












33.


Considers that the recognition of VET as a path of equal value to academic studies is overdue; moreover, is worried by the remaining obstacles to seamless VET mobility, such as policies fragmented between national and EU level;












34.


Regrets the insufficient funding for Centres of Vocational Excellence in view of the demand for them;












35.


Is disappointed by the low uptake of adult learning and education activities, given its importance;












36.


Welcomes the lump sum approach being applied in cooperation projects, as many beneficiaries acknowledge it as an effective simplification measure; notes, however, that the requirement of ‘continuous reporting’ can be a burden, especially for smaller organisations;












37.


Regrets the fact that in 2022, the number of beneficiaries of centralised youth operating grants was reduced drastically, severely impacting an already COVID-weakened, volunteer-led youth civil society sector;












38.


Regrets also the significantly fewer successful applications from youth and volunteer-led organisations for centralised grants, particularly in the European Youth Together and Key Action 2, Cooperation Partnerships in the field of Youth, and the subsequent reduction in the latter’s budget in 2023;












39.


Notes that the Erasmus+ sport sector has very limited funds in some areas, particularly for the organisation of events, thus limiting its scope;












40.


Deeply regrets the slow and incomplete development of the IT infrastructure and the improper functioning of IT tools such as the Beneficiary and Project Management modules and the Online Language Support (OLS), which increases the workload of all those involved in the programme’s implementation, discourages the participation of newcomers and undermines the programme’s ambition to widen participation; notes that this inhibits optimal implementation, risks flawed and incomplete programme documentation and monitoring, and jeopardises evidence-based development in the future and notes further that similar issues exist with IT tools in other EU-funded programmes, including the European Solidarity Corps;












41.


Deplores the fact that IT issues also severely affect data availability, which is essential for the ongoing mid-term review, thus necessitating a much more onerous evaluation methodology and exacerbating the administrative burden;












42.


Points out the need to take the impact of AI seriously, since it has already facilitated fraudulent actors, but could also ease the workload of NAs and improve data collection;












43.


Underlines the existing inconsistencies with regard to reporting expectations, evaluation results and general information-sharing across the different NAs, which creates different implementation standards for beneficiaries and affects equity in the programme’s functioning;












44.


Is concerned about the shortage of professionals and volunteers to implement the programme and requires clarification as to whether this has an impact on the absorption of funds;






Improving the current and designing the future Erasmus+ programme










45.


Calls on the Commission, the Member States, national authorities and NAs to keep Erasmus+ close to the people and ensure it remains a bottom-up ‘citizens’ programme’ offering quality education and mobility opportunities for young people and learners of all ages;












46.


Emphasises that the overarching purpose of Erasmus+ is broad and goes beyond labour market needs;












47.


Asks that the programme be simplified at all levels, including by assessing whether existing (sub-)actions can be merged, and that this EU flagship programme not be overloaded with new tasks and initiatives that dilute its core objective;












48.


Calls on the Commission to remove all barriers, including financial, linguistic and administrative barriers, such as those created by the new ICT tools, in order to achieve a truly inclusive programme embracing diversity, while not reducing the number of grants available to beneficiaries;












49.


Insists that digital tools should be optimised by 2025 at the latest to create a user-friendly, accessible, reliable, speedy and efficient environment that respects data protection;












50.


Emphasises that issues with the IT infrastructure similar to those experienced in the current programme period are unacceptable; calls on the Commission to stabilise the existing IT-tools and not change them with each new programming period, and expects the IT infrastructure of the next Erasmus+ generation to be fully operational from day one, particularly with regard to the Beneficiary Module;












51.


Calls for thorough trials and consultations with NAs and end users before rolling out additional features or new IT tools, and for compliance with the EU Web Accessibility Directive to be ensured;












52.


Calls on the Commission to correct the limited transparency and usability of the results section ‘Projects funded under this topic’ in the portal for funding and tender opportunities, so that data can be downloaded by stakeholders to analyse the characteristics of successful and rejected projects in terms of organisation, budget amounts, lead country of project or project type;












53.


Calls on the Hungarian Government to comply immediately with the rule of law and EU values and to put in place the necessary reforms so that Hungarian students, teachers and researchers may benefit from the Erasmus+ programme and contribute to the broader goals of European educational and research cooperation;












54.


Requests that the Commission consider charging for digital tools and online activities to support learning separately, particularly when they are used to prepare for an activity, in order to avoid excessively high advance payments;












55.


Insists that the simplification of application procedures and requirements and the improvement of the guidelines, particularly for individuals, must remain a high priority, as they are barriers to the programme; points out that inadequacies often affect young, first-time participants the most;












56.


Requests proportionate registration, application and reporting processes in terms of the length of documents and a reduction in administrative and bureaucratic requirements, particularly for smaller grants;












57.


Points out that proposal forms need to be accompanied by clear rules and guidance in understandable language; calls on the NAs to further improve feedback to applicants;












58.


Calls on the Commission to provide continuous training to EACEA project officers and NAs’ staff and clear communication about the interpretation of Erasmus+ initiatives;












59.


Recalls that the early, transparent and reliable communication of deadlines and steps is the basis for fair and equal access to the programme;












60.


Calls on the NAs to organise information sessions on reporting requirements at the beginning of the projects; suggests a comprehensive revision of reporting and accounting so that the same information is not requested repeatedly;












61.


Calls on the NAs to empower their inclusion officers to implement the plans for inclusion and diversity;












62.


Calls on the Commission to strengthen its work with stakeholders on European ‘inclusion targets’ for the programme and to make available data on projects which include participants with fewer opportunities;












63.


Calls for a better balance between quantitative (the number of beneficiaries and supported projects) and qualitative objectives within the programme, and emphasises that improving the quality of education must continue to be a focus of Erasmus+;












64.


Urges the Commission to step up efforts on the programme’s digital transformation, in particular on achieving an ‘Erasmus Without Paper’ for all education and training sectors; calls on the Commission to establish the ‘European Student Card’ following the initial planning, and to help higher education institutions adopt digital learning mobility nominations and transcripts of records by 2025;












65.


Asks for an increase in the upfront payments for beneficiaries with fewer opportunities and to provide beneficiaries with timely payments;












66.


Asks for a more frequent and regular review and adjustments to the inflation rate index of grants and unit costs in order to align them with the cost of living, inflation and the needs of beneficiaries;












67.


Calls on the Commission and the Member States to help address the problems of accommodation for Erasmus+ mobility students;












68.


Calls on the Commission to evaluate the alliances’ readiness for autonomy together with them before the end of their funding period, in order to determine whether they need some form of targeted support to achieve autonomy within a reasonable time frame, as well as for the stabilisation and deepening of alliances through project-related future funding;












69.


Calls on the Commission to discuss with the co-legislators, as early as possible, the sustainable continuation of the European Universities Alliances as a flagship initiative; stresses that such a future-oriented vision must make these alliances the spearhead of European higher education; recalls that the European University Alliances should serve as models and that the Commission and the Member States should create framework conditions which are fully interlinked to the European Higher Education Area and the European Education Area as well as a legal status for European Universities Alliances;












70.


Calls on the Commission to use the programme’s tools to encourage accommodations that would open up sectors where women are underrepresented such as IT, science, technology, engineering, the arts and mathematics, entrepreneurship and VET, and subsequently to facilitate women’s integration into these segments of the labour market; suggests that the Commission foster gender balance in the programme;












71.


Stresses that by improving co-creation, Erasmus+ can support education to respond to new societal needs with methodologies that foster the development of an adapted set of knowledge, skills, attitudes and values, and draws attention particularly to the programme’s contribution to the transition towards digital education;












72.


Calls for the wider use of and clearer rules for virtual and blended learning and the building of infrastructure for digitalised and remote learning opportunities, extending them to other educational sectors in order to facilitate smoother and more flexible transitions and to facilitate inclusion;












73.


Suggests the development of synergies between Erasmus+ and other multiannual financial framework (MFF) programmes to fund improvements in access to educational tools for areas and communities where connectivity or access to technologies are low, similarly to what is being tested in a preparatory action;












74.


Asks for eTwinning and the European School gateway to be integrated fully and seamlessly into Erasmus+ and to be better promoted among teachers and school staff;












75.


Asks the Commission and the Member States to promote the European dimension in teachers’ professional development and to encourage mobility among them; asks for provisions to be made to substitute teachers or to compensate them for time spent on Erasmus+ projects;












76.


Suggests that the ‘Jean Monnet for Schools’ action become decentralised so that it is managed by the NAs in order to simplify access for schools;












77.


Underlines the need to allocate more funding to opportunities aimed at primary schools and pupils, given the very high level of demand in most programme countries;












78.


Calls on the Commission to resolve the issues caused by the quantitative limitation implicit in institutional accreditation, given the programme’s ambition to be inclusive, particularly with regard to schools, given their sheer number across the EU;












79.


Calls on the Commission to examine how synergies between Erasmus+, other MFF programmes and the EU Strategy on Combating Antisemitism and Fostering Jewish Life (2021-2030) can be established and promoted so that secondary schools have better access to the network of Holocaust memorial sites and their pupils are given the opportunity to visit at least one of these sites in Europe during their school careers;












80.


Requests that the Commission issue a call for projects to enable secondary school students to visit a site connected with the atrocities committed by totalitarian regimes in Europe;












81.


Asks the Commission to issue calls for proposals in Erasmus+ to support schools in the fight against all forms of bullying and discrimination, and to enhance school psychological counselling;












82.


Calls on the Commission to foster the role of Erasmus+ in increasing a sense of belonging, civic engagement, a better understanding of the Union and support for European values, and to turn the programme into a true promoter of European democracy;












83.


Asks the Commission to introduce the EU citizenship education component with curricular and extracurricular activities, connected to learning mobility, which are certified by micro-credentials, develop active citizenship and embrace non-discrimination;












84.


Welcomes the action’s learning component and asks the Commission to assess its outcomes with a view to strengthening the educational dimension by establishing stronger synergies between learning mobility and DiscoverEU;












85.


Calls for the development of DiscoverEU in order to promote a more inclusive action;












86.


Suggests considering ticket quotas for group trips, as insisting too rigidly that all peers in a group must be aged exactly 18 to qualify as a DiscoverEU group can be counterproductive;












87.


Asks the Commission to assess options for a more integrated approach towards youth activities across EU programmes, learning from the experience of the European Year of Youth 2022 and in consultation with youth stakeholders on the design, implementation and evaluation of grants and instruments in the field of youth;












88.


Calls on the Commission to strengthen the programme’s alignment with the EU Youth Strategy, the 11 youth goals and the outcomes of the EU Youth Dialogue; calls for a better definition of objectives and roles for projects in Key Action 2 in the field of youth in a way that reinforces youth work, the professional development of youth workers and non-formal education;












89.


Calls on the EACEA and the NAs to create a communications strategy that reaches out to new youth organisations, particularly those led by or working with youth with fewer opportunities, and to provide them with additional support in writing project proposals and capacity building using Support, Advanced Learning and Training Opportunities for Youth (SALTO);












90.


Recalls the need for sufficient funds for small partnerships in all sectors of the programme to facilitate entry by small organisations and inexperienced persons, and to offer them real prospects for development;












91.


Insists that the programme is key to establishing the European Education Area and asks for greater synergies with the European Solidarity Corps programme; urges the Commission and the Member States to initiate an open method of coordination on the mutual recognition of competences acquired during periods of European mobility or civic engagement;












92.


Suggests that the programme offer greater support to measures such as individual learning accounts and micro-credentials which improve the permeability of educational systems;












93.


Stresses the importance of promoting mobility among VET students, among other reasons in order to reach young people with fewer opportunities; calls on the Member States to develop synergies between Erasmus+ and other funding programmes to facilitate learning mobility among VET learners and low-skilled workers and to improve territorial and regional cooperation;












94.


Urges the development of a dedicated online tool tailored to the needs of teachers, instructors and learners in initial and continuing VET, as the current tools have proven insufficient;












95.


Calls on the Commission to discuss with the co-legislators, as early as possible, its vision on the sustainable continuation of the Centres of Vocational Excellence as a flagship initiative;












96.


Calls for a holistic educational approach within the Centres of Vocational Excellence and calls on the Member States to make these centres the driving force behind the development of joint European VET qualifications, curricula and diplomas;












97.


Calls on the Commission to study the status of VET learners who are on mobility; insists that the organisations hosting apprenticeships be required to sign a quality charter in line with the Erasmus Charter for Higher Education and calls for better monitoring of the working conditions and for adequate remuneration for the individuals participating in Erasmus+ apprenticeships;












98.


Suggests that the programme continue to support projects that promote a wide variety of skills, including artisanal crafts, in order to preserve them;












99.


Calls on the Commission to reconsider its adult learning strategy in collaboration with NAs and relevant stakeholders, given the target of 60 % of adults participating in adult learning and education by 2030;












100.


Calls on the Commission to increase the visibility of the support available for adult learning and education activities; suggests that unspent funds are not immediately siphoned away to other actions but used for cooperation in adult education and to ease the uptake of mobility among adult learners with fewer opportunities through awareness campaigns, easy-to-fill-in applications and greater synergies with the European Social Fund Plus across Member States;












101.


Calls on the Commission to improve communication on and the promotion of sport funding in Erasmus+; calls for a better representation of sport associations in the awarded projects, as non-sport organisations such as non-governmental organisations and consultancies are often over-represented as beneficiaries;












102.


Stresses that the programme’s capacity to provide support in crisis situations is necessarily very limited and the Commission should additionally facilitate cooperation between Member States to address common challenges comprehensively, safeguarding the programme from being overloaded;












103.


Calls on the Commission and the NAs to endeavour to ensure that prospective participants, who are third country nationals, residing lawfully in the EU, do not face difficulties during the application process, making the programme truly inclusive;












104.


Points out that cooperation with non-associated third countries can be very difficult, and calls on the Commission to systematically monitor, improve and strengthen the international dimension of the programme;












105.


Asks that closer attention be paid to issues concerning the international dimension of the programme such as data protection rules for non-EU countries, the impact of geopolitical issues and visa-related issues;












106.


Calls on the Commission to provide for the necessary programme flexibility in the design of the next generation of Erasmus+, while ensuring uniformity and proper scrutiny of the programme, including by Parliament;












107.


Insists that NAs, beneficiaries and other stakeholders, including young people, and Parliament are actively involved in a continual, dialogue-based process to optimise the current and the next generation of Erasmus+; suggests that the Commission explore how AI tools can be used to aid with the evaluation of the programme and provide clearer insights into needs and possible developments without replacing human decision-making;












108.


Asks the Commission to re-evaluate the need for increased visibility of the direct link between the EU and Erasmus+ as its flagship programme in order to increase awareness of that link among current and future beneficiaries;












109.


Urges the Commission and the Member States to ensure that synergies between Erasmus+ and other programmes such as Horizon Europe or the European Social Fund Plus are fully exploited, and that the programme is better connected with other EU policies such as the 2020-2025 anti-racism action plan; and the EU Disability Rights Strategy 2021-2030;












110.


Requires timely updates from the new inter-programme group between the Commission’s Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture and its Directorate-General for Research and Innovation on its results in terms of synergies between Horizon Europe and Erasmus+;












111.


Stresses the need to accelerate synergies between the European Education Area, the Digital Education Action Plan and the European Skills Agenda in shaping a digital education policy;












112.


Requests the Commission, the EACEA and NAs to analyse and systematically implement concrete measures that break down existing silos in the programme structure in order to increase synergies between different educational areas and actors so as to improve permeability and rebalance the programme, while maintaining the distinctions that are necessary for effective political scrutiny;












113.


Calls for centralised and decentralised actions to be better linked and for the use of flexible funding instruments such as micro-grants to be enhanced; suggests that given the positive experiences gained with micro-grants during the pandemic, they should be maintained in a targeted way;












114.


Calls on the Commission to conduct proper piloting and testing when introducing new administrative measures such as top-ups and lump sums to avoid creating additional administrative barriers to beneficiaries;












115.


Calls for operating grants to support the development of strategic sectors that often rely on volunteers and for structured and regular cooperation between stakeholders and beneficiary representative organisations;












116.


Calls for an improvement in the quality of evaluations of operating grants;












117.


Encourages stronger incentives and better guidance so that the Seal of Excellence label will start having a tangible positive impact on Erasmus+;












118.


Calls on the Commission to consistently follow up on any indications that an accredited beneficiary does not respect European values, with the aim of ensuring confidence in the established accreditation mechanism and to take appropriate action as a result, which must lead to expulsion if the allegations are substantiated and cannot be immediately and permanently remedied; points to the need for stricter monitoring in the next programing period;












119.


Calls on the Commission to take better account of fraud, such as letterbox companies or inclusion top-ups that do not actually reach groups with fewer opportunities, and to make the actions taken to counter such abuses more transparent;












120.


Calls for more gradual and predictable budgetary increases in the next multiannual financial framework programming period, and insists that, from the very beginning in 2028, funding levels must not be less than those of the last year of the current programme (2027) in order to ensure the smooth continuity and stability of the programme’s actions and activities;












121.


Declares its determination to ensure a substantial increase in the Erasmus+ budget in the 2028-2034 programming period and commits itself to tripling the current envelope, taking the requirements of the programme into account;
°
° °












122.


Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Erasmus+ National Agencies.






(1)  
            OJ L 189, 28.5.2021, p. 1.

(2)  
            OJ C 385, 22.9.2021, p. 2.

(3)  
            OJ C 205, 20.5.2022, p. 17.

(4)  
            OJ C 224, 8.6.2022, p. 2.

(5)  
            OJ C 479, 16.12.2022, p. 65.

(6)  
            OJ C 32, 27.1.2023, p. 58.

(7)  Study – ‘EU funding programmes 2021-2027 in culture, media, education, youth and sports: first lessons, challenges and future perspectives: Erasmus+’, European Parliament, Directorate-General for Internal Policies, Policy Department B – Structural and Cohesion Policies, 11 September 2023.

(8)  Study – ‘Early implementation of four 2021-2027 EU programmes: Erasmus+, Creative Europe, European Solidarity Corps and Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (Strand 3)’, European Parliament, Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services, 20 July 2023.

(9)  For a definition of people with fewer opportunities see Article 2(25) of Regulation (EU) 2021/817.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5701/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)