COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Evaluation 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 interim evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027
Date: 2024-04-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: EU strategy, European cooperation, education policy, equal treatment, job access, social integration, social participation, young person, youth employment, youth policy

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 11.4.2024  SWD(2024) 90 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Evaluation  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 interim evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 {COM(2024) 162 final}  
 
 
Table of contents 

1. 

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 4 

2.  WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION? ......................... 6 

2.1.  DESCRIPTION OF THE EU YOUTH STRATEGY AND ITS OBJECTIVES ............. 6 

2.2.  POINTS OF COMPARISON ............................................................................................... 9 

3.  HOW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATION PERIOD? ......... 13 

3.1.  CURRENT STATE OF PLAY ........................................................................................... 13 

4. 

EVALUATION FINDINGS ................................................................................................. 25 

4.1.  TO WHAT EXTENT WAS THE INTERVENTION SUCCESSFUL AND WHY? ..... 26 

4.2.  HOW HAS THE EU INTERVENTION MADE A DIFFERENCE AND TO WHOM?
 .............................................................................................................................................. 51 

4.3.  IS THE INTERVENTION STILL RELEVANT?............................................................ 56 

5.  WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED? ................................... 60 

ANNEX I. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION ............................................................................... 66 

ANNEX II. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED ..................................... 68 

ANNEX III. EVALUATION MATRIX ......................................................................................... 75 

ANNEX IV. OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND  COSTS  AND, WHERE RELEVANT, TABLE 
ON SIMPLIFICATION AND BURDEN REDUCTION. .................................................... 90 

ANNEX V. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION – SYNOPSIS REPORT ................................. 98 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Glossary 

Term or acronym 

Meaning or definition 

ALMA 

BIK+  

CERV 

CoE 

CSO 

DG EAC 

DG 

EACEA 

EAGFRD 

EAGF 

EQ 

ERDF 

ESF+ 

ESN 

Aim – Learn – Master – Achieve 

Better Internet for Kids Strategy  

Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values Programme 

Council of Europe 

Civil Society Organisation 

Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and 
Culture 

Directorate-General 

European Education and Culture Executive Agency 

European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development 

European Agricultural Guarantee Fund 

Evaluation Questions  

European Regional Development Fund  

European Social Fund Plus 

Erasmus Student Network  

EUYD, EU Youth Dialogue  European Union Youth Dialogue 

EUYS 

EYE 

The EU Youth Strategy  

European Youth Event 

Youth Portal 

European Youth Portal 

Year 

FNAPs 

NEETs 

OMC 

TFEU 

European Year of Youth 

Future National Activities Planners  

Not in Education, Employment or Training  

Open Method of Coordination  

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 

2 

 
 
 
RRF 

UN SDG 

Recovery and Resilience Facility 

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 

3 

 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This staff working document describes the purpose, methodology and findings of the European 
Commission’s interim evaluation of the European Union Youth Strategy 2019-2027 (hereafter 
referred to as ‘EUYS’), which is the framework for EU cooperation in the youth field based on 
the Council Resolution of 18 December 20181.   

Purpose  

Based  on  the  Council  Resolution  establishing  the  EUYS,  and  in  line  with  the  European 
Commission's Better Regulation Guidelines2, the purpose was to provide an interim evaluation 
of the EUYS, assessing its effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence, and EU-added value 
at mid-point.   

The results will be used as input to eventually develop and adapt the instruments and initiatives 
in the context of the implementation of the EUYS, to guide potential adjustments to the EUYS 
and its alignment with  evolving developments,  challenges, and needs of  young people. The 
results will also inform the reflections and preparations of the framework for EU youth policy 
cooperation beyond 2027.  

Scope 

The interim evaluation covers:  

- 

- 
- 

- 

the period from 2019 to part of 2023, which represents the midway point of the EUYS’ 
implementation; 
the analysis of the performance of the EUYS in all EU Member States;  
the EUYS’ instruments and related initiatives, such as the EU Youth Dialogue, the EU 
Youth Coordinator, the European Youth Portal, mutual learning activities, knowledge- 
and evidence-building, the European Youth Work Agenda, and more. 
the alignment with the Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps programmes and 
the effects of the 2022 European Year of Youth on the EUYS.  

Methodology 

The Commission’s interim evaluation  was  supported by an  independent  external  evaluation 
assignment/support  study3  using  a  mixed-method  approach  to  data  collection  and  analysis, 
including qualitative and quantitative data and contribution analysis. The contribution analysis 
consisted of assessing the extent to which the EUYS contributed to the intended changes and 
included  developing  an  intervention  logic  for  the  EUYS  instruments,  unpacking  their 
implementation  and using primary evidence validating the assumptions. In  addition,  a cost-
effectiveness analysis was conducted using a defined framework to assess the costs associated 
with the EUYS. A steering group of relevant Commission departments oversaw the evaluation.   

The external evaluation assignment was carried out between February and December 2023 and 
included a public consultation and multiple targeted consultations. The consultation strategy 

1  Resolution of the Council of the European Union and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the 

Council on a framework for European cooperation in the youth field: The European Union Youth Strategy 2019-2027  

2  Commission Staff Working Document. Better Regulation Guidelines (2021)  
3 Support study for the Interim evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 

4 

 
 
 
for the evaluation was based on a mapping of stakeholders and the quantitative and qualitative 
data was mainly gathered through the following consultation activities: 

•  Call for evidence on the Commission’s 'Have Your Say' portal from 23 September to 

21 October 2022.    

•  Public consultation on the ‘Have Your Say’-portal from 26 April to 2 August 2023.  
•  Quantitative data on awareness of the EUYS and engagement with its instruments, 

collected through:  

-  Online survey of young people  
-  Online survey of youth civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth 

informal groups  

•  Qualitative data on perceptions of the EUYS and examples of progress in its 

implementation, collected through:  

-  105 key informant interviews with 21 policy makers at EU level and 84 policy 
makers at national level and 3 focus groups with 15 decision and national policy 
makers, from 3 May to 20 June 2023; 

-  4  focus  groups  with  21  young  people  from  14  June  to  8  August  2023Group 
interviews  and  individual  interviews  were  performed  with  9  civil  society 
organisations, youth researchers and youth informal groups from 14 June to 23 
August 2023. 

Figure 1. Stakeholders’ participation in consultation activities. 
Source: Kantar Public – Public Consultation on the EU Youth Strategy, 2023 

5 

 
 
 
 
The EU mandate4 and the open method of coordination5 in the field of youth policy set the 
scope for the intervention logic. The EUYS aims at contributing to the development of youth 
policies  by  encouraging  cooperation  and  supporting  and  supplementing  Member  States' 
actions. This involves a challenge in identifying causality and in attributing and quantifying 
the specific effects of the EU Youth Strategy. The effect of the EUYS is thus often indirect, 
and  mediated  by  stakeholders’  awareness,  their  buy  in  and  alignment  to  the  EUYS.    The 
performance of the EUYS relies to a large extent on Member States activities, their interest in 
exchanging and learning from each other, making use of the instruments available at EU level, 
and  committing  resources  at  national,  regional  and  local  levels  to  pursue  the  common 
objectives. 

The evaluation encountered some challenges to data collection. The main limitations identified 
were the complexity of youth-related policies, potential overlaps with other evaluations, and 
limited  evidence  on  human  resource  cost  data.  Mitigation  measures  involved  prioritising 
qualitative methods such as key informant interviews and focus groups to capture insights on 
youth policies' complexity, methodology to differentiate from overlapping assessments, and 
quality checks in data collection.   

The methodology is detailed in Annex I and II. 

2.  WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION? 

2.1.  Description of the EU Youth Strategy and its objectives 

The EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 builds on 20 years of European youth policy cooperation 
and aims to promote young people's participation in democratic life, in line with Article 165 of 
the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, to support social and civic engagement 
and to ensure that all young people have the necessary means to participate in society.  

The overall objectives of the EUYS are to: 

•  enable  young  people  to  be  architects  of  their  own  lives,  support  their  personal 
development and growth to autonomy, build their resilience and equip them with life 
skills to cope with a changing world; 

•  encourage  and  equip  young  people  with  the  necessary  resources  to  become  active 
citizens, agents of solidarity and positive change inspired by EU values and a European 
identity; 
improve policy decisions with regard to their impact on young people across all sectors, 
notably employment, education, health and social inclusion; 

• 

•  contribute  to  the  eradication  of  youth  poverty  and  all  forms  of  discrimination  and 

promote the social inclusion of young people. 

4 Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU. 
5 The open method of coordination (OMC) in the European Union may be described as a form of ‘soft’ law. It is a form of intergovernmental 
policy-making that does not result in binding EU legislative measures and it does not require EU countries to introduce or amend their laws. 

6 

 
 
 
By pursuing the above objectives, the EUYS should also help realise the vision of young people 
as expressed in the 11 European Youth Goals6, which are part of the EUYS, by mobilising 
EU level policy and programme instruments and actions at national, regional and local levels 
by all stakeholders. 

In short, the EUYS aims to engage, connect and empower young people, and to advance 
youth participation and youth mainstreaming across different policy areas. Through the 
open method of coordination, it encourages the development of youth policies across the EU 
and  beyond,  in  synergy  with  other  policies  targeting  young  people  such  as  education  and 
training,  employment,  health,  culture,  environment,  media  literacy  or  digital  skills.  It  also 
provides a policy framework for the EU youth programmes, which are Erasmus+ youth and 
the European Solidarity Corps.   

The  EUYS  maintains  a  high  degree  of  stability  and  continuity  in  overall  objectives  and 
instruments. At the same time, changes were introduced to better respond to the challenges and 
needs  in  a  rapidly  evolving  society,  to  address  the  recommendations  from  the  interim 
evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2010-2018 and to reflect input coming from stakeholders 
and young people.  

The  structure  of  the  EUYS  was  simplified  and  the  previous  eight  fields  of  action  were 
rationalised into three core areas of the youth sector – ‘Engage, Connect, Empower’- – while 
also  mainstreaming  youth  as  a  priority  across  different  policy  areas  and  emphasising  the 
importance of greater youth involvement across the board.  

The changes introduced in the 2019-2027 EU Youth Strategy, most of them resulting from 
the  lessons  learned  from  the  interim  evaluation  of  the  predecessor  framework  2010-2018, 
mainly consisted in adaptations linked to:  

•  More focus and flexibility to adapt European priorities in national contexts;  
•  Wider outreach to young people, in particular those with fewer opportunities;  
•  A new approach to working across policy areas;  
• 
•  Multi-level and participatory governance;  
•  A clearer link between EU youth policy and related EU programme activities.  

Improved transparency and monitoring framework;  

Concretely, the main new/strengthened actions included:  

• 

Improve cross-sector cooperation across policy areas, including through the creation of 
an EU Youth Coordinator, to give youth a voice in shaping EU policies; 

•  Launch a new and more inclusive EU Youth Dialogue, with a focus on youth with fewer 

opportunities;  

•  Remove obstacles to and facilitate volunteering and solidarity mobility;  
• 
Implement a Youth Work Agenda to increase recognition of non-formal learning;  
•  Reinforce the links between EU youth policy and related EU programmes (Erasmus+ 

and the European Solidarity Corps) 

6 European Youth Goals | European Youth Portal (europa.eu) 

7 

 
 
 
 
•  Track EU spending on youth. 

The EUYS was developed before 2019 against the backdrop of a broad range of challenges of 
young  people.  On  their  way  to  adulthood,  young  people  typically  experience  several 
transitions in their personal life and environment, from education and training to work, living 
on their own, partnerships or starting a family life, and becoming active citizens. Many face 
uncertainties  about  their  future,  because  of  climate  change,  digitalisation,  globalisation, 
demographic and socioeconomic trends, discrimination, social exclusion, populism and fake 
news,  with  potential  effects  on  jobs,  skills,  health  and  well-being,  or  of  the  way  our 
democracies work.  

The policy context has changed dramatically since the launch in 2019 of the EU Youth Strategy 
2019-2027,  with  the  impact  of  the  Covid-19  pandemic  and  Russia’s  full-scale  invasion  of 
Ukraine and the ensuing inflation crisis. During the first years of the implementation, these 
unforeseen  circumstances  have  amplified  existing  challenges  faced  by  young  people  and 
children,  including  negatively  affecting  the  mental  health  and  general  well-being  of  young 
people. The Flash Eurobarometer on mental health7, launched in October 2023 ahead of World 
Mental Health Day, showed that 59% of young people (15–24 year-olds) had an emotional or 
psychosocial  problem  (such  as  feeling  depressed  or  feeling  anxious)  in  the  last  12  months. 
According to a UNICEF report from 2021, suicide is the second leading cause of death among 
young people (15-19 years of age) after road accidents, and in the EU, the annual value of lost 
mental  health,  in  children  and  young  people  is  estimated  at  EUR  50  billion.8  In  the  public 
consultation for this evaluation, the most frequently mentioned challenges for young people 
today are the impact of the rise in cost-of-living (95% of respondents), mental well-being (91%) 
and financial stability (90%).  

Intervention Logic of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 

Given the EUYS’ complexity and diverse set of instruments, assessing its impact requires a 
structured  approach.  To  unravel  how  different  components  of  the  EUYS  contribute  to  the 
overarching  goals,  impact  pathways  were  developed  as  part  of  the  external  support  study, 
shedding light on how the instruments contribute to the specific objectives in the EUYS’ three 
core areas: 'Engage,' 'Connect,' and 'Empower'.  

For the evaluation, the impact pathways were organised in a simplified manner according to 
four groups that were anticipated to result in direct or indirect outcomes and impacts. 

1)  Policy development and implementation: Evidence-based youth policymaking and 
knowledge building, mutual learning and dissemination, peer learning activities, Future 
National Activities Planners and EU Work Plans for Youth. These activities establish 
the policymaking environment for all other activities;  

2)  Activities in the ‘Engage’ core area: Participatory governance including through the 
EUYS stakeholder platform; the EU Youth Dialogue and EU Youth Coordinator. These 
activities allow youth and relevant youth stakeholders to engage in youth policy making 
at the EU and national levels;  

7 Flash Eurobarometer 530. Mental Health (2023)  

8 SOWC-2021-full-report-English.pdf (unicef.org) 

8 

 
 
 
3)  Activities  in  the  ‘Connect’  core  area:  Communicating  the  EU  Youth  Strategy; 
mobilising and monitoring EU programmes and funds; youth information and support 
services such as the European Youth Portal.  These activities allow youth and relevant 
stakeholders to strengthen their network and use the opportunities available to them;  
4)  Activities in the ‘Empower’ core area: youth information and support services such as 
through  European-wide  organisations;  and  activities  for  the  quality,  innovation  and 
recognition of youth work based on the European Youth Work Agenda.  

Figure 2. Intervention Logic of the EU Youth Strategy. 
Source Kantar Public  

2.2.  Points of comparison 

To assess the impact of the EUYS, it is crucial to consider the context before the intervention 
and the expectations for its development. Given that the previous Strategy was active between 
2010 and 2018, it serves as a valuable reference period to evaluate the progress achieved by 
the current Strategy. 

Baseline 

Over the reference period (2010-2018), European economies were recovering from the 2008 
economic crisis. However, there were significant challenges such as the high level of NEETs. 
This was an indication of the vulnerable status of young people in the EU. Although there has 
been  a  notable  decline  to  11.7%  in  2022,  worldwide  phenomena  such  as  the  COVID-19 
pandemic slightly increased the proportion of young people in this categorisation. 

Between 2014 and 2018, youth unemployment rates decreased across all Member States but 
remained more than twice as high  as  general  unemployment.  In 2018, 3.415 million  young 
persons  (under  25)  were  unemployed  in  the  EU28.  This  decrease  continued  into  2019  but 
increased slightly in 2020 and 2021 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic Despite economic 
improvements, inequalities persisted. For example, the percentage of persons at risk of poverty 
or social exclusion (aged 15-29) rose between 2015 and 2016 to a peak of 28.3%.  Thereafter, 

9 

 
 
 
there  has  been  a  steady  decline  in  this  rate,  to  a  low  of  24.3%  in  2019.  The  impact  of  the 
COVID-19 pandemic, saw a 1 percentage point increase from 2019-2021, while recent data 
points to a return to 2019 levels in 2022.  

Figure 3. Youth unemployment rate in the EU 27, under 25 years of age (2008-2023) 
 Source: Eurostat (2023). YTH_EMPL_1009 

Before  the  EUYS  was  implemented  in  2019, 
inequalities  within  EU  society,  especially  those 
spanning  different  generations,  persisted.  These 
disparities came despite an economic upswing and 
diminished unemployment rates over the reference 
period. For example, the percentage of persons at 
risk  of  poverty  or  social  exclusion  (aged  15-29) 
rose between 2015 and 2016 to a peak of 28.3%. In 
addition  to  this,  gender  imbalances  also  persist, 
with  young  women  being  more  prone  to  facing 
risks of poverty and social exclusion.  

Participation  in  formal  or  informal  voluntary 
activities or active citizenship across Europe was 
unevenly distributed over the reference period, and 
particularly  in  2015:  Eastern  European  countries 
(e.g.,  Romania,  Bulgaria,  and  Latvia)  had  lower 
participation  rates  (between  0.3-9%)  compared  to  central  European  countries  (e.g., 
Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark) with higher participation rates (between 55-90%).  The 
results from the third International Civic and Citizenship Education Study 2022 (ICCS 2022)10 
show  a  decreasing  trend  (2022  compared  to  2016)  in  civic  and  citizenship  competence  of 
students in several of the participating EU Member States11. The recent results of the OECD 
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 202212 show that student's personal 

Figure 4. Participation in formal or informal 
voluntary activities or active citizenship (% 
of young people), 2015. (Source: Eurostat 
(ILC_SCP19__custom_2135736)) 

9 Eurostat, Youth unemployment rate by sec, age, country of birth  
10 Education for Citizenship in Times of Global Change - ICCS 2022 International Report | IEA.nl 
11 ICCS participating EU Member States: Sweden, Poland, Estonia, Croatia, Italy, Spain, Lithuania, Netherlands, France. Slovenia, Slovakia, 

Latvia, Malta, Romania, Cyprus, Bulgaria.  

12 PISA 2022 Results (Volume I) : The State of Learning and Equity in Education | PISA | OECD iLibrary (oecd-ilibrary.org) 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
circumstances such as socio-economic status and the advantages or disadvantages that come 
within have an impact on student performance (OECD, 2023). Individuals with higher socio-
economic status often have better access to education and sources of information which can 
foster deeper understanding and knowledge of civic participation. 

Points of comparison 

EUYS aims to respond to the challenges of youth unemployment, participation in voluntary 
activities, and active citizenship by promoting youth engagement, addressing inequalities, and 
enhancing opportunities for young people across Member States. The following table presents 
the  main  points  of  comparison  against  each  evaluation  criterion.  It  presents  the  insights 
obtained  from  the  evaluation  of  the  previous  Strategy,  the  related  main  aims  of  the  current 
EUYS, and also serves as the basis for assessing the performance of the EUYS in addressing 
the identified challenges and achieving its objectives. 

Point of comparison  
(situation prior to 2019)13 

Effectiveness  

EUYS 2019-202714 

Indicator (how progress is 
measured) 

•  The level of awareness and 
understanding of the 
EUYS among key 
stakeholders, 
policymakers, youth 
organisations, and young 
people. 

•  The level of youth 

participation and 
engagement in decision-
making processes and the 
implementation of the 
EUYS. 

•  The extent to which the 

EUYS has influenced 
policy agendas, 
frameworks, and practices 
in Member States. 

•  EUYS 2010-2018 brought 

•  Aims to strengthen the link 

tangible changes at national and 
organizational levels, promoting 
common approaches across 
Member States. 

•  EUYS 2010-2018 directly 
influenced policy agendas, 
especially in volunteering, 
internationalisation, mobility, 
youth work, and cross-sectoral 
policy. 

•  EUYS 2010-2018 also impacted 
non-formal learning, youth 
entrepreneurship, and addressing 
NEETs. 

•  Greater awareness and 

understanding among key 
stakeholders, including 
policymakers and youth 
organisations, were highlighted as 
crucial. Better dissemination and 
communication are needed. 
•  Youth organisations in EUYS 
activities reported positive 
outcomes, including changes in 
practices, partnerships, and 
networking. 

•  Structured dialogue, EU fund 

mobilisation, mutual learning, and 
knowledge-building were 

between the EU and young people 
through inclusive and digital 
dialogue, focused priorities, and 
effective information sharing.  
•  Emphasises youth engagement 
and participation in democratic 
life and seeks to improve cross-
sector cooperation.  

•  The expected achievements 
include fostering youth 
participation, promoting solidarity 
and intercultural understanding, 
supporting youth empowerment, 
and enabling active citizenship.  
•  Emphasises equality, inclusion, 

participation, and global-local 
dimensions as guiding principles. 
Member States are encouraged to 
implement targeted actions, 
promote cross-sectoral 
cooperation, and explore synergies 
between funding sources.  
•  Aims to improve accessibility, 

visibility, and impact, with a 
systematic approach to youth 
information and the effective use 
of EU programmes and funds. In 
particular, the importance of youth 
mainstreaming is highlighted. 

13 Evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy and the Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the EU. ICF (2016) 
14 Resolution of the Council of the European Union and the Representatives of the Governments of the  Member States meeting within the 

Council on a framework for European cooperation in the youth field: The European Union Youth Strategy 2019-2027 

11 

 
 
 
• 

identified as key tools for EU 
youth cooperation. 
Integrating and building upon 
existing efforts were identified as 
important for greater 
effectiveness. 

Efficiency  

•  Resources allocated to EU 

cooperation activities in the youth 
field were generally small. 
Nonetheless, even with a 
relatively low budget, the EU 
youth cooperation was successful 
in triggering changes at national 
and organisational level.  

•  The budget was however spread 

across a large number of activities 
covering many fields of action, 
which meant that it was often 
being spread thinly.  

•  The instruments and governance 
of the EUYS are primarily 
financed by EU programmes, in 
particular Erasmus+ and European 
Solidarity Corps, with other EU 
programmes contributing to its 
objectives.  

•  Member State national funding 

also contributes to their 
participation in the instruments 
and governance of the EUYS.   

•  The efficiency of resource 

allocation and utilisation 
within the EUYS. 
•  The degree to which 

structures in the EUYS 
enable efficient decision-
making processes, 
effective communication, 
and streamlined 
implementation of the 
EUYS’ initiatives. 

•  Some obstacles to efficiency were 
identified including limited 
resources at national level to take 
full advantage of EU cooperation 
structures; inefficiencies related to 
certain specific instruments or 
activities. 

Coherence  

•  EUYS 2010-2018 lacked an 

•  Emphasises the alignment of 

integrated approach at the EU 
level and cross-referencing with 
relevant initiatives was limited. 
Stakeholders expressed the need 
for greater involvement of the 
youth sector in decision-making 
processes.  

•  The implementation instruments 
were generally relevant, but the 
coherence in decision-making 
regarding their use was not clear 
externally. 

EU added value  

youth policy with EU funding and 
the focus on shared priorities 
across Member States while 
allowing flexibility for adaptation.  
•  Aims to reinforce the link between 
EU youth policy and related 
programmes such as Erasmus+ 
and the European Solidarity 
Corps.  

•  Maintains the coherence of its 
core areas and instruments, 
promoting effective and joined-up 
implementation across sectors. 

•  The degree to which there 
is integration of youth 
perspective into broader 
policy areas. 
•  The level of cross-

referencing and integration 
between the EUYS and 
other relevant EU 
initiatives. 

•  The added value of the EUYS 
2010-2018 was influenced by 
Member States' alignment and 
interest in cooperation. In 
countries with strong alignment or 
low interest, the added value was 
limited. National factors drove 
changes, and the EUYS 
contributed inspiration, expertise, 
leverage, and resources to support 
the EU Youth Open Method of 
Coordination objectives.  

•  Sets out several areas for Member 
State cooperation, as well as the 
promotion of sharing information 
and best practices through the 
FNAPs.  

•  Aims to contribute to enhancing 
collaboration and knowledge 
exchange, expanding youth 
participation in policy 
consultations, and fostering the 
cross-fertilization of innovative 
ideas and practices. 

•  The extent to which young 
people across all Member 
States actively engage and 
participate in the EUYS’ 
initiatives. 

•  The extent to which the 
EUYS has acted as a 
catalyst or accelerator for 
change at the national 
level. 

12 

 
 
• 

It acted as a catalyst in some 
Member States, fostering a "youth 
policy" culture and leading to 
lasting effects like new 
frameworks and legislative 
revisions. Overall, the EUYS 
played a significant role in youth 
policy development. 

Relevance  

•  EUYS 2010-2018 had a high 

•  Sets out various needs and 

•  The extent to which the 

EUYS addresses the needs 
and challenges of young 
people and youth 
stakeholders today. 

degree of relevance in addressing 
the needs of young people and 
youth stakeholders.  

•  EUYS 2010-2018 objectives were 
seen to have been aligned with the 
priorities identified by young 
people, such as employment, 
education, training, and cross-
border volunteering.  

•  The flexible framework of the 

EUYS allowed for addressing a 
wide range of issues and 
accommodating diverse needs 
across Member States. 

challenges faced by young people 
and youth stakeholders, including 
uncertainties about their future 
due to technological change, 
demographic trends, 
discrimination, social exclusion, 
fake news, and populism.  
•  Emphasises the importance of 

acquiring necessary skills to 
contribute to prosperous, 
democratic, and cohesive 
societies, as well as the need to 
address socio-economic and 
democratic exclusion. 

Table 1. Points of comparison. 
Source: Kantar Public – Public Consultation on the EU Youth Strategy, 2023 

3.  HOW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATION PERIOD? 

3.1.  Current state of play 

Implementation of the EU Youth Strategy during 2019-2023  

The  EU  Youth  Strategy  operates  in  three-year  work  cycles,  at  the  end  of  which  the 
Commission  reports  on  the  progress  in  the  EU  Youth  Report15.  The  priorities  and 
actions in the core areas for each cycle are set by the Council together with the Commission 
and presented in the  EU  Work  Plans  for  Youth.  Each  Work  Plan  spans  two  Council 
Presidency  trios.  The  overarching  thematic  priority  for  2019-2021  was  ‘Creating 
opportunities for youth’ and for 2022-2024 it is ‘Engaging together for a sustainable and 
inclusive Europe’. 

15 EU Youth Report 2021 and Commission Staff Working Document accompanying the EU Youth Report 2021 

13 

 
 
 
The governance and implementation of the EU Youth Strategy is supported by a range of 
instruments,  mainly  financed  through  the  Erasmus+  and  European  Solidarity  Corps 
programmes, such as the EU Youth Dialogue, the European Youth Portal, the European 
Youth  Work  Agenda,  mutual  learning  activities,  knowledge-  and  evidence-building  and 
more.  

The  new  generation  of  EU  youth  programmes  –  Erasmus+  2021-2027  and  European 
Solidarity Corps 2021-2027 – have brought a significant boost: the Erasmus+ budget for the 
2021-2027 period doubled to over € 26 billion (with an additional 2 billion from EU external 
cooperation funds) and the European Solidarity Corps  budget for 2021-2027 period was 
consolidated  to  just  above  €  1  billion.  This  benefits  young  people  and  youth  work 
organisations and the development and implementation of the EU Youth Strategy at EU and 
national levels. Erasmus+ provides support to policy reform in the youth, contributing to the 
implementation of the EUYS. 

A  number  of  new  or  updated  actions,  including  Youth  Participation  Activities  and 
DiscoverEU in Erasmus+ and the Solidarity Projects and Humanitarian Aid Strand in the European 
Solidarity  Corps,  have  enriched  the  range  of  opportunities open to young people and 
supporting  their  democratic,  civic  and  humanitarian  engagement.  The  four  horizontal 
priorities  of  both  programmes  -  inclusion  and  diversity,  environment  and  fight  against 
climate change, digital transformation, participation and civic engagement – and the quality 

14 

 
 
 
and  support  measures,  such  as  training  and  cooperation  and  networking  activities  and 
SALTO resource centres16, create linkages between the EUYS and the programmes. 

Highlights of the EUYS implementation during 2019-2023 are presented below.  

Mutual learning activities 

Mutual learning activities17 between Member States, the European Commission and relevant 
stakeholders is an important instrument to advance youth policy in the core areas as well as 
cross-sectorally. Mutual learning activities include expert groups which can develop policy 
guidance, practical tools and share good practices as well as peer learning activities, peer 
counselling and supporting studies.18 

The implemented activities during the first years of the EUYS included three several Expert 
Groups  that  worked  on  indicators,  on  the  mobility  of  young  volunteers  and  cross-border 
solidarity, and on youth work. The Expert Group’s recommendations were finalised based on 
similar challenges among Member States, for example, to improve volunteering and solidarity 
activities to reach more people with fewer opportunities. 

Furthermore, three Peer Learning Activities between Member States have taken place on non-
vocational qualifications for youth work, on a rights-based approach to youth policies, and on 
complementarity and synergy between national or regional volunteering schemes for youth and 
the European Solidarity Corps. 

the  Peer  Learning  Activities 

Some of the challenges for implementing a rights-based approach to youth policies identified 
during 
limited  youth  participation,  outdated 
include 
communication and participation tools, lack of mechanisms to reach out to vulnerable youth 
and the digital divide. The Peer Learning Activity on non-vocational qualifications for youth 
work mentions that digital technologies such as micro-credential systems have been useful in 
identifying and recognising key competences at national level and could contribute to long-
term impacts such as increased youth employment19.  

Future National Activities Planners 

The Future National Activities Planners20 (hereafter referred to as ‘FNAPs’) allow Member 
States on a voluntary  basis  to  share  their  national  priorities  in  line  with  the  EU  Youth 
Strategy. The FNAPs aim to increase transparency in the implementation of youth policies 
at regional, national and EU  level. Youth policies in Member States are among the most 
important instruments for the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy. They are  often 
consolidated in a national youth strategy or an equivalent youth policy planning document, 
as  documented by  the  Youth Wiki.  The  content of  such national  youth strategies can  be 
highly relevant for the European Commission and Member States to establish synergies, 
facilitate peer learning and help identify and cluster different interests and specific needs of 
Member States in youth policy development.  

16 SALTO resource centres (Support for Advanced Learning and Training Opportunities) provide services (expertise, trainings) to  National 

Agencies of Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes. 

17 Mutual Learning and Expert Groups | European Youth Portal (europa.eu) 
18 Mutual Learning and Expert Groups | European Youth Portal  
19 Peer learning activity (PLA) on non-vocational qualifications for youth work – Meeting Report June 2021 (2021) 
20 Future National Activities Planners | European Youth Portal (europa.eu) 

15 

 
 
 
The Member States have been invited twice to submit FNAPs, in 2019 and in 2021, and the 
main outcomes of these  surveys are included in the EU Youth Report 2021.   21 Member 
States21 shared their plans in 2019 and 1822 in 2021, with 1623 countries answering both in 2019 
and 2021.  

The  figure  below  reports  which  EU  Youth  Goals  were  thought  to  be  most  important 
considering  national  priorities  in  2019  and  2021  respectively.  As  shown  in  Figure  5,  some 
EYGs, such as EYG 3 Inclusive Societies and EYG 9 Space and Participation for All, were 
considered  less  relevant  in  2021  than  in  2019,  while  EYG  4  Information  and  Constructive 
Dialogue and EYG 10 Sustainable Green Europe, were considered more relevant in 2021 than 
in 2019. The increase (from 61% to 75%) in relevance of EYG 5. Mental Health and Wellbeing 
is probably at least to some extent explained by the pandemic.  

11: Youth Organisations and European Programmes
10: Sustainable Green European Programme
9: Space and Participation for All
8: Quality Learning
7: Quality Employement for All
6: Moving Rural Youth Forward
5: Mental Health and Wellbeing
4: Information and Constructive Dialogue
3: Inclusive Societies
2: Equality of All Genders
1: Connecting EU with Youth

Share of responding Member States 2019

Share of responding Member States 2021

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Figure 5. FNAP – EU Youth Goals that the Member States thought to be particularly relevant in light of  
national priorities  
Source: Future National Activities Planners 2019 and 2021 

EU Youth Dialogue 

The EU Youth Dialogue24 (hereafter referred to as ‘EUYD’) is the dialogue between young 
people  and  youth  organisations  and  policy  and  decision  makers,  as  well  as  experts, 
researchers and other relevant civil society actors. It serves as a forum for continuous joint 
reflection and consultation on the priorities, implementation and follow-up of the EU Youth 
Strategy.  It  builds  on  the  achievements  of  past  dialogue  processes  (previously  called 
“Structured Dialogue”) and is organised into 18-month work cycles. A Council Resolution 
provided  further  guidelines  for  the  governance  of  the  renewed  EU  Youth  Dialogue17, 
stressing  also  the importance of representativeness and of including the voices of young 
people with fewer opportunities and of those not organised in youth associations. To date, 

21 Member States that answered the FNAP in 2019: Austria, Belgium DE, Belgium-FL, Belgium-FR, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, 
Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, United 
Kingdom 

22 Member States that answered the FNAP in 2021:  Austria, Belgium DE, Belgium-FL, Belgium-FR, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, 

Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia Sweden 

23 Member States that answered both FNAP: Austria, Belgium DE, Belgium-FL, Belgium-FR, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, Finland, 

France, Germany, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden 

24 EU Youth Dialogue | European Youth Portal (europa.eu) 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
nine cycles of the EU Youth Dialogue have been fully implemented with three of them having 
been implemented during the current Strategy. The tenth cycle is on-going. It started in July 
2023 and will end in December 2024.  

The  participatory  process  in  each  country  is  organised  by  national  working  groups  through 
representatives  of  youth  ministries,  national  youth  councils,  youth  organisations,  youth 
workers, researchers, and young people from all backgrounds. It was through the sixth cycle 
of the Dialogue (then called Structured Dialogue) which was being implemented during the 
former EUYS that the EU Youth Goals were shaped, and the aim of the cycle was to contribute 
to the creation of the 2019-2027 Strategy. One of the actions of the new Strategy was to launch 
a Dialogue with more focus on people with fewer opportunities. 

During the last three Dialogue cycles, the proportion of young people identifying as disabled, 
part of an ethnic or religious minority group or LGBTIQ had increased (table 2 below). The 
participation  of  minority  groups  largely  reflects  the  conclusions  from  an  evaluation  of 
participant inclusion levels within the EUYD, conducted by the EU-Council of Europe youth 
partnership  (hereafter  referred  to  as  ‘EU-CoE  Youth  Partnership’).25  The  report  states  that 
49.5% of the participants represent minority groups and that there is overrepresentation for all 
the  minority  groups  mentioned,  except  NEETs  and  rural  youth.26  This  showcases  that  the 
EUYS has become more diverse over time. In terms of gender equality, over the EUYD cycles 
6-9, there were 59.85% of female participants, compared to 40.15% of male participants.  

Seventh Cycle 

Eighth Cycle 

Ninth Cycle 

Time-period 

January 2019 – June 2020 

July 2020 – December 
2021 

January 2022 – June 2023 

Trio Council 
presidency 

Romania, Finland and 
Croatia 

Germany, Portugal and 
Slovenia 

France, Czechia and 
Sweden 

Theme  

Creating opportunities for 
youth 

Europe for YOUth-YOUth 
for Europe 

Engaging together for 
sustainable and inclusive 
Europe 

Space for democracy and 
participation 

Relevant 
European Youth 
Goal 

7 Quality Employment for 
All 

9 Space and Participation 
for All 

8 Quality Learning 

6 Moving Rural Youth 
Forward 

3 Inclusive Societies  

10 Sustainable Green 
Europe 

Share of 
participants who 
assessed 
themselves to be 

LGBTQ+: 10% 

LGBTQ+: 8% 

LGBTQ+: 28% 

Religious minority:13% 

Religious minority: 8% 

Religious minority: 21% 

Ethnic minority: 13% 

Ethnic minority:12% 

Ethnic minority: 20% 

25  Moxon,  D,  Barta,  O.,  Evaluation  of  participant  inclusion  levels  within  the  EU  Youth  Dialogue,  Partnership  between  the  European 

Commission and the Council of Europe in the field of youth (2023).  

26 Ibid. 

17 

 
 
 
 
youths with fewer 
opportunities27 

From rural area: 36% 

From rural area: 34% 

From rural area: 26% 

With disability: 5% 

With disability: 4% 

With disability: 19% 

NEET: 14% 

NEET: 6% 

NEET: 10% 

Table 2. Overview of the EU Youth Dialogue. 

Source: Kantar Public – desk research, 2023 

The EUYD also aims to contribute to policy making by providing inputs to Council documents. 
For instance, the Council Resolution on the Outcomes of the seventh Cycle of the EU Youth 
Dialogue  invited  the  Commission  and  the  Member  States  to  address  how  to  promote  non-
formal  learning  methods  and  approaches  to  secure  formal  recognition  of  non-formal 
education/learning and volunteering activities28. The Council Resolution on the Outcomes of 
the eighth Cycle of the EU Youth Dialogue invited the Commission and the Member States 
to prioritise and give visibility to the EUYD in national and EU-level events, promote youth 
participation in decision-making processes at all levels, and support and strengthen cooperation 
between  different  stakeholders,  such  as  the  European  Steering  Group,  National  Working 
Groups,  the  European  Youth  Forum,  National  Youth  Councils,  International  Non-
Governmental  Youth  Organisations,  and  other  relevant  stakeholders29.  The  Council 
Resolution  on  the  outcomes  of  the  ninth  Cycle  of  the  EU  Youth  Dialogue  invited  the 
Commission and the Member States to consider the outcomes of the ninth cycle of the EUYD 
when  implementing  and  evaluating  current  youth  policies  and  designing  future  policies  in 
synergy with all policies affecting young people.30  

Communicating the EU Youth Strategy & Youth Information and Support 

The European Youth Portal31 is the single multilingual entry point for EU level youth related 
information and opportunities. It functions as a one-stop-shop portal for young people and the 
visits increase year on year. In the period January-December 2023, the European Youth Portal 
registered more than 10.5 million visits, making it among the top 10 most visited websites on 
europa.eu overall, and the most visited website during the first days of any DiscoverEU round. 
Its revamped version launched in November 2020 supports the EU Youth Strategy in providing 
content  and  services  for  young  people  centred  around  its  three  core  areas  and  a  dedicated 
section on the EU Youth Strategy targeting youth stakeholders. 

Other organisations involved in youth information and support are the Eurodesk network, the 
European  Youth  Information  and  Counselling  Agency  (ERYICA)  and  the  European  Youth 
Card Association (EYCA).  

On a national level, there are also examples of measures implemented that are connected to the 
COVID-19 pandemic. However, in general, the main information from the national level came 
from the National Agencies for the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps. These National 
Agencies  are  responsible,  among  other  things,  for  providing  information  about  the 

27 Moxon, D, Bárta, O., EUYD9 Results of the Consultation Phase: Engaging together for a sustainable and inclusive Europe, (2022) 
28 Resolution of the Council on the Outcomes of the 7th Cycle of the EU Youth Dialogue European Union Youth Strategy 2019-2027, 

2020/c 212/01 

29 Resolution of the Council on the outcomes of the 8th Cycle of the EU Youth Dialogue, 2021/C 504/01 
30 Resolution of the Council on the outcomes of the 9th Cycle of the EU Youth Dialogue, 9134/23  
31 About us | European Youth Portal (europa.eu) 

18 

 
 
 
programmes.32  These  National  Agencies  are  supported  by  SALTOs,  which  is  a  network  of 
resource  centres  working  on  the  horizontal  priority  areas  for  the  Erasmus+  and  European 
Solidarity Corps programmes and supporting the programmes’ international dimension.   

EU Youth Strategy Platform 

The EU Youth Strategy Platform is a collaborative online platform for youth stakeholders 
(youth ministries, programme implementing bodies, youth NGOs, researchers, networks and 
youth work organisations) which aims to build a basis for a  regular civic dialogue, offer 
opportunities to exchange information on activities and results, and facilitate participatory 
governance and coordination of the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy. Following 
the launch in 2019 and online activities held in 2020, the pandemic disrupted the work of 
the network, however with the European Year of Youth many of the members re-convened 
as part of the Year of Youth national coordinators and stakeholders’ group. The plan is to 
revive the EU Youth Strategy Platform group in 2024 as part of the legacy of the Year. 

Evidence-based Youth Policy Making and Knowledge Building 

Evidence-based policy making33 requires continuous research, knowledge development and 
outreach to young people and youth organisations. The Youth Wiki34 gathers data to support 
the evidence base for the EUYS. It provides comparable qualitative information on youth 
related national policies, based on official documents, such as laws, decrees, regulations and 
recommendations. This supports analysis of policies, reforms, trends and exchange of good 
practices.  The  Youth  Wiki  complements  the  resources  available  via  other  internal  and 
external knowledge providers, including:  

-  Eurostat, providing survey data on the situation of young people; 
-  EU-Council  of  Europe  Youth  partnership,  providing  research  and  training 

materials on youth policy related topics; 

-  Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps Dashboards and National Agencies, 
including  the  RAY  research  network  providing  data  and  analysis  on  the  youth 
programmes.  

-  Civil society organisations and international organisations, providing research on 

youth related topics.  

Youth Wiki data and other available data, as well as research, studies and reports, are used for 
the regular official report on the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy – the EU Youth 
Report. The EU Youth Report covering the first triennial cycle (2019-2021) was published in 
2021 and the next EU Youth Report will cover the period 2022-2024. The 2021 EU Youth 
Report35 provided a snapshot of the situation and challenges facing young people and of the 
progress in the implementation of the EUYS, against the backdrop of the impact of the COVID-
19 pandemic. The report stressed that 2020 and 2021 were atypical years and that the COVID-
19 outbreak led to the acceleration of digital trends and had a negative impact on education, 
employment and mental health of young people. Implementation of the EU Youth Strategy was 

32 Erasmus+ Contacts (ec.europa.eu)  
33 Evidence-based policy-making | European Youth Portal (europa.eu) 
34 Youth Wiki: Europe's Encyclopedia of National Youth Policies (europa.eu) 
35  Report from the Commission on the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy (2019-2021) (europa.eu) 

19 

 
 
 
also disrupted, however allowed for flexibility to modify, reschedule (or cancel if not possible) 
some actions in the EU Work Plan for Youth 2019-2021 and to adjust projects in the Erasmus+ 
and European Solidarity Corps programmes.  

The  Eurostat  EU  Youth  Dashboard36  provides  statistical  data  about  the  situation  of  young 
people. The Dashboard was updated in 2022, based on the proposal of an ad hoc expert group 
on youth indicators37,  as an achievement under the European Year of Youth. It is composed of 
a  selection  of  statistical  indicators  grouped  according  to  the  EUYS  core  areas  of  ‘Engage’, 
‘Connect’  and  ‘Empower’,  complemented  with  contextual  indicators.  The  EU  Youth 
Dashboard takes the cross-sectoral nature of youth policy into consideration which is important 
to facilitate youth mainstreaming.  

The EU-CoE Youth Partnership provides research, training and cooperation on youth topics 
and functions as a “think tank” and laboratory in youth research, youth policy and youth work. 
The partnership coordinates and supports the European Platform on Learning Mobility (EPLM) 
and its Steering Group in producing and disseminating knowledge.  

EU Youth Coordinator 

The first EU Youth Coordinator was appointed in the European Commission in June 2021. 
The  EU  Youth  Coordinator  acts  as  a  reference  point  for  young  people  and  their 
representatives,  promoting  integration  of  the  youth  perspective  in  relevant  policies, 
contributes to coordination and cooperation of Commission services on youth mainstreaming 
and encourages youth participation and uptake of opportunities. 

The EU Youth Coordinator chaired the internal Commission informal Youth Network and the 
European  Year  of  Youth  national  coordinators  and  stakeholders’  group.  The  first  one  is  an 
internal network for capacity building, coordination and collaboration on youth related issues 
between Commission services, while the second one comprised a group of 29 Member States, 
six contact points from Erasmus+ associated countries and more than 120 European-level youth 
stakeholders and was set-up in 2021 to support the implementation of the European Year of 
Youth. Furthermore, given the success of this group, the plan is to transform it into a renewed 
EU Youth Stakeholders platform which would meet regularly and exchange on initiatives for 
young people. 

Monitoring and mobilising EU programmes and funds 

The Erasmus+ and European  Solidarity Corps programmes are key programmes that 
contribute to achieving the objectives of the EU Youth Strategy and advancing youth policy 
cooperation. Erasmus+ provides opportunities for non-formal and informal learning mobility 
and active participation among young people, as well as cooperation,  quality, inclusion, 
creativity, and innovation at the level of organisations and policies in the field of youth. The 
formal education and training strands of Erasmus+ also contribute to youth engagement 
and  empowering  young  people.  European  Solidarity  Corps  provides  opportunities  for 
volunteering and solidarity activities as well as volunteering in the field of humanitarian aid. 

36 EU Dashboard, (ec.europa.eu)  
37 Proposal for an updated dashboard of EU youth indicators (op.europa.eu) (2021) 

20 

 
 
 
 
Quality and support measures under both programmes, e.g. transnational cooperation and 
networking activities and SALTO resources centres, contribute to synergies and bridges 
between youth programmes and youth policy.  

The  SALTOs38  in  the  youth  field  play  a  specific  role,  as  they  often  participate  in  and 
coordinate the long-term cooperation activities among National Agencies and involve a range 
of  stakeholders  at  different  levels.  These  are  the  so-called  Strategic  National  Agency 
Cooperation  Activities  (SNACs),  of  which  a  range  operate  at  the  intersection  between 
Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes and the EUYS, contributing to youth 
policy development as well as to quality in the programme implementation. Two new cross-
sectoral SALTOs were set up under the current programming period, the SALTO on Green 
transition and sustainable development and SALTO Digital. 

As  manifested  during  the  European  Year  of  Youth,  there  are  also  many  other  EU 
programmes/funds/instruments  that benefit young people, such as Horizon Europe, EU 
cohesion policy funds (including ESF+, ERDF and its Interreg strand, Just Transition Fund, 
Cohesion  Fund),  EU  agricultural  funds  (EAGF  and  EAFRD),  Recovery  and  Resilience 
Facility,  the  Technical  Support  Instrument,  Digital  Europe,  Citizens,  Equality,  Rights  and 
Values programme, EU4Health, Creative Europe, the Technical Support Instrument  and many 
more.  

The  interim  evaluations  of  the  2021-2027  Erasmus+  and  the  European  Solidarity 
Corps programmes, to be completed by the end of 2024, will assess the performance and 
impact of the initiatives and actions implemented via both programmes. 

EU Work Plans for Youth 

The EU Work Plans for Youth created by the Council and the Commission present the priorities 
and actions in the core areas of each three-year work cycle. Each Work Plan spans two Council 
Presidency trios. The overarching thematic priority for 2019-2021 was “Creating opportunities 
for youth”, and for 2022-2024 “Engaging together for a sustainable and inclusive Europe”. The 
implementation  of  the  2019-2021  Work  Plan  was  however  altered  by  the  pandemic.  Some 
actions had to be modified, rescheduled or even cancelled.39  

In  the  2022-2024  Work  Plan  for  Youth,  the  European  Year  of  Youth  was  given  particular 
attention40.  Out  of  the  more  than  13  000  activities  organised  as  part  of  the  Year,  the  most 
popular  topic  was  Participation  and  Engagement.  In  conclusion,  the  Year  has  strengthened 
cross-sectoral cooperation; youth participation has emerged as the top focus and new tools for 
youth participation have been introduced. Mainstreaming a youth angle in EU policy across all 
relevant policy areas and not exclusively of those pertaining to the youth field, is a key legacy 
of the European Year of Youth.41  

European Youth Work Agenda  

38 SALTO resource centres (Support for Advanced Learning and Training Opportunities) provide services (expertise, trainings) to  National 

Agencies of Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes.     

39 Report from the Commission on the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy (2019-2021)  
40 Resolution of the Council on the EU Youth Strategy Work Plan 2022-2024/C 504 |/01  
41 National Agencies Event January 2023 – 2022 European Year of Youth, 2023. 

21 

 
 
 
The  EYWA  is  an  important  instrument  to  strengthen,  develop  and  promote  youth  work42, 
which was considered the second most relevant topic for cooperation in the 2021 FNAP.43 The 
EYWA is linked to several instruments of the EUYS. A particular focus of the EYWA is to act 
at  local  level  and  in  remote  rural  areas.  As  part  of  achieving  this,  the  Sub-group  on  Youth 
Work, met six times between 2021 and 2022. The sub-group had a role in the implementation 
of the EYWA by giving advice on the process of creating and implementing a dedicated digital 
platform  on  youth  work  to  share  information,  knowledge  and  good  practices,  engage  in 
cooperation and peer learning. The subgroup also supports the EU-CoE Youth Partnership.  

The Steering Group on the European Youth Work Agenda supported the implementation of 
the  EYWA  through  three  meetings  between  2022-2023.  The  Group  has  supported  the 
implementation  by  facilitating  the  dialogue  within  the  youth  work  community  of  practice, 
support improvement in recognition of youth work, supporting EU-CoE Youth Partnership and 
EU initiatives on youth work, organising activities in the priority regions with a focus on Youth 
Work Development and by providing learning and development opportunities for members of 
the youth work community of practice. 

Broader perspective on the implementation of the EU Youth Strategy 

Taking  a  broad  perspective  of  implementation  which  benefits  young  people,  policy 
developments linked to the EU Youth Strategy span over many inter-connected policy areas: 
the EU Youth Strategy contributes to (and benefits from) delivering on the objectives of the, 
the European Education Area44 and the Strategic Framework for European Cooperation in 
Education and Training towards the European Education Area and beyond (2021-2030)45, 
and other underlying sectoral policy agendas (e.g. the European Agenda for Adult Learning 
2021- 203046, the European Strategy for Universities47, etc.), the European Skills Agenda48, 
the New  European  Innovation  Agenda49,  the  European  Pillar  of  Social  Rights50,  the  Digital 
Education Action Plan 2021-202751, or the European Union Work Plan for Sport 2021-202452. 
With the sixth European Education Summit in November 2023, the mid-term review of the 
European Education Area was concluded, showing strong progress towards EU level targets 
and  inspiration  for  further  efforts  to  make  the  experience  of  Europe  as  an  open  space  for 
education, training and mobility an opportunity for all.   

The international dimension of the EU Youth Strategy has been strengthened through the 
first-ever policy framework for a strategic partnership with young people around the world 
adopted in October 2022 – the Youth Action Plan in the European Union external action for 
2022-202753. It will help deliver on international commitments, such as the United Nation's 

42 Youth work covers activities of a social, cultural, educational, environmental and/or political nature; by, with and for young people; delivered 

by youth workers; and based on non-formal and informal learning processes and voluntary participation (EYWA, points 1-7). 

43 Study on youth work in the EU – Final report, , (2021). 
44 Communication on achieving the European Education Area by 2025 
45 Council Resolution on a strategic framework for European cooperation in education and training towards the European Education Area and 

beyond (2021-2030) 2021/C 66/01 - Publications Office of the EU (europa.eu) 

46 Council resolution on a new European agenda for adult learning (2021-2030) 
47 Council conclusions on  a European strategy empowering higher education institutions for the future  
48 Communication_30June_v2.pdf; Helping Europe’s youth find (better and greener) jobs (europa.eu) 
49 Communication on a new European Innovation Agenda 
50 European Pillar of Social Rights | European Commission (europa.eu) 
51 Digital Education Action Plan 2021-2027 
52 European Union Work Plan for Sport 2021-2024 
53 Youth Action Plan (Joint communication by the Commission and the High Representative) | International Partnerships (europa.eu) 

22 

 
 
 
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Climate Agreement, by enhancing 
youth participation and empowerment in the EU's external action policies. 

Youth policy developments following the start of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 have 
in  particular focused  on  youth  work,  based  on  the  new  dedicated  core  field  of  action  – 
Empower – which targets youth work in all its forms as a catalyst for empowerment of young 
people. Youth work brings unique benefits to young people in their transition to adulthood, 
providing a safe environment for them to gain self-confidence, and learn in a non-formal 
way.  Two  policy  documents adopted in 2019 emphasise the need to invest in youth work: 
Council conclusions on  digital youth work and the Council conclusions on education and 
training of youth workers. The policy base on youth work was further strengthened with the 
adoption of the European Youth Work Agenda in 2020.  

Furthermore,  policy  developments  have  also  specifically  aimed  at  strengthening  young 
people’s democratic participation, including through the Council conclusions on fostering 
democratic awareness and democratic engagement among young people in Europe54 and on 
strengthening multi-level governance when promoting the participation of young people in 
decision-making processes55. The EU Children’s Participation Platform 56 involves children 
(0-17)  in  EU  decision-making  and  supports  their  active  participation  in  democratic  life, 
contributing to youth participation and active citizenship in the EUYS. The Commission’s 
Citizenship Package57 aims to support democratic participation by raising awareness on EU 
citizenship rights, including with a Guide to EU citizenship58 targeted to young EU citizens 
(who start being democratically engaged). The Defence of Democracy package59 includes 
the 
relevant  Recommendations: 
engagement and effective participation of citizens and civil society organisations in public 
policy-making processes underlines the importance of promoting the participation of young 
people  and  children  in  democratic  life  in  the  EU  and  refers  to  best  practices  of  existing 
children  and  youth  councils  and  processes,  including  the  EU  Youth  Dialogue.60  The 
Recommendation on inclusive and resilient elections covers supporting young citizens in the 
exercise of their electoral rights, both as voters and candidates, and on promoting political 
engagement,  with  a  special  focus  on  young  people,  especially  first-time  voters.  Youth 
participation is a key feature of the new European strategy for a better internet for kids (BIK+), 
with  active  involvement  of  children  and  young  people  across  the  EU  in  shaping  the  digital 
environment through consultations and youth led activities. 

the  Commission  Recommendation  on  promoting 

Policy developments have also aimed to promote cross-border volunteering. The Council 
recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union61, aims to 
address obstacles to and facilitate cross-border volunteering, in particular for young people 

54 Council conclusions on fostering democratic awareness and democratic engagement among  young people in Europe, 20 November 2020 
55  Conclusions  of  the  Council  and  of  the  Representatives  of  the  Governments  of  the  Member  States  meeting  within  the  Council  on 

Strengthening the multilevel governance when promoting the participation of young people in decision-making processes, 

56 EU Children’s Participation Platform | European Union (europa.eu) 
57 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6330 
58 Citizenship Package - European Commission (europa.eu) 
59 Protecting democracy - European Commission (europa.eu) 
60 Commission Recommendation on promoting the engagement and effective participation of citizens and civil society C(2023) 8627 final 
61 Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union, 5 April 2022 

23 

 
 
 
 
with fewer opportunities, through the European Solidarity Corps as well as national schemes. 
This  also  contributes  to  the  European  Education  Area  through  fostering,  valuing  and 
recognising  non-formal  learning  including  volunteering,  and  enhancing  the  inclusiveness, 
quality and recognition of cross-border solidarity. 

The  European  Year  of  Youth  202262  raised  awareness  of  EU  action  and  strengthened 
opportunities for young people to voice their views, engage in  and influence policies at 
different levels, also giving a boost to the EU Youth Strategy, The objectives of the Year 
were very relevant for and closely linked to the EUYS: 

• 

• 

Renewing the positive perspectives for young people and drawing inspiration from 
their actions, vision and insights; 
Supporting young people, especially those with fewer opportunities to become active 
and engaged citizens and actors of change; 
Promoting opportunities for young people in a green, digital and inclusive world; 

• 
•  Mainstreaming youth policy across all relevant policy areas to encourage that a youth 

perspective is brought into policy-making at all levels. 

The Conference on the Future of Europe63 generated lessons of relevance for participative 
democracy in the EU’s youth policy-making and many of the ideas and proposals on the future 
of Europe concern young people. Building on the success of the Conference on the Future of 
Europe,  Citizens’  Panels  (with  significant  participation  of  young  people)  have  become  a 
regular feature of EU policy making.   

Developments of high relevance for the EUYS also included the 2023 European Year of 
Skills64,  the  Commission  Communication  on  a  comprehensive  approach  to  mental 
health65, adopted in June 2023, and Council Conclusions66 in this area in November 2023, and 
the  Commission  proposal  for  a  Council  Recommendation  ‘Europe  on  the  Move’  – 
learning mobility opportunities for everyone67, as part of the Talent Mobility package, 
adopted in November 2023.   

4.  EVALUATION FINDINGS  

The evaluation framework covers the five evaluation criteria, namely: effectiveness, efficiency, 
coherence, EU added value and relevance. These were operationalised through more detailed 
evaluation  questions  (see  Evaluation  framework  in  Annex  III)  for  the  following  evaluation 
objectives.  

Effectiveness 

•  Evaluate progress in the core areas (Engage, Connect, Empower) and progress towards 

the 11 European Youth Goals, guiding principles at EU and MS level. 

62 European Year of Youth 2022 
63 Conference on the Future of Europe 
64 European Year of Skills (europa.eu) 
65 Communication from the Commission on a comprehensive approach to mental health, COM (2023) 298 final  
66  Conclusions  of the  Council on a  comprehensive approach to  the  mental health of  young people  in  the  European  Union  (C/2023/1337, 

30.11.2023) I 

67  Proposal for a Council Recommendation ‘Europe on the Move’ – learning mobility opportunities for everyone as part of the Talent Mobility 

package.   

24 

 
 
 
 
•  Evaluate the extent to which the EUYS instruments have proven to be effective. 
•  Examine unintended/unexpected effect of the EUYS. 
•  Evaluate  the  extent  to  which  the  EUYS  instruments  have  supported  cross-sectorial 

cooperation and mainstreaming. 

•  Examine the ability of the EUYS to adapt to unforeseen developments and the impacts 
of the Covid 19 pandemic and Russia’s full scale military aggression of Ukraine. 
•  Evaluate  the  impact  of  the  EUYS  on  the  inclusion  of  young  people  with  fewer 

opportunities. 

•  Assess the extent to which the EUYS promotes green and digital transition. 

Efficiency 

•  Evaluate the extent to which the EUYS instruments, structures, processes and activities 

were non-burdensome and cost-effective. 

•  Assess the extent to which the EUYS has used proportionate resources to achieve its 

objectives. 

Coherence 

•  Assess the coherence of the EUYS with wider EU policies and priorities. 
•  Uncover how the different core areas and instruments of the EUYS work together to 

achieve its objectives and are coherent with each other. 

•  Assess the extent to which the EUYS’ coherence was influenced by the European Year 

of Youth. 

EU added value 

•  Assess how and to what extent does the EUYS add value in what MS could achieve on 

their own. 

•  Evaluate to what extent the EUYS promotes cooperation between countries in Europe 

and beyond. 

•  Assess the extent to which the EUYS’ added value was influenced by the European 

Year of Youth. 

•  Explore the possible consequences of discontinuing the EUYS. 

Relevance 

•  Understand the degree to which the objectives of the EUYS remained relevant over the 

period 2019 - part of 2023. 

•  Evaluate how the EUYS still corresponds to the needs and challenges of young people 

and youth stakeholders. 

•  Assess the extent to which the EUYS’ relevance was influenced by the European Year 

of Youth. 

The evaluation covered the period from 2019 to part of 2023. Special attention was given to 
the new or strengthened elements, in particular the renewed EU Youth Dialogue, the FNAPs, 
the EU Youth Coordinator, and the developments related to the new emphasis on quality youth 
work as a specific strand. 

25 

 
 
4.1.  To what extent was the intervention successful and why? 

Effectiveness 

This  section  presents  the  findings  concerning  the  effectiveness  of  the  EUYS  as  a  strategic 
framework at EU and national levels, its effects in relation to the three core areas ‘Engage’, 
‘Connect’ and ‘Empower’, the effectiveness and sustainability of the EUYS instruments, the 
degree of adaptability of the EUYS, and how it has contributed to the social inclusion of young 
people, as well as to the digital and green transitions.  

A  number  of  general  remarks  on  the  effectiveness  of  the  EUYS  need  to  be  taken  into 
consideration: 

•  Among the stakeholders consulted, very few had a clear, comprehensive overview of 
the EUYS as a whole and of its instruments, making it difficult for them to determine 
what exactly has been achieved by the EUYS, over and above what has been achieved 
by its component parts, i.e., its instruments and activities.   

•  Many  stakeholders  consider  the  EU  youth  programmes,  namely  Erasmus+  and  the 
European Solidarity Corps as very closely intertwined with the EUYS and struggle 
differentiating  between  the  contribution  of  the  programmes  and  contribution  of  the 
EUYS. 

•  The EUYS 2019-2027 builds on the previous Strategy (2010-2018) and framework for 
European  cooperation  in  the  youth  field68.  While  the  current  EUYS  has  been 
restructured  and  some  new  instruments  have  been  introduced,  many  activities  and 
priorities  are  a  continuation  of  the  previous  frameworks.  It  is  very  difficult,  if  not 
impossible, to clearly delineate the effects of the current Strategy independently of 
the predecessors. Consulted stakeholders were not always able to differentiate clearly 
between  the  current  and  previous  Strategy  as  from  their  perspective  these  are  a 
continuous effort. Therefore, it is likely that the findings presented in this chapter on 
effectiveness do not solely capture the effects of the current Strategy at mid-term but 
also capture the legacy effects of previous frameworks.  

Key findings related to the effectiveness criterion:  

•  The EUYS has contributed to foster active citizenship, social inclusion and solidarity 
in particular through the EU Youth Dialogue and the EU youth programmes (Erasmus+ 
and European Solidarity Corps). 

•  The EUYS has a positive influence on youth policies at national level as well as on 
youth mainstreaming into other policy areas, resulting in specific and tangible policy 
developments at national level. 

•  The  EUYS  has  fostered  more  inclusive  and  good  quality  youth  work  through  the 
European Youth Work Agenda as well as through aligned priorities and actions in EU 

68  Council Resolution on a renewed framework for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-2018) (2009) 

26 

 
 
 
 
youth programmes. As part of the public consultation, 71% of respondents who were 
aware of the EUYS or of any of its instruments (102 out of 143) considered that the 
EUYS  helped  improve  the  quality  of  youth  work,  while  71%  (101  out  of  143) 
considered that it increased the recognition of youth work. 

•  The  EUYS  has  a  wider  international  influence  beyond  the  EU  through  the 
international dimension of the EU youth programmes and the Youth Action Plan in EU 
external action. 

•  The EUYS has fostered participation of young people with fewer opportunities in the 

EU Youth Dialogue and EU youth programmes.  

•  The EUYS has accelerated the promotion of the green and digital transition through 

its instruments at the EU and national level, albeit to varying degrees. 

The EUYS as a strategic framework 

The  evaluation  found  that  the  EUYS  was  effective  in  promoting  youth  participation, 
fostering  solidarity  and  intercultural  understanding,  supporting  youth  empowerment 
and enabling active citizenship at EU and national levels.  

This  was  achieved  through  a  combination  of  instruments,  with  the  most  important 
contribution by the:   

•  The EUYD celebrates more than 10 years of existence and is the largest participatory 
instrument  at  EU  level  involving  young  people  in  policy  making.  As  flagship 
instrument  of  the  EUYS,  it  directly  boosts  the  active  citizenship  of  those 
participating.  The  EUYD  has  also  contributed  to  stimulate  more  participatory 
initiatives in Member States. The EUYD through its last three cycles, has played a key 
role  in  increasing  the  inclusion  of  young  people  with  fewer  opportunities,  thus 
ensuring a more diverse and representative dialogue.  

•  The mobilisation and monitoring of EU programmes, funds and instruments have 
created important opportunities for young people, focusing on youth mobility and 
volunteering.  The  EUYS  has  effectively  fostered  alignment  of  the  Erasmus+  and 
European  Solidarity  Corps  programmes  with  the  EUYS  objectives.  Examples  of  the 
strengthened  linkages  include  new/adapted  actions  such  as  the  Youth  Participation 
Activities,  DiscoverEU  and  Youth  Worker  Mobility  in  Erasmus+  and  the  Solidarity 
Projects and Humanitarian Aid Strand in the European Solidarity Corps. The EUYS has 
increased  the  awareness  and  accessibility  of  EU  youth  programmes  promoting 
information  about  youth  opportunities  through  the  European  Youth  Portal  and  the 
Eurodesk network. This has empowered young people to contribute to societal debates 
on critical challenges and encouraged them to actively engage with these issues.  

•  The European Youth Work Agenda has strengthened the policy focus on quality 
and recognition of youth work. This acts in combination with EU programmes which 
provide important funding to youth work, including for youth workers mobility, youth 
exchanges and partnerships in the field of youth work. Through transparency tools such 

27 

 
 
as  the  Youthpass69,  young  people  and  youth  workers  can  identify  and  document 
learning outcomes and achievements in cross-border youth and youth work activities 
and volunteering, contributing to recognition of youth work. 

Youth mainstreaming 

The EUYS also  encourages mainstreaming  the youth perspective across different policy 
areas  at  EU  level  and  it  encourages  national  policy  makers  to  strive  for  the  same  through 
national youth strategies or policies. Youth mainstreaming aims to ensure that the effects of 
policies  on  youth  are  systematically  examined  and  considered  when  designing  or  changing 
policies. It also aims to ensure meaningful youth participation and youth representation so that 
the needs and voices of young people are taken into account across different policies. 

When it comes to youth mainstreaming at EU level, the results are somewhat mixed. The 
evaluation  of the EUYS  2010-2018 concluded that whilst  the EUYS  was striving for  youth 
mainstreaming it was making limited progress in this regard at EU level. The creation of the 
EU Youth Coordinator in the EUYS 2019-2027 was partially a response to this conclusion and 
an effort to enhance youth mainstreaming in EU policies and initiatives. This current evaluation 
finds  that  progress  has  been  made  in  youth  mainstreaming  and  the  following  findings  arise 
from the analysis: 

•  There is a stronger emphasis on youth mainstreaming in EU policies beyond the 
youth policy field. This is also shown in the analysis of coherence. Developments such 
as  youth  engagement  in  climate  action,  the  vulnerability  of  young  people  to  mental 
health difficulties during and after the pandemic, exposure and vulnerability of young 
people  to  online  threats  including  misinformation,  cyberviolence  or  fraud,  have 
increased the focus on youth in different policy agendas of the EU.  

•  There has also been an increased exchange on youth at EU level, which has promoted 
more discussions and actions on youth-related challenges and priorities. This was also 
boosted and increased thanks to the 2022 European Year of Youth, which had youth 
mainstreaming as one of its four objectives, and the work of the EU Youth Coordinator.  

•  EU policy makers have actively participated in EUYD discussions and activities, 
indicating a commitment to youth-related initiatives. Other participatory actions such 
as the creation of the EU Children’s Participation Platform, policy dialogues with 
European Commissioners organised in the context of the European Year of Youth, or 
the Youth Sounding Board for youth participation and empowerment in EU external 
action have also emphasised the role of youth and of the dialogue between EU policy 
makers and youth 

•  Nevertheless, despite these efforts, only 31% of the respondents in the survey  for 
young  people  mentioned  that  EU  initiatives  effectively  address  their  needs, 
suggesting room for improvement in this regard. 

69 Welcome to Youthpass | Youthpass 

28 

 
 
 
• 

Interviews  with  national  policy  makers  and  CSOs  revealed  that  some  of  these 
stakeholders were not aware of or expressed doubts about the influence of the EU 
Youth Dialogue on European policy making. 

At national level, the contribution of the EUYS to youth mainstreaming is more indirect 
and depends on the extent to which national youth policies and strategies succeed in fostering 
such mainstreaming. The EUYS shapes national youth policies but the scale and type of effects 
vary greatly across countries. The predecessor EUYS (2010-2018) led to the establishment of 
youth strategies in most EU countries. The focus of the 2019-2027 EUYS has been to influence 
policy  agendas,  frameworks,  and  practices  in  Member  States.    As  a  result,  national  youth 
policies are better aligned with the EUYS and there is therefore less incentive and scope for 
the  EUYS  to  have  a  direct  impact  on  triggering  national  strategies.  Nevertheless,  EUYS 
continues  to  be  a  ‘catalyst’  for  national  youth  strategy/youth  policy  developments,  e.g.  by 
empowering national youth sectors and stakeholders and enhancing their legitimacy also in the 
eyes of policy makers from other sectors in the Member States.  

The  following  factors  were  found  to  limit  the  influence  of  the  EUYS  on  youth 
mainstreaming at national level:  

•  All EUYS instruments, except the EUYD, EU Youth Coordinator and Erasmus+ and 
European  Solidarity  Corps  programmes,  are  solely  targeting  policy  makers  in  the 
field of youth. For example, the evaluation found no evidence that stakeholders from 
outside the youth sector would regularly participate in EUYS mutual learning activities 
or events.  

•  The  EU  Youth  Dialogue,  despite  its  embedded  national  process,  is  sometimes 
perceived as an initiative intended for the EU level, and national stakeholders do not 
always see it as something that could contribute also to national policies. As a result, 
the EUYD does not systematically influence national policy debates and national policy 
development. Stakeholders are not always aware of the final recommendations and even 
less of the follow-up. 

The use of concrete youth mainstreaming instruments (including youth checks, youth tests 
or similar) was not explicitly covered in evaluation questions, however national policy makers 
in Belgium (Flemish Community), Germany, France and Austria, mentioned the existence and 
positive experience with such tools in their countries. A forthcoming analytical report by the 
European Commission (expected in 2024) will present youth mainstreaming approaches in EU 
Member States. The use of a ‘youth test’ in EU policy making was among others advocated by 
the European Youth Forum70. In its conclusions on youth mainstreaming71 , the Council invited 
the Commission to use its Better Regulation framework to factor in the impact of new policies 
on young people.   

On 10 January 2024, the Commission adopted a Communication on the legacy of the European 
Year of Youth 202272. The Communication deepens the youth dimension of EU policies, thus 

70 EU Youth Test | European Youth Forum 
71 Conclusions of the Council of the European Union on promoting youth mainstreaming in policy decision-making processes in the European 

Union, (C/2023/1342) (2023). 

72 Communication on the European Year of Youth 2022.pdf (europa.eu) 

29 

 
 
 
boosting the engagement of young people in the preparation of EU policies. When designing 
EU policies, the Commission will use the full potential of youth mainstreaming as part of the 
Commission’s Better Regulation  framework  and  toolbox, resulting  in a youth  check. These 
tools will be complemented with several  youth-specific instruments under the 2019-2027 EU 
Youth Strategy. 

EU Youth programmes 

At  programme  level,  there  is  a  very  clear  relationship  between  the  EUYS  and  the  EU 
programmes in the field of youth, Erasmus + and the European Solidarity Corps: 

•  The  Erasmus+  and  European  Solidarity  Corps  programmes  are  the  main  and  best-
known instruments of the EUYS. For example, 93% of the respondents to the survey 
of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal group were aware of Erasmus+, and 
90%  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps.  In  the  public  consultation,  95%  of  the 
respondents were aware of Erasmus+ and 80% of the European Solidarity Corps. The 
programmes  offer  a  range  of  opportunities  across  all  education  and  training  sectors, 
youth  and  sport,  among  other  for  young  people,  youth  workers  and  civil  society 
organisations.  

•  Funding  opportunities  have  become  better  focused  and  more  strategic,  e.g.  as 
concerns  new  actions  such  as  Youth  Participation  Activities,  and  the  renewed 
Youth Worker Mobility action under Erasmus+. While the direct contribution of the 
EUYS to these changes is difficult to delineate, it is clear that the EUYS explicitly aims 
to mobilise and promote effective use of EU programmes for its objectives.  

There  is  no  clear  evidence  about  the  effects  of  the  EUYS  on  other  funding  programmes, 
although  positive  steps  were  noted  in  the  context  of  the  European  Year  of  Youth,  with  the 
mobilisation  of  more  than  30  European  Commission  departments  and  services  which 
contributed to the objectives of the Year with more than 130 policy initiatives for young people.  

Youth Work 

The EUYS, in combination notably with the EU funding programmes in the field of youth, has 
contributed to strengthen the quality, recognition and inclusiveness of youth work and 
thus  helped  to  facilitate  young  people's  transitions  to  adulthood,  and  to  the  world  of  work, 
enhancing their skills and competences and their active citizenship. These changes have been 
achieved  through  the  European  Youth  Work  Agenda,  professionalising  youth  work  and 
strategic  cooperation  with  policy  makers  at  EU  and  national  level  and  civil  society 
organisations.  This  also  included  mutual  learning  activities,  notably  the  work  of  the  expert 
group on youth work and associated studies and guidance. 

The CSOs as well as young people surveyed expressed positive views on the contribution of 
youth work to young people in their transition to adulthood, and the recognition and quality 
enhancement of youth work contributing to the developing quality youth work offer.  

Qualitative  evidence  from  interviews,  focus  groups  and  desk  research  show  a  positive 
interaction between the EUYS, EYWA and youth work developments in EU Member States:  

30 

 
 
•  EUYS has acted as a catalyst in accelerating specific efforts in the field of quality 
youth work. This has been achieved by professionalising youth work and increasing 
cooperation between policy makers and civil society organisations at EU and national 
level.  

•  Through the EU youth programmes, the EYWA policy ambition around and support 
for quality youth work can directly reach youth workers and youth organisations and 
contribute to effects such as better recognition of youth work. For example,71% of 
the respondents to the surveys of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups 
considered  that  the  EUYS  increased  the  recognition  of  youth  work.  Tools  such  as 
Youthpass can be a direct trigger for the recognition of youth work. 

•  The Steering Group on the European Youth Work Agenda provided a relevant support 
to the implementation of the EYWA, with several meetings, activities and opportunities 
for the youth work community of practice. 

•  The EU-CoE Youth Partnership has played an important role in the implementation of 
the EYWA, particularly through the research conducted by the Pool of European Youth 
Researchers (PEYR) driving the development of better knowledge and contributing to 
the development of evidence-based youth initiatives such as the EYWA. 

•  There is already a strong network – SALTO – which is funded through the Erasmus+ 
and European Solidarity Corps programmes – and which has two decades of history in 
supporting youth work development and youth workers.  

•  Member States (as well as other countries such as candidate countries) are in different 
stages of development of their youth work systems and youth workers, including the 
professionalisation  and  training  offer  for  this  crucial  group  of  professionals. 
Subsequently there is scope for mutual learning and exchange.  

Youth work was also a sector that was strongly affected by COVID-19 pandemic. The effects 
on youth work were three-fold:  

•  On one hand the restrictions imposed meant that many activities which were delivered 
face-to-face were disrupted (moved on-line, postponed or cancelled. According to the 
study73, 70% of responding youth workers and youth leaders stated that the impact 
was major, and only one percent stated that the pandemic had no effects on their youth 
work.  

•  Vulnerable  groups  were  particularly  affected  by  this  disruption  as  many  youth 
workers and youth organisations lost contact with vulnerable young people during the 
pandemic. 

•  The isolation during the pandemic worsened mental health of many young people, 
highlighted  in  the  focus  group  with  the  CSOs  also,  and  created  increased  or  new 
demand on youth workers which they were not equipped in terms of capacities or also 
in  some  cases  in  terms  of  competences.  As  example,  the  Health  at  a  Glance  report 

73 Krzaklewska, E., Şenyuva, Ö., Covid-19 and learning mobility: a desk research study, Partnership between the European Commission and 

the Council of Europe in the field of Youth, (2020). 0 

31 

 
 
 
202274 reported that 1 in 2 young Europeans reported unmet needs, and that depression 
among young people more than doubled. 

These  challenges  further  strengthened  the  relevance  of  the  EYWA  and  created  a  new 
momentum for cooperation in the field of youth work post pandemic. This development also 
favourably  influenced  the  take  up  of  recommendations  and  guidelines  stemming  from  the 
EYWA and associated activities. 

International dimension 

The international impact of the EUYS is demonstrated by its role in shaping external action 
for youth as well as when it comes to accelerating knowledge exchange and creating positive 
perceptions among international organisations. The EUYS has become a reference and a source 
of  guidance  for  youth-related  actions  in  the  external  context,  while  facilitating  knowledge 
exchange and cooperation with countries outside the EU. This is evident in several ways: 

•  The EUYS has played a key role in shaping the activities and principles implemented 
in the framework of external action for youth. This includes the adoption of the Youth 
Action Plan in EU External Action for 2022-2027, where the EUYS has served as a 
reference  document  providing  guidance  for  youth-related  actions  in  the  external 
actions. 

•  As  mentioned  in  the  key  informant  interviews  with  EU  level  and  international 
organisations the Youth Wiki – Europe’s Encyclopaedia of National Youth Policies 
providing information on youth policies in the EU MS and in 5 candidate countries -  
has facilitated the exchange of knowledge and good practices within the EU and CoE 
countries. An interview with the representative of the UN showed that the Youth Wiki 
was  used  a  reference  point:  “We  used  Youth  Wiki  comparative  overviews  of  what 
happens at national level. For example, we have used it on the matter of social inclusion 
[and how it is addressed] in national youth strategies”. 

•  The  principles  and  model  of  the  EUYS  are  highly  regarded  by  other  international 
organisations  as  a  replicable  model  for  countries  outside  the  EU.  International 
organisations,  including  UNICEF,  view  the  EUYS  positively  and  as  a  source  of 
inspiration. 

•  The  EUYS  has  encouraged  the  participation  of  international  organisations  in 
dissemination  activities,  thus  promoting  the  exchange  of  valuable  information  and 
experience in the youth field. For example, UN staff has participated in EU youth events 
where there was an opportunity to discuss and exchange good practices. The OECD has 
been involved in the dissemination and exchange through their network of “Friends of 
Youth+” under the Public Evidence Committee.  

•  Mutual learning and dissemination have played a crucial role in shaping youth 
practice  in  countries  participating  in  the  Erasmus+  and  European  Solidarity  Corps 
programmes,  including  around  youth  dialogue  and  volunteering  activities.  This  is 
further reinforced by the process linked to the implementation of programme activities, 
which ensures that the experiences of participating organisations are disseminated to 

74 Health at a Glance : Europe | (ec.europa.eu)  

32 

 
 
 
countries  outside  the  EU.  In  addition,  the  participation  of  third  countries  in  the 
Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes demonstrates the international 
reach of the EUYS. 

•  The  EU-CoE  Youth  Partnership  has  brought  an  international  dimension  to  the 
EUYS  through  its  geographical  coverage,  supporting  the  EUYS  in  promoting 
cooperation between countries within and outside of the European Union. 

The  youth  researchers  interviewed  flagged  the  positive  contribution  of  the  EU-CoE  Youth 
Partnership to research on issues faced by youth. The Knowledge Hub75 was mentioned as a 
positive example of the EU-CoE Youth Partnership and focused on the impact of the pandemic 
on young people and the youth sector. In the survey of CSOs the EU-CoE Youth Partnership 
was also positively perceived76. In some of the open-ended questions, the respondents noted 
that  the  organisation  and  professionalism  of  the  EU-CoE  Youth  Partnership  was  a  positive 
factor strengthening the influence of the EUYS.  

Effectiveness of the EUYS’ instruments 

This  section  outlines  how  the  different  instruments  contributed  to  the  effectiveness  of  the 
EUYS  so  far  and  presents  the  contribution  analysis  for  each  of  the  instruments  separately. 
However, it is important to keep in mind that  the instruments are designed to operate in  an 
intertwined manner. They are also expected to have effects at different levels (system level: 
EU and national policies, organisational level: civil society organisations practices, individuals: 
young people). 

The EU Work Plans for Youth: the contribution analysis showed that the activities, 
outputs and results of the EU Work Plans for Youth were achieved. The COVID-19 
pandemic  affected  the  implementation  of  the  2019-2021  Work  Plans  and  some 
activities were modified, rescheduled or cancelled, indicating a successful adaptation to some 
degree. The subsequent Work Plan for the period 2022-2024 compensated partly for the delays.  

The EU Work Plans for Youth are found to have contributed to the medium-term impact of 
ensuring that EUYS activities are focused, driven by agreed priorities and that resources 
are used in a strategic manner towards agreed activities. 

The FNAPs77: Contribution analysis showed that the outputs and results of FNAPs 
were partially achieved. In 2019 and 2021 the FNAPs were only partially completed 
by national representatives and the number of completed FNAPs declined in 2021 
compared  to  2019,  therefore  suggesting  that  they  are  of  limited  added  value  at 
national level. Their current use is primarily at EU level and for EU-level overview of national 
youth strategies. In the consultations, policy makers found them burdensome to complete and 
with limited use, while most other stakeholders indicated limited involvement and awareness 

75 COVID-19 impact on the youth sector | Council of Europe 
76 53% of the CSOs agree (to a very great or great extent) that the EU-CoE Youth Partnership is complementary to existing initiatives/policies 

at the national level 

77 Future National Activities Planners (FNAPs) allows Member States to share on a voluntary basis information on national youth policy 

priorities in line with the EUYS. 

33 

 
 
 
of the FNAPs. This indicates a need to consider alternative ways of gathering information on 
national youth policy priorities and developments, including e.g. through the Youth wiki.   

Evidence-based  youth  policymaking  and  knowledge-building  tools:  the 
contribution  analysis  showed  that  data  have  been  collected,  and  several  studies 
have been carried out to fill the knowledge gap, but the dissemination of evidence 
has not been fully implemented. While progress has been made, challenges remain 
in terms of data availability and interaction between different platforms presenting the data. The 
Expert  Group  on  indicators  made  a  comprehensive  proposal  for  a  monitoring  framework78 
which includes an updated Dashboard of (mainly quantitative) indicators on the situation of 
young people (based on which Eurostat published an updated EU Youth Dashboard in 2022), 
and a new Dashboard of (mainly qualitative) policy indicators on the EUYS instruments. For 
the latter, efforts need to continue on availability and accessibility of data. 

Activities under this instrument contribute to the generation of knowledge about the situation 
of young people and their needs,  about  implementation  of the EUYS  instruments  and about 
youth  policy  developments,  and  this  evidence  is  somewhat  used  for  the  youth  policies. 
Limitations  in  data  depth,  methodology  and  centralisation  hamper  the  wider  impact  of 
evidence-based monitoring and evaluation of the EUYS, suggesting potential for improvements 
through  better  integration  and  access  to  data.  For  this  reason,  the  analysis  showed  that  the 
evidence-based tools somewhat contributed to the medium-term impact of the EUYS in 
enhancing youth mainstreaming and strengthening youth policies. 

The EUYS’ participatory governance aims to involve a wide range of youth 
stakeholders, including national authorities and agencies, young people, youth 
organisations,  experts  and  researchers,  in  particular  through  an  EUYS 
stakeholder  platform  launched  in  2019.  The  meetings  of  the  platform  were 
disrupted by the pandemic and subsequently replaced by the European Year of 

Youth national coordinators and stakeholders’ group meetings.  

There is recognition that the EUYS was designed in a participatory manner (see for example 
the European Youth Goals which were defined through the EU Youth Dialogue and also the 
process with a year of listening that preceded the Commission proposal for the EUYS) and that 
the  Commission  strives  to  also  steer  it  in  a  participatory  manner.  However,  the  EUYS 
stakeholders’ platform meetings were impacted by the pandemic, replaced by webinars due to 
the pandemic, and this could not fully provide for optimal interaction. It remains to be observed 
if the positive experiences with the 2022 European Year of Youth national coordinators and 
stakeholder group can be sustained for a permanent EUYS stakeholders’ group.  Subsequently 
so  far  this  strand  of  activities  contributed  somewhat  to  the  objective  of  participatory 
governance of the EUYS, and youth mainstreaming into different policy areas as well as 
across different levels of government. 

The  EUYD  celebrates  more  than  10  years  of  existence  and  is  the  largest 
participatory instrument at EU level for involving young people in policy making. 
This flagship instrument under the EUYS has been instrumental in systematically 
involving young people in policy debate with policy makers and stakeholders and 
formulating policy recommendations and promoting their active citizenship. The EUYD has 

78 Proposal for an updated dashboard of EU youth indicators | (op.europa.eu) 1  

34 

 
 
 
successfully engaged a diverse range of young people, including those from minority groups, 
indicating a broad inclusivity, which needs to be sustained and efforts made to further involve 
any under-represented groups. Participation of young people with fewer opportunities in the 
EUYD has increased over the cycles (except for NEETs and youth living in rural areas, whose 
representation  decreased  between  2019-2021)  indicating  that  the  EU  Youth  Dialogue  has 
become  more  inclusive  over  time  and  contributed  to  medium-term  impacts  such  as  social 
inclusion but also long-term impacts such as increased youth participation and representation. 

Young people themselves as well as the stakeholders interviewed generally praise its added 
value on the young people who participate.  Almost 90 000 young people have engaged in the 
consultation in the period 2019-(first half)2023, of which 22 000 during the 9th cycle (January 
2022–June 2023). The individual level impact of the EUYD is an important contribution to 
active citizenship. There is however limited evidence that young people who take part in the 
EUYD receive proper preparation and training which would help in particular young people 
with fewer opportunities to build knowledge, confidence and public speaking capabilities, thus 
contributing  to  making  their  inputs  to  the  dialogues  even  more  effective.  The  role  and 
systematic involvement of national youth councils in the EUYD could also be clarified. 

Stakeholders and policy makers at national level are in general very positive about the EUYD 
which  is  clearly  one  of  the  success  stories  of  the  EUYS.  In  terms  of  the  use  of  EUYD 
recommendations, the interviews and desk research show that youth voices are reflected in the 
design of youth policies at EU level. However, there is less evidence about the extent to which 
EUYD  contribute  to  mainstream  the  youth  perspective  in  other  policy  areas.  While  some 
national  policy  makers  report  that  the  results  of  the  EUYD  are  useful  to  design  national 
initiatives,  a  greater  number  perceived  that  the  EUYD  could  be  further  strengthened  by 
increasing ownership at the level of applying it to national youth policies. This will allow the 
EUYD to have the same positive impact on national policies as it has been shown to have at 
EU level.  

Taking this into consideration, the EUYD fully contributed to policymaking, empowering 
young  people's  voices  and  fostering  a  vital  link  between  young  people  and  decision-
makers, however the inclusiveness of the process needs to be kept up and the impact of the 
EUYD recommendations can be further strengthened. 

The EU Youth Coordinator: the first EU Youth Coordinator was appointed in 
June 2021 and was immediately active during the preparation and implementation 
of the 2022 European Year of Youth, which created a strong momentum for inter-
service cooperation and youth mainstreaming. The EU Youth Coordinator set up 
and animated a dedicated informal internal Youth Network, as well as the European Year of 
Youth  national  coordinators  and  stakeholders’  group.  The  Coordinator  was  extensively  in 
contact with many stakeholders and harvested their suggestions and concerns. The EU Youth 
Coordinator  is  relatively  known  among  the  stakeholders  despite  this  role  being  new. 
Interviewees in the evaluation almost uniformly agreed on the benefits of establishing the EU 
Youth  Coordinator  role  and  its  effectiveness,  in  particular  for  knowledge-sharing  on  youth 
needs for cross-sectoral cooperation within the European Commission.  

35 

 
 
The  EU  Youth  Coordinator  is  the  front  runner  for  youth  mainstreaming  in  the  EU.  The 
evaluation  pointed  out  that  the  EU  Youth  Coordinator  mandate  is  very  vast  in  terms  of 
cooperation and communication with external stakeholders. Considering the high expectations 
for this role, adequate resources are required for fulfilling this highly visible role. 

Moreover, the European Year of Youth offered a strong incentive of cooperation and synergies 
between the different Commission departments, as youth was high on the European political 
agenda in 2022. After the Year, the challenge is to maintain the same level of cooperation and 
active synergies.  

The  EU  Youth  Coordinator  has  already  facilitated  the  dissemination  of  knowledge  and 
information  and  contributed  to  the  mainstreaming  of  youth  perspectives  in  EU  policies  by 
speaking  prominently  about  the  youth  perspective,  participating  in  numerous  events  and 
exchanges with internal and external stakeholders, and facilitating the integration of the youth 
perspective in different policy areas. The EU Youth Coordinator participated in and organised 
more than 300 meetings and events on youth mainstreaming and facilitated half of the 27 policy 
dialogues with European Commissioners as part of the European Year of Youth.   

 The  EU  Youth  Coordinator  function  shows  high  potential  and,  despite  the  short  time  of 
existence  of  the  role,  already  contributed  to  the  EUYS’  medium-term  impact  to 
mainstreaming of youth policies and amplifying the voice of youth within the European 
Commission. 

Communicating  the  EU  Youth  Strategy:  aims  to  raise  awareness  and 
understanding of the EUYS through a combination of communication channels.  

While  the  EU  Youth  Report  contains  useful  information  on  different  activities 
implemented under the EUYS, the three years period between publications present a challenge 
as tailored and concise updates on youth are not made available between two editions of the 
EU Youth Report. Furthermore, while the EU Youth Reports present information on different 
actions contributing to the three core areas of the EUYS, the breadth of information may be too 
wide for certain stakeholders who require specified information.  

While  overall  respondents  to  the  different  surveys  are  relatively  aware  of  the  EUYS,  when 
questioned in more detail it appears that the EUYS  is perceived differently among different 
groups. Very often stakeholders associate their perception of EU programmes in the field of 
youth with the EUYS. Others have a fragmented view of the EUYS and focus on the EU Youth 
Dialogue. Young people interviewed during focus groups were also rather critical about some 
communication materials they recalled having been exposed to, for instance some  social media 
posts. This has resulted in the need of a better targeted dissemination strategy for the different 
target groups. 

The  communication  activities  have  targeted  multiple  audiences  and  channels.  For  instance, 
young receive information about opportunities for engagement and participation while decision 
makers might be more interested in information on funding, cooperation opportunities, youth 
policy developments as they are directly engaged in activities of the EUYS. On the other hand, 
CSOs might be interested in receiving information on both. 

While overall the different stakeholders appear to have a positive opinion of the EUYS, this is 
largely linked to the positive view they have of the Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps 

36 

 
 
programmes. The communication activities therefore succeeded in providing information and 
raising  awareness  about  the  funding  opportunities  and  opportunities  in  broader  sense.  The 
extent to which the communication activities are at the service of the EUYS goals around youth 
mainstreaming  and  influencing  of  youth  policies  is  less  clear,  and  the  contribution  to  these 
objectives  seems  more  limited.    Subsequently,  so  far  communication  activities  somewhat 
contributed to mid-term impacts of the EUYS. 

The  mobilisation  and  monitoring  of  EU  programmes  and  funds:  The 
Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes remain the main and best-
known  instruments  of  the  EUYS  among  stakeholders  and  young  people.  The 
EUYS has effectively fostered a stronger alignment of programmes actions with 
the  EUYS  objectives,  promoting  coherence  in  the  funding  opportunities  offered.  The 
mobilisation  of 
these  youth  programmes  promoted  cooperation  between  different 
administrative  levels  and  optimised  the  allocation  of  resources.  According  to  national 
stakeholders, the EUYS has strengthened the links between different EU funding programmes, 
Erasmus+  and  the  European  Solidarity  Corps,  which  now  more  strongly  emphasise  the 
importance of youth and youth work. 

There  are  also  many  other  programmes  and  initiatives  benefitting  youth,  e.g.    the  ESF+ 
promotes  the  social  integration  of  young  people  at  risk  of  poverty  or  social  exclusion,  by 
supporting  equal  access  to  education  and  employment,  and  the  ERDF  contributes  to 
strengthening equal access to employment, education and training, social inclusion, social and 
healthcare,  sustainable  tourism  and  culture,  through  investments  in  infrastructure  and 
equipment, from which young people will benefit. Through the European Technical Support 
Instrument, the European Commission supports EU Member States to design and implement 
reforms that are geared towards supporting young people’s participation in education, training 
and  their  further  integration  into  the  labour  market.  Examples  of  support  include  the 
implementation of the European Child Guarantee Action Plan and fostering the mental health 
and  wellbeing  of  youth.  A  mapping  of  these  programmes,  initiatives,  and  instruments  was 
carried out during the European Year of Youth. 

Efforts taken under the mobilisation and monitoring of EU programmes and funds have fully 
contributed to the EUYS’ medium-term impact to achieve youth active citizenship, social 
inclusion  and  solidarity  enabled  through  policies,  promotion,  support and  supporting 
youth in transitioning into adulthood and working life. 

Youth Information and Support: the contribution analysis carried out for this 
evaluation  shows  that  information  activities  have  been  delivered  through  the 
European Youth Portal and also in combination with the communication activities 
(see  above)  and  through  the  National  Erasmus+  Agencies,  Eurodesk  network, 
multipliers and other stakeholders. Young people are quite aware of EU opportunities as well 
as of the relevant EUYS tools. Similarly, CSOs are well aware of the opportunities as well as 
of the EUYS and related instruments.  

Participation  in  youth  activities  has  been  growing  over  the  past  years.  While  information 
barriers about opportunities to  take part in  different  youth-focused  activities are still ranked 
among important reasons for not participating, financial barriers are far more important. The 
youth survey shows that 47% of young people agree or strongly agree that they and their peers 
are  offered  sufficient  opportunities  to  learn  or  work  abroad  through  EU  programmes,  while 
19% disagree or strongly disagree.   

37 

 
 
Subsequently the youth information and support instrument fully contributed to the level of 
information and awareness  of young people. This  in  turn contributes to  their decisions to 
participate in such activities as a result of which they become empowered and more fulfilled. 

The  European  Youth  Work  Agenda  builds  on  and  benefits  from  the 
developments in the field of youth work which are supported by EU programmes 
in the field of youth. Combined, these tools are seen to fully contribute to fostering 
innovation and recognition of youth work, as well as its quality. Through the work 
on and implementation of the recognition tools of the EYWA, cooperation and commitment to 
efforts in taking up the recognition tools were accelerated across Member States. This in turn 
results in better support to young people. The CSOs surveyed also held a positive view of the 
contribution  of  the  EUYS  to  the  quality  and  recognition  of  youth  work.  The  Youth  Work 
Agenda  therefore  fully  contributes  to  foster  quality  and  inclusive  youth  work  and  thus 
supports  young  people  in  their  transition  to  adulthood.  The  EYWA  is  implemented  through 
collaborations  between  various  stakeholders,  in  particular  the  EU-CoE  Youth  Partnership, 
Member States and the youth work community. Several Transnational Cooperation Activities 
in the area of youth work development under Erasmus+ involve a broad range of stakeholders 
and contribute to strategic progress in the field, one example is the work on local youth work 
resulting in the European Charter on Local Youth Work79. 

Adaptability of EUYS to unforeseen circumstances 

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted some EUYS instruments notably those linked to events 
which prior to the pandemic were largely face-to-face, such as mutual learning activities, youth 
events, and stakeholder interaction. EU programmes in the field of youth were also affected 
and were flexible in adapting to the situation by allowing modification of project activities, 
changing into online activities, postponing, or cancelling some activities. Youth work provision 
was also affected more generally as well as young people who suffered from social isolation 
and whose mental health deteriorated during the pandemic. 

Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine resulted in an inflow of refugees and led to a general 
movement of solidarity. In time, however, this faded in some countries and gave course to more 
polarised  positions.  This  was  accompanied  by  the  spreading  of  mis-  and  disinformation,  in 
particular in countries neighbouring Ukraine. It also led to an increase of energy prices which 
in turn translated into an increase in costs of living, harshly affecting young people in particular 
students or in early careers, but in particular those with low or no income. Inflation and increase 
of interest rates negatively affected access to loans including for young people.  

During  the  period  covered,  EU  countries  also  had  to  face  major  challenges  due  to  climate 
change such as wildfires, floods or draughts. Young people have been mobilised in movements 
related to climate justice and calling for more action including through actions taken under the 
European Year of Youth (e.g., Green Track campaign).  

The EUYS instruments were most directly affected by the pandemic as some activities planned 
in the EU Work Plan for Youth 2019-2021 were modified, postponed, or cancelled.  indicating 
a successful adaption to some degree. The EUYS was able to replace some of the activities by 

79 European Charter on Local Youth Work | (ec.europa.eu)  

38 

 
 
 
online formats. The pandemic and its effects on youth were also covered as a topic for research 
and mutual learning relatively rapidly. Overall, the EUYS adapted reasonably well to the issues 
created by the pandemic, including through exchange of good practices.  

Similarly, following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, through their in-built flexibility, 
EU youth programmes were quickly adapted to help out people from Ukraine fleeing the war, 
many  of  which  were  young  people.  The  European  Youth  Portal  published  information  for 
young people fleeing Ukraine and for young people wishing to help, providing trusted sources 
on EU actions, and debunking disinformation. 

When  asked  about  the  degree  of  adaptability  of  the  EUYS  to  unforeseen  circumstances, 
national  stakeholders  mentioned  that  the  flexibility  shown  by  the  European  Commission  in 
adapting the rules for the implementation of programmes and projects was highly appreciated. 

In general, the main consequences of COVID-19 pandemic were the digitalisation of meetings, 
consultations, and events, as well as a stronger focus on mental health and well-being of youth.  
Overall, the EUYS’ underlying principles and goals remained relevant and resilient during the 
crises, although it was considered that it was not fully effective in directly addressing real needs 
such as cost of living, housing and employment, which become more acute during crises. 

Contribution of the EUYS to the promotion of social inclusion and equality 

The  contribution  of  the EUYS  to  the  promotion of  social  inclusion  and  equality  at  EU  and 
national levels has taken place through several mechanisms:  

•  The EUYS has promoted participation and monitoring of participation of youth with 
fewer opportunities through the EU youth programmes as well as in the EUYD. In the 
EUYD, the participation of youth with fewer opportunities, such as young people from 
minority groups and LGBTIQ youth, has increased over time as shown in the section 
on implementation. This indicates that the EUYS has been successful in making the 
EUYD more inclusive, although efforts should be maintained for young NEETs and 
young people living in rural areas. Inclusion is a horizontal priority in both Erasmus+ 
and European Solidarity Corps and the common framework of inclusion measures as 
well as common inclusion strategy of both programmes and the SALTO Inclusion & 
Diversity help strengthen social inclusion and equality in these programmes. 

•  Studies,  evidence-based  tools,  mutual  learning  and  other  activities  under  the  EUYS 
regularly cover issues faced by youth with fewer opportunities. Examples include the 
work of the Expert Group on mobility of young volunteers and cross-border solidarity, 
which  was  supported  by  a  study  on  removing  obstacles  to  cross  border  solidarity 
activities; the study identified a need for better recognition of volunteering experience, 
inclusion  of  people  from  disadvantaged  backgrounds,  a  need  for  stable  funding  and 
capacity-building  opportunities  for  organisations.  Subsequently,  the  2022  Council 
Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers80 provides measures to promote 
inclusive volunteering opportunities.   

80 Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers across the European Union 2022/C 157/01 (2022)  

39 

 
 
 
•  Through the EYWA, specific attention has been paid to inclusion and providing quality 
youth work to youth with fewer opportunities with a specific focus on youth in remote 
or rural areas.  

Overall, most respondents at national level agreed that the EUYS has promoted or influenced 
the inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities. They also note that this is not a new 
priority in national youth policies, but it is one that needs to continuously remain present and 
be pushed forward. Therefore, even in countries where youth strategies or policies already have 
a strong emphasis on the issues of inclusion of youth with fewer opportunities,  there is still 
space for progress. In this regard the EUYS contributes to making the case for even greater 
inclusiveness. 

The survey carried out among youth shows that financial resources continue being a major 
barrier  for  young  people  to  take  advantage  of  opportunities  to  learn,  work  and  volunteer 
abroad. The EUYS can contribute to address this barrier through the actions of relevant funding 
programmes and specific support provided to participants with fewer opportunities. The EUYS 
is  also  an important mechanism to  continue highlighting  the challenges faced by  youth  and 
pushing the political discussion about support measures forward. 

Contribution of the EUYS to the green and digital transitions 

The contribution of the EUYS to the green and digital transitions at EU and national level has 
been made through several mechanisms. It should be noted that the EUYS 2019-2027 addresses 
the digital transition and its implications for youth in each of the three core areas. The EUYS, 
however, does not directly refer to the promotion of the green transition, except through the 
EYG 10 Sustainable Green Europe.   The  evaluation found that the  contribution  to  the twin 
transition during the 2019-2023 period was made in the following ways: 

•  The protection of the environment and the fight against global warming are a horizontal 
priority for the selection of projects under Erasmus+ and the European Solidarity Corps. 
The EU youth programmes also integrate green practices into projects and encourage 
environmentally  sustainable  and  responsible  behaviour  among  participants  and 
participating organisations.  

•  The  contribution  of  the  EUYS  to  the  green  and  digital  transitions  through  EU 
programmes is also linked to the EYWA, where opportunities are provided for young 
people and youth workers to improve their digital literacy and to recognise their digital 
youth work skills. 

•  The alignment has  also been strengthened through the  creation of two cross-sectoral 
SALTOs  -  SALTO  on  Green  Transition  and  Sustainable  Development  and  SALTO 
Digital - which specifically address the issue of green and digital transitions.  

•  The EUYS has contributed to the green and digital transitions by addressing these issues 
in the EUYD and allowing young people to express their voices and needs related to 
the twin transitions.  In the seventh cycle of the EUYD, special attention was given to 
the digital transition in the context of youth employment. In the ninth cycle of EUYD 
the specific focus was on the EYG 10 Sustainable Green Europe. The discussion on 
youth and the green and digital transition has also been accelerated in national events 

40 

 
 
as part of the EUYD national process. The examples of national activities organised 
under  the  EUYD  on  green  and  digital  transition  has  been  found  across  15  Member 
States.  

•  The green and digital transitions were  also  addressed through the EU Work Plans for 
Youth and the FNAPs. The EUYS has also worked towards addressing the knowledge 
gaps  regarding  the  digitalisation  as  part  of  the  evidence-based  tools,  for  example, 
through  the  EU-CoE  Youth  Partnership’s  publications  on  digitalisation  and  digital 
literacy among youth. 

•  The  digital  transition  is  being  addressed  under  BIK+  through  active  participation  of 
BIK  Youth  Ambassadors  and  Youth  panellists,  including  via  youth-led  events81 
targeting decision-makers, industry and NGOs. 

Transversal considerations on the EUYS as a catalyst of change 

The role of the EUYS extends beyond the specific contribution it has to the effects which have 
been discussed earlier in this section. It also goes beyond the effects of the different instruments 
individually and combined. During the period covered by this evaluation, fewer countries had 
high level or overarching youth strategies than in the baseline period. Nevertheless, the EUYS 
still positively influenced youth policy and youth strategy developments in many Member 
States. In many cases the influences were very concrete and covered the ways in which specific 
aspects of youth policy evolved and in some cases the EUYS acted as an example/inspiration, 
e.g.  giving  legitimacy  to  youth  stakeholders  pushing  for  youth  strategy/youth  policy 
developments at national level. The evaluation found examples of influence across all three 
core areas of ‘Connect’, ‘Engage’ and ‘Empower’. 

The EUYS has an important role as a catalyst of change in youth policies in that it emphasises 
both:  

•  The specific vulnerabilities and challenges of young people across different issues and 
which are tackled by a diversity of policy areas. In this regard the EUYS call for cross-
sectoral  youth  strategies  sends  an  important  signal  to  all  stakeholders  involved  with 
issues related to youth and invites them to consider youth in a holistic perspective across 
policy domains; and  

•  The importance of youth work, youth activities and non-formal and informal learning 
in building young people who are fulfilled and engaged. In that regard it also underlines 
the importance of these activities for the building of cohesive, accepting, diverse and 
inclusive societies.  

This catalyst role of the EUYS is highly welcomed by all stakeholders interviewed. National 
policy  makers  and  youth  CSOs  have  a  positive  view  of  the  EUYS  because  they  see  it  as  a 
mechanism  which  keeps  youth  high  on  the  very  busy  political  agenda,  where  many  issues 
compete for policy makers’ attention and focus. The consistency of the EU in having an EU 
Youth Strategy and in  dedicating activities and resources to  it is  in  itself seen as a positive 
outcome and a signal to other stakeholders of the value of this sector. 

81 Safer Internet Forum 

41 

 
 
 
Efficiency 

This section presents the mid-term analysis of the efficiency of the EUYS, covering the cost-
effectiveness  of  the  EUYS  instruments,  structures,  processes  and  activities,  and  the 
proportionality of resources devoted to the implementation of the EUYS. 

It is possible to identify the following key findings related to the efficiency criterion: 

•  The EUYS as a whole has been cost-effective delivering adequate value for money at 

the EU level.  

•  The total costs of the EUYS are small but appear sufficient and proportional given its 
character as a cooperation framework and what the EUYS has set out to achieve.  

•  The  EUYS  has  not  imposed  significant  administrative  burdens  on  public 
administrations  or  other  stakeholders.  For  example,  in  the    survey  of  CSOs,  youth 
researchers  and  youth  informal  groups,  65%  of,  found  the  administrative  burden 
associated with being involved in EUYS activities and instruments to be proportionate 
to their benefits. 

•  The cost-efficiency differed between EUYS instruments. As it was not possible to 
uniquely allocate costs and benefits to single instruments, no precise comparison was 
made between the EUYS instruments. Some benefits are best considered as a combined 
effect of diverse EUYS instruments. 

•  Minor  improvements  in  cost-efficiency  are  possible.  These  could  be  achieved 
through different  measures,  including  changes  to the format  and modalities  of some 
outputs (e.g. FNAPs where the evaluation found scope for simplification and reducing 
Member States reporting burden), reviewing  resource allocations  or clarifying  scope 
(e.g. for communication activities and for the  EU Youth Coordinator  role which the 
evaluation found broadly formulated).  

The  analysis  used  committed  budget  data  for  selected  activities  in  Erasmus+  and  European 
Solidarity Corps Annual Work Programmes 2019-2022.   

It shows an increase in the total budget allocations in 2022 compared to  the previous years 
(2019-2021), with a noticeable rise in 2022. The increase in budgetary commitments can be 
traced to the transition from the 2014-2020 programme generation to the current programme 
2021-2027.  The  rise  in  2022  can  also  be  attributed  to  the  additional  reinforcement  to  some 
actions within the programmes due to the European Year of Youth.  

Considering the diversity of instruments implemented through these budgets and the fact that 
some Strategy activities are implemented also at national level (EUYD), or that some activities 
require IT infrastructure that necessitates maintenance and updating as well as generation of 
content  (youth  information),  the  resources  allocated  to  the  EUYS  appear  small  in  absolute 
terms and proportionate. 

Stakeholders at the EU and national levels broadly agreed that the costs can be described as 
small or even minimal compared to the benefits brought about by the EUYS. It was however 

42 

 
 
not  possible  to  obtain  precise  estimates  from  Member  State  authorities  on  the  cost  of 
implementing the EUYS at national level.  

Suggestions were also put forward by stakeholders for how the cost effectiveness of the EUYS 
and  its  instruments  could  be  further  improved.  CSOs  and  youth  researchers,  for  example, 
highlighted  that  instruments  such  as  the  EUYS  stakeholder  platform  and  the  EU  Youth 
Coordinator  role  could  be  further  expanded  both  in  scale  and  resources  allocated  to  their 
implementation. In the case of the Youth Strategy Platform, it was specifically reiterated that 
despite there being a wealth of information available about the EUYS, there continued to be 
limited  awareness  and  understanding  among  stakeholders.  Thus,  to  improve  the  cost-
effectiveness of this instrument, it was suggested to improve the communication and promotion 
of available resources to ensure broader awareness and encourage their active usage by youth 
and stakeholders. 

Furthermore,  CSOs  and  youth  researchers  also  emphasised  the  benefits  of  collaborative 
partnerships  and  grassroots  involvement  in  the  effective  implementation  of  the  EUYS, 
underscoring the role of local organisations and stakeholders in the EUYS’ success. Thus, it 
was suggested that even with a small increase in funding for collaborative partnerships and 
grassroot initiatives for local organisations and stakeholders could yield significant benefits.  

Considering the benefits (e.g. better co-ordination and alignment of youth-related strategies, 
policies and programmes  and mainstreaming youth  actions across several  policy areas) that 
have been brought about by the EUYS at mid-term, the analysis points towards the EUYS as a 
whole  being  cost-effective  and  proportionate  to  the  resources  allocated.  Similarly  to  the 
predecessor (2010-2018 EUYS), the EUYS has been able to generate impacts at the EU and 
national levels with relatively minimal resources. The following sub-section provides further 
insights  into  the  cost  effectiveness  of  the  EUYS  at  the  level  of  the  instruments,  structures, 
processes, and activities. 

Selected actions of high relevance for the EUYS  

2019 

2020 

2021 

2022 

European Youth Portal 
European Solidarity Corps Portal  
Support to better knowledge in youth policy 

390,913 

1,238,965 

906,029 

1,900,658 

1,353,386 

1,098,928 

1,013,985 

2,239,798 

Studies 

281,415 

600,000 

0 

650,000 

Presidency events in the field of youth: 
conferences, meetings of ministers and directors-
general 
Cooperation with the Council of Europe 

EU Youth dialogue: support to National Working 
Groups 
Dialogue: Meetings between young people and 
decision-makers in the field of youth83 
Youth events 

498,004 

399,370 

494,265 

500,000 

600,000 

600,000 

600,000 

1,600,00082 

2,108,599 

n/a 

1,028,292 

3,539,590 

7,868,227 

8,029,769 

10,784,276 

19,361,344 

587,189 

0 

12,445 

3,385,766 

82 Budget cover two years 2022 and 2023 (aligned to the work programme) 
83 From 2021 this is part of a broader action: the youth participation activities. 

43 

 
 
 
Networking and communication activities and 
events organised at European level 

399,373 

24,827 

12,250 

487,759 

Table 3 Committed budget (in EUR) for selected actions under the Erasmus+ (youth chapter) and European 
Solidarity Corps 2019-2022 Source: compiled by Kantar Public, 2023 

Cost-effectiveness of the EUYS instruments, structure, processes and activities 

The analysis of the functioning, potential administrative burden, and cost-effectiveness of the 
EUYS and its instruments, structures, processes, and activities at the EU and national levels 
revealed  an  overall  positive  picture.  The  table  below  illustrates  the  estimated  cost-
effectiveness classification of the different instruments. Those that remain undetermined due 
to the time lag between outreach and measuring outcomes or the unavailability of cost data for 
precise estimates. 

High cost efficient 

Adequate cost-efficiency 

Undetermined 

EU Youth Strategy Work Plans 

Mobilising  and  monitoring  EU 
Programmes and Funds 

European Youth Work Agenda 

Future 
Planners 
Evidence-based 
Policymaking 
Building 

National 

Activities 

Learning 

and 

Youth 
and  Knowledge 

Mutual 
Dissemination 
Communicating 
Strategy 

the  EU  Youth 

Participatory Governance 
EU Youth Dialogue 
Youth Information and Support 

Table 4. Cost-effectiveness of the EUYS instruments, structure, processes and activities. 
Source: Kantar Public 

The  analysis  of  the  proportionality  of  the  resources  dedicated  to  the  implementation  of  the 
EUYS and its instruments, found the costs to be overall sufficient with an adequate cost-
benefit ratio. The EUYS Work Plans, for instance, were found to exhibit a favourable balance 
between their relatively low costs and the positive impacts they generate in terms of promoting 
active citizenship and social inclusion. Similarly, the instrument for mobilising and monitoring 
EU  programmes  and  funds  relied  on  using  existing  initiatives  (e.g.  Erasmus+),  thus  no 
significant costs were incurred. However, challenges arise in instruments such as the FNAPs, 
where stakeholders at the national level questioned the usability of the information provided in 
relation to the burden of providing it.  

At the national level, mixed views were expressed by national policy makers and CSOs on the 
cost-effectiveness of the EUYS’ instruments, structure, processes, and activities. For CSOs, 
65% of those responding to the targeted survey agreed that the administrative burden associated 
with being involved in activities under the EUYS was proportionate to the benefits that were 
brought  about.  However,  analysis  of  the  written  responses  found  diverging  ways  of 
understanding  the  EUYS  and  in  particular  its  relations  with  its  specific  instruments  or 
programmes. For example, 45% of the respondents to the survey to CSOs noted that they face 
challenges  in  relation  to  limited  financial  resources  to  participate  in  Erasmus+  and  45%  to 
participate in the European Solidarity Corps. This sheds a negative light on the perception of 
the EUYS by these stakeholders, even though not directly linked to the EUYS as such.  

44 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Despite  this,  national  policymakers  and  CSOs  emphasised  the  need  to  further  emphasise 
initiatives with proven impacts. One notable example was the Erasmus+ programme which has 
demonstrated its effectiveness in supporting educational, professional, and cultural exchanges, 
leading to marked improvements in skills development, employability, social inclusion, and 
active citizenship of young people. Similarly, strengthening integration and leveraging existing 
initiatives, such as the EUYD, was another recurring theme in stakeholders’ views. Increasing 
the awareness and recognition of existing initiatives was thus seen as a way to not only improve 
the visibility of the EUYS, but also improve its cost-effectiveness.   

In  addition,  CSOs  contributing  to  the  group  interviews  raised  challenges  in  accessing  and 
utilising  information  and  resources  from  EUYS  instruments  (e.g.  European  Youth  Portal, 
Youth  Wiki,  DiscoverEU  and  the  EUYS  platform),  primarily  due  to  the  sheer  volume  of 
information  which  has  been  made  available.  They  express  a  certain  degree  of  information 
overload which suggests that there is scope to streamline and simplify information that targets 
this user group. Moreover, while instruments such as evidence-based youth policymaking and 
knowledge building were assessed as having  adequate cost-effectiveness, stakeholder views 
outline  that  the  useability  and  user-friendliness  of  the  instruments  may  also  hinder  their 
potential cost-effectiveness.  

In assessing the cost effectiveness of the EUYS, it was often challenging for stakeholders to 
delineate  potential  burdens  that  may  stem  from  specific  funding  programmes  compared  to 
those  potentially  generated  by  the  EUYS  as  a  cooperation  framework.  Nevertheless,  most 
consulted stakeholders considered the EUYS’ associated costs and burdens to be minimal 
and the overall conclusion points to negligible or low burdens at EU and national levels related 
to the EUYS. 

Coherence 

This  section  presents  the  assessment  of  the  coherence  of  the  EUYS,  including  its  external 
coherence  with  wider  EU  policies  and  the  internal  coherence  of  the  EUYS’  core  areas  and 
instruments, as well as an assessment of the influence of the Year on the EUYS’ coherence. 
Overall, a positive assessment is made of the EUYS’ coherence. 

It is possible to identify the following key findings related to the coherence criterion: 

•  The EUYS aligns with multiple EU policies and strategies, through shared priorities, 
objectivesand values. A positive example is the synergies between youth participation 
and  child  participation  actions84.  The  new  EU  Children’s  Participation  Platform85 
involves children (0-17) in EU decision-making and supports the active participation in 
democratic  life  from  an  early  age,  contributing  to  youth  participation  and  active 
citizenship under the EUYS.  The Commission’s Citizenship Package86  aims to support 
democratic participation by raising awareness on EU citizenship rights, including with 
a  Guide  to  EU  citizenship    targeted  to  young  EU  citizens  (who  start  being 

84 Communication from the Commission on the EU strategy on the rights of the child, COM(2021) 142 final. 
85 EU Children’s Participation Platform | (europa.eu), set up under the EU Strategy for the rights of the child, which creates a space for children 

and young people below the age of 18 to participate in EU decision-making 

86 Citizenship Package - European Commission (europa.eu) 

45 

 
 
 
democratically  engaged).  The  Defence  of  Democracy  package87    includes  relevant 
Recommendations: the Commission Recommendation on promoting the engagement 
and effective participation of citizens and civil society organisations in public policy-
making processes underlines the importance of promoting the participation of young 
people and children in democratic life in the EU and refers to best practices of existing 
children and youth councils and processes, including the EU Youth Dialogue. Another 
example  is  the  synergy  with  demography  policies  prioritising  gender  equality,  non-
discrimination and intergenerational fairness; in this regard, the Communication from 
the Commission “Demographic change in Europe: a toolbox for action” called for the 
support of policy solutions mutually benefitting several or all generations across various policy 
areas such as education and, housing and care and in the workplace88. Youth participation is 
a key feature of the new European strategy for a better internet for kids (BIK+): in 2023, 
around 960 activities organised by the Safer Internet Centres and the BIK platform89 
involved  actively  children  and  young 
with  funding  under  Digital  Europe, 
people.90However,  although  there  are  many  synergies  across  EU  policies,  there  is 
limited evidence on concrete actions of complementarities and synergies, highlighting 
existing room for enhanced cooperation at EU level.  

•  The EUYS ensures coherence with international obligations by reflecting some of 
the  priorities  contained  in  the  17  United  Nations  Sustainable  Development  Goals 
(hereafter  referred  to  as  ‘UN  SDGs’),  notably  inclusion  (UN  SDG  16),  reducing 
inequalities (UN SDG 10), decent work and economic growth (UN SDG 8), and the 
green  transition  (UN  SDGs  12  and  13).  Nevertheless,  there  is  scope  for  further 
highlighting linkages and for developing the communication around these. 

•  The instruments and core areas of the EUYS are largely internally coherent; the 
EU  Youth  Dialogue,  Erasmus+  and  European  Solidarity  Corps  programmes  in 
particular emerged as the instruments fostering the most synergies. 

•  The European Year of Youth positively influenced the coherence of the EUYS, by 
enhancing coordination and mobilisation in the area of youth and around  the EUYS, 
and  by  contributing  to  the  launch  of  multiple  initiatives  that  are  relevant  to  the 
implementation of the EUYS. 

Coherence with wider EU policies, strategies, priorities, and with international obligations 

The first aspect of the coherence assessment of the EUYS focuses on its external coherence 
with  wider EU policies, strategies and priorities, as well as international obligations.  Youth 
mainstreaming is an explicit objective of the EUYS and relies on cross-sectoral cooperation at 
all  levels  of  decision-making,  promoting  synergies  and  complementarities,  and  youth 
involvement. 

Similarly to the predecessor (2010-2018 EUYS) the EUYS is broadly coherent with wider EU 
policies, strategies, and priorities. Such links and complementarities largely emerge through 

87 Protecting democracy - European Commission (europa.eu) 
88 Communication: 'Demographic change in Europe: a toolbox for action' 
89 BIK Portal: www.betterinternetforkids.eu; BIK Youth Portal: www.bikyouth.eu.  
90   Communication from the Commission on “A Digital Decade for children and youth: the new European strategy for a better internet for 

kids (BIK+), COM/2022/212 final 

46 

 
 
 
shared  common  objectives,  priorities  and  focus  areas,  and  sometimes  through  explicit 
references to the EUYS and its instruments. 

Examples of policies and strategies which explicitly reference the EUYS (or its instruments) 
and/or the European Youth Goals are: 

• 

the LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-202591, which makes direct reference to the EU 
Youth Dialogue and the European Youth Goals; 

•  The EU anti-racism action plan 2020-202592, which emphasises the important role of 
young  people  in  combating  racism  and  discrimination  and  directly  refers  to  the  EU 
Youth Dialogue, the EU Solidarity Corps and Erasmus+; 

•  The Defence of Democracy package93, which underlines the importance of promoting 
the participation of young people and children in democratic life in the EU and refers 
to best practices of existing children and youth councils and processes, including the 
EU Youth Dialogue.94 

• 

• 

• 

• 

the EU Strategy on the Rights of the Child95, which makes a reference to the EU Youth 
Dialogue as a way to promote democratic participation; 

the European Democracy Action Plan, which builds on the EUYS focus on promoting 
active  citizenship  among  young  people  and  foresees  the  use  of  EU  funds  and 
opportunities  under  the  EUYS  (among  others)  to  foster  access  to  democratic 
participation and trust in democracy; 

the  Commission  Communication  on  a  comprehensive  approach  to  mental  health96, 
adopted in June 2023, has a strong focus on boosting the mental health of children and 
young  people,  with  several  flagship  initiatives,  including  a  child  and  youth  mental 
health network, a prevention toolkit, and activities to protect young people in the digital 
sphere, and makes reference to the EUYS and European Youth Goals;  

the Youth Action Plan in EU External Action, which mirrors the structure of the EUYS 
around  the  core  areas  of  ‘Engage,  ‘Connect’  and  ‘Empower’,  and  contributes  to  the 
international dimension of the EUYS. 

•  The European Alliance for Apprenticeships (EAfA), has set up since 2017 the European 
Apprentices  Network  (EAN)  to  involve  young  people  in  vocational  education  and 
training, in particular apprentices in the development of the Alliance 

More  frequently,  external  coherence  of  the  EUYS  is  about  alignment  (rather  than  explicit 
references  and  mentions).  Such  an  alignment  materialises  through  the  fact  that  the  other 
policies  and  strategies  concern  (some  of)  the  same  priorities  and  values  as  the  EUYS,  the 
European Youth Goals and/or the EUYS’ core areas and guiding principles. 

91  The LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025  | (europa.eu)  
92 The EU anti-racism action plan 2020-2025 | (europa.eu) 
93 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_6453 
94 Commission Recommendation on promoting the engagement and effective participation of citizens and civil society (C(2023) 8627 final 
95 Communication from the Commission on the EU strategy on the rights of the child, COM(2021) 142 final. 
96 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the 

Committee of the Regions on a comprehensive approach to mental health COM(2023) 298 final 

47 

 
 
 
The coherence of the EUYS’ focus areas and priorities with the broader EU policy framework 
was  confirmed  by  the  consulted  stakeholders.  One  of  the  factors  contributing  to  this  is  the 
transversality of youth as a topic, which intersects with multiple policy areas, for instance 
education, employment, health, culture and environment. As such, the EUYS was found to be 
successful in encompassing and highlighting multiple policy priorities - for instance relating to 
sustainability,  youth  employment,  lifelong  learning,  equality  and  inclusion.  and  allowed  to 
create complementarities with other policy areas,  

Key  informant  interviews  also  mentioned  active  efforts  to  promote  synergies  between  the 
EUYS  and  other  EU  policies,  in  particular  through  the  establishment  of  the  internal  Youth 
Network,  and  the  EU  Youth  Coordinator,  in  increasing  the  visibility  of  the  EUYS  and 
promoting  connections  between  policy  areas.  These  efforts  contributed  to  creating  a  better 
overview  of  initiatives  and  resources  supporting  youth  and  fostering  the  exchange  of 
information and ideas across Commission departments. Overall, the alignment of the EUYS 
with  the  broader  EU  policy  framework  was  largely  visible  in  policy  documents  and  some 
positive examples of collaborative efforts emerged.  

Concerning  the  international  sphere,  despite  evidence  being  relatively  limited,  the  EUYS 
appears to be broadly coherent with international obligations, while also being considered 
as  a  relevant  instrument  at  international  level  in  the  field  of  youth  policy.  Alignment  with 
international obligations is primarily reflected by the fact that the EUYS encompasses some of 
the priorities contained in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) (e.g. inclusion, 
reduced inequalities, decent work, the green transition), thus contributing to their achievement. 
Strengthening of the EUYS’ international dimension was also provided for by the Youth Action 
Plan  in  EU  external  action,  which  aims  to  promote  the  engagement  of  young  people  as  a 
strategic partner in EU external action, to make progress towards international commitments 
such as the UN SDGs. 

Nevertheless,  some  stakeholders  at  the  international  level  considered  that  the  EUYS  could 
place  more  emphasis  on  promoting  global  themes  like  sustainable  development,  hunger, 
poverty, peace and security, and highlight linkage with the UN SDGs. This could also be used 
for communication, to increase the visibility of these linkages.  

Finally, it is relevant to note that most national youth strategies have a degree of alignment 
with the EUYS in terms of policies and priorities. Even in countries where the existence of a 
national youth strategy preceded the adoption of the EUYS, such coherence exists. Some of 
the aspects most prominently covered across national strategies, in line with  the EUYS, are 
youth democratic participation and the reduction of social and cultural inequalities, aimed at 
promoting social inclusion. Complementarities between the EUYS challenges and objectives 
and  national  youth  strategies  were  recognised  by  most  of  the  stakeholders  consulted. 
Specifically, the Erasmus + and European Solidarity Corps programmes emerged to be by far 
the  highest  degree  of  complementarity  with  existing 
instruments  showcasing 
the 
initiatives/policies at national level.  

Coherence of the EUYS’ core areas and instruments 

The  internal  coherence  of  the  EUYS’  core  areas  and  instruments  was  another  focus  of  this 
evaluation. The final evaluation of the 2010-2018 EUYS reported mixed views on its internal 

48 

 
 
coherence,  with  some  stakeholders  being  unable  to  make  a  judgement  on  this  aspect.  This 
evaluation  found that  the focus on three core  areas instead of eight thematic ones  as  in  the 
previous Strategy resulted in strengthening the internal coherence of the 2019-2027 EUYS. 

While it is important to note that stakeholders often lacked complete knowledge/overview of 
the instruments of the EUYS, they often found the EUYS’ areas and instruments to be overall 
complementary and to allow for the creation of synergies, while providing different avenues 
for engagement and participation. In particular, the EUYD was the instrument most frequently 
mentioned  as  an  enabler  of  synergies,  specifically  with  the  core  areas  of  ‘Engage’  and 
‘Connect’.  The  instrument  relating  to  the  mobilisation  and  monitoring  of  EU  funds,  and 
particularly  the  Erasmus+  and  European  Solidarity  Corps  programmes,  also  emerged  as 
important drivers of synergies with each other and with the three core areas. 

Influence of the European Year of Youth on the EUYS’ coherence 

The European Year of Youth had an overall positive impact on the coherence of the EUYS. It 
is important to note that evidence on this aspect is relatively limited yet and the impacts might 
take  time  to  materialise  fully  as  the  Year  was  only  closed  in  spring  2023.  However,  the 
feedback and information gathered so far reveal the coherence and synergies of the objectives 
of and activities carried out during the Year with the EUYS.  

The Year contributed to enhancing coordination between different services in relation to youth 
and the EUYS, as it mobilised different Commission departments, as well as youth departments 
at national level. It also led to the mobilisation of young people and relevant stakeholders in 
the field, through the more than 13,000 activities organised at national, EU and international 
level across 67 countries. The Year thus allowed to increase the visibility of the instruments 
and priorities of the EUYS, promote engagement in the activities of the EUYS and enhance 
support for its implementation. 

The Year allowed to establish connections and complementarities between the EUYS and other 
policy areas. Importantly, some key initiatives were launched in the context of the Year, such 
as ALMA, the Youth Action Plan in EU External Action 2022-2027, the new European strategy 
for a better internet for kids (BIK+), the 2023 Flagship Technical Support Project Youth FIRST 
supporting  children  and  youth  wellbeing,  education,  training,  social  protection  and  labour 
prospects,  or  the  Green  Track  Campaign,  which  show  coherence  between  the  Year  and  the 
EUYS, as well as with other EU level policy priorities. Moreover, several initiatives aimed at 
strengthening the voice of young people into the policy dialogue, such as the Youth Talks, the 
policy  dialogues  between  young  people  and  European  Commissioners,  the  youth-led  Safer 
Internet  Forum  ,and  the  Youth  Voice  Platform,  positively  contributing  to  the  priorities  and 
goals of the EUYS. 

The Year was a highly politically visible initiative and created incentives for cooperation and 
coordination between the different  parts of the  European Commission.  The Youth Network 
coordinated  by  the  EU  Youth  Coordinator,  and  more  than  30  European  Commission 
departments  and services  contributing  to  the Year with  more than 130 policy initiatives for 
young people, are testimony to this strengthened coherence in connection with the EUYS. The 
challenge and opportunity for the next phase of the implementation of the EUYS will be to 
continue and maintain the momentum created by the European Year of Youth and keep a high 

49 

 
 
focus  on  youth  mainstreaming  in  the  coordination  and  cooperation  at  EU  level,  including 
across future policy developments. 

4.2.  How has the EU intervention made a difference and to whom? 

EU added value 

This section presents the findings on the EU added value of the EUYS as a strategic framework 
at the EU and national level and its impact in terms of scale, scope, role and process, its value 
in promoting cooperation between countries in Europe and beyond, the impact of the Year on 
the EUYS added value, and the consequences of discontinuing the EUYS. Overall, the desk 
research,  stakeholder  consultations  and  country  research  conducted  allowed  for  a  positive 
assessment of the EU added value of the EUYS.   

It is possible to identify below key findings related to the EU added value criterion:  

•  The EUYS provided added value beyond what Member States could achieve on their 
own.  For  example,  in  the  public  consultation  for  this  evaluation,  68%  of  the 
respondents97indicated  that  the  EUYS  had  provided  additional  value  beyond  what 
Member States could have achieved on their own to a great or certain extent. 

•  The EUYS generates added value by  

-  providing a policy framework to funding programmes with strong youth focus, 

- 
- 

- 
- 

notably Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps;  
facilitating knowledge sharing and exchange of experience; 
acting as an example and catalyst for national and international youth relevant 
policy development;  
creating collective responsibility in addressing youth challenges at the EU level;  
increasing the understanding of youth as a complex target group that requires 
holistic approaches. 

•  The  European  Year  of  Youth  had  a  positive  impact  on  the  added  value  of  the 
EUYS,  as  it  raised  awareness  of  available  opportunities  and  improved  the 
understanding of complementarities between policies and instruments. 

•  A  discontinuation  of  the  EUYS  would  have  several  negative  consequences,  like 
fragmented EU funding in the field of youth; decline in perception of the importance of 
the  youth  perspective  among  decision  makers  including  from  other  policy  fields; 
limited cross-sectorial cooperation at EU level; fewer opportunities for youth to input 
into  EU  level  decision  making;  slowing  down  of  progress  of  youth  related  policy 
development and actions in Member States. 

EU added value of the EUYS as a strategic framework  

The EUYS provides an overarching policy framework to funding activities at EU level through 
programmes with a strong youth focus notably Erasmus + and European Solidarity Corps. The 
activities funded through the programmes are aligned with EUYS priorities (see effectiveness 

97 Excluding young people as this question was not asked in the questions routed to young respondents.  

50 

 
 
 
section)  which  ensures  the  funding  contributes  to  a  commonly  agreed  set  of  broad  goals. 
Without the EUYS these EU funding programmes would still be providing funding towards 
actions  in  the  field  of  youth,  however  it  is  highly  likely  that  these  actions  would  be  more 
fragmented in terms of focus. 

The  EUYS  provides  stakeholders  with  a  platform  for  exchange  and  sharing  of  experience 
which  in  turn  influence  the  development  of  national  youth  policies  (see  section  on 
effectiveness), albeit to a varying degree, and also the work of youth organisations. 

The  EUYS  as  a  catalyst  in  youth  policies  brings  benefits  beyond  what  individual  Member 
States and stakeholders could achieve on their own. The existence of a youth strategy at EU 
level signals, to youth stakeholders as well as other policy makers, that the youth perspective 
and considerations for youth impact are important for the development of all relevant policies. 
This catalyst role supports youth policy makers and other youth stakeholders in national agenda 
setting and policy making processes. The youth sector may sometimes suffer from being under-
valued by stakeholders from other sectors. Having a youth strategy at EU level gives a boost 
to the way in which youth sector stakeholders can position themselves in decision-making at 
country level. 

In  parallel  to  its  role  as  a  catalyst  in  policy  development  noted  above,  the  EUYS  also 
strengthens the understanding among policy makers of the fact that young people are a complex 
target  group  facing  possibly  multiple  vulnerabilities  but  also  representing  the  future  of  our 
societies and therefore needing  dedicated  attention and holistic approach.  Previously  young 
people were often seen only through specific lenses, such as unemployment, education, and 
democratic participation. The EUYS has followed the dual approach as a guiding principle – 
specific  actions  in  the  youth  sector  and  mainstreaming  youth  across  different  policies. 
Furthermore, the emphasis of the EUYS on youth direct participation was also flagged as value-
added and supporting change, particularly in countries where traditionally young people were 
spoken on behalf of by persons from other age groups. 

The EU added value of the EUYS as a framework for driving change for national youth policy 
making is evident but depends very much on the tradition and starting position of the country 
concerned. 

The  added  value  of  the  EUYS  at  the  level  of  Member  States  is  present,  albeit  to  a  varying 
degree, in terms of the scope and scale of the effects. The assessment showed that the EUYS 
represents a specific effort to empower and engage young people across Europe and beyond, 
with  the  goal  of  fostering  active  citizenship,  social  inclusion,  and  solidarity.  However,  the 
impact  of  the  EUYS  is  not  uniform  across  the  diverse  landscape  of  EU  countries.  The 
evaluation  shows  that  even  countries  with  a  strong  alignment  between  their  national  youth 
policy and EU-level policy see the added value of the EUYS. At the same time, the added value 
was also observed in countries without a national youth strategy. 

Moreover, the general public via the public consultation, interviewed stakeholders from EU 
institutions and policymakers at the national level, and surveyed CSOs, also confirmed that the 
EUYS provided added value beyond what Member States could achieve on their own.  

51 

 
 
Figure 6. To what extent has the EU Youth Strategy provided additional value to what Member States could 
have achieved on their own? (N=91).  
Source: Kantar Public – Public Consultation on the EU Youth Strategy, 2023. 

The results from the surveys with young people and CSOs are condensed in the figure below, 
demonstrating the role of the EUYS in key areas, namely education and mental health, youth 
engagement, and stakeholder engagement.  

Figure 7. Role effects of the EUYS identified by young people and CSOs.  
Source: Kantar Public – survey of CSOs and survey of young people, 2023 

In addition to its added value in terms of the scale of support to Member States and the range 
of  issues  addressed,  the  EUYS  plays  an  important  role  in  fostering  cooperation  between 
countries  in  Europe  and  beyond.  It  facilitates  transnational  exchanges,  consultations,  and 
dialogue between institutions and organisations in the Member States, thus promoting mutual 
learning and sharing of successful approaches.  The EUYS encourages stakeholders to work 
together,  creating  networks  and  stimulating  cooperation  in  youth  work  at  the  national  and 
transnational  levels.  Mechanisms  such  as  peer  learning  activities  and  dialogues  deepen 
countries'  understanding  of  youth-related  policies  and  enable  them  to  reflect  on  their  own 
strategies.  The  EUYS  also  promotes  engagement  between  policymakers  and  youth 
organisations, facilitating networking and cross-border engagement. By providing a platform 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
 
for  countries  to  share  knowledge,  exchange  ideas  and  learn  from  each  other,  the  EUYS 
enhances cooperation, coherence, and awareness of the youth perspective at regional, national 
and international level. 

In addition, the contribution analysis shows that the mutual learning activities, which aim at 
strengthening cooperation between Member States, brought strong added value. The analysis 
also  showed  that  the  EU  Youth  Coordinator,  the  evidence-based  tools,  the  participatory 
governance and the EUYD added value to what the Member States could have achieved on 
their own. This impact was also visible beyond the EU through the EU-CoE Youth Partnership 
and the Youth Action Plan in EU External Action. 

Impact of the European Year of Youth on the EUYS added value  

The  Year  had  a  positive  impact  on  the  added  value  of  the  EUYS.  As  pointed  out  in  the 
coherence section, the Year and its objectives were fully in line with the EUYS objectives and 
EYGs.  The  volume  of  Year  activities  and  their  strong  alignment  with  the  objectives  of  the 
EUYS show that the Year has accelerated the visibility of opportunities linked to EUYS for 
young people and youth stakeholders. The interviews at EU and national levels showcased that 
the  Year  and  its  relevant  initiatives  provided  a  platform  for  coordination,  networking,  and 
information gathering on youth-related activities while at the same time raising awareness of 
available  opportunities  and 
the  understanding  of  policy 
complementarities. This contributed to the visibility and recognition of the EUYS. 

funding  and 

improving 

At the EU level, the Year also facilitated internal networking within the European Commission, 
leading  to  improved  youth  mainstreaming,  policy  coordination,  and  reflection  on  tools  to 
enhance the consideration of impacts on young people in legislative processes. It also raised 
awareness, promoted communication, and created a space for dialogue, fostering recognition 
and support for youth-related policies.  

While  the  positive  impact  of  the  Year  was  recognised  at  the  EU  level,  consultations  with 
policymakers at national level revealed varying perceptions. The Year played an important role 
in shaping youth policy across the EU, but the perceptions of national policy makers on  its 
impact  varied  among  Member States. While  many  experienced significant  positive changes 
(national  policy  makers  from  13  Member  States  indicated  that  the  Year  had  a  strong  or 
moderate positive impact), some observed limited positive impact or made no observation on 
this. The figure below summarises the perception of the national policy makers on the Year, as 
gathered during national interviews.  

53 

 
 
Figure 8. National policy makers perceptions on the added value and impact of the Year. 
Source: Kantar Public based on the country research. 

Consequences of discontinuing the EUYS  

The effects of discontinuing the EUYS  at EU level would be largely adverse. The negative 
consequences are mainly related to the positive results of the EUYS in promoting cross-sectoral 
cooperation, mainstreaming youth in policy and strengthening the connection, engagement and 
empowerment of young people at EU level: 

•  Limiting  the  extent  of  cross-sectoral  cooperation  between  the  Commission  services. 
There  would  be  less  attention  paid  to  youth  mainstreaming,  possibly  returning  to  a 
situation where each department would continue its own activities in the field of youth 
without there being coordination and active synergies. 

•  Decline  in  the  perception  of  the  importance  of  the  youth  perspective  in  the  eyes  of 

decision makers. 

•  Absence of clear and dedicated policy linkages and priorities for EU programmes in 

the field of youth – Erasmus + Youth and European Solidarity Corps. 

•  Substantially fewer opportunities for youth to input into EU level decision making.  
•  Less comparative evidence about the situation of youth and about youth policies. 

At the national level, the discontinuation of the EUYS would have effects mostly due to its 
value as a catalyst nature, as explained above. Overall, national level policymakers stated that 
there  would  be  less  policy  input  on  the  youth  perspective  from  Member  States,  leading  to 
uneven  levels  of  importance  of  youth  policies  and  differences  in  support  for  young  people 
across the EU. The absence of the EUYS could make it more difficult to achieve visibility and 
legitimacy for youth-related issues, especially in countries where the political context does not 
prioritise youth policy. National policymakers perceive varying degrees of consequences of a 
discontinuation of the EUYS. 

54 

 
 
 
 
Figure 9. Perceptions of national policy makers on consequences of discontinuing the EUYS.  
Source: Kantar Public – country research, 2023. 

4.3. 

Is the intervention still relevant? 

Relevance  

This  section  presents  the  findings  on  the  relevance  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy,  particularly 
regarding the extent to which the EUYS objectives remained relevant over 2019-2023; how 
well the EUYS objectives still correspond to the needs and challenges of youth today; and the 
extent to which the EUYS’ relevance has  been  influenced by the European Year of Youth. 
Overall, the evaluation allowed for a positive assessment of the relevance of the EUYS.  

It is possible to identify below key findings related to the EU relevance criterion:  

•  The EUYS was relevant in addressing diverse youth needs during 2019-2023, due to 
the broad formulation of  its objectives and the comprehensiveness of the EYGs 
and  guiding  principles,  and  this  is  confirmed  also  by  the  perceptions  of  EU  and 
national policy makers, and CSOs. 

•  Since the launch of the EUYS 2019-2027, new needs have emerged that have been 

addressed via the EUYS, albeit to varying degrees. 

•  The  2022  European  Year  of  Youth  brought  a  number  of  benefits  increasing  the 
relevance of the EUYS. In the survey of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal 
groups, 63% of respondents that were aware of the EUYS, considered that the European 
Year of Youth made the EUYS more relevant to their organisation. 

Stakeholders’ perceptions of the relevance of the EUYS objectives during 2019-2023 

The focus of the EUYS has been broadened compared to the previous Strategy, to cover the 
complex  landscape  of  youth  challenges.  During  the  2019-2023  period,  young  people  faced 
challenges  in  different  areas  of  their  lives,  which  were  then  exacerbated  by  unforeseen 
circumstances,  such  as  the  Covid-19  pandemic  and  Russia's  full-scale  invasion  of  Ukraine 
which led to inflation and exacerbated costs of living challenges. 

Generally, policymakers at EU and national level consider the EUYS relevant and sustainable 
because  of  its  broadness  and  adaptability  to  specific  youth  needs  over  time.  EU  level 
policymakers also appreciated the EUYS’ comprehensive nature for identifying interventions 

55 

 
 
 
 
to  support  young  people,  including  the  fostering  of  youth  participation  and  engagement 
opportunities. 

Similarly,  national  policymakers  considered  the  EUYS  to  be  relevant  in  addressing  youth 
needs, either directly through EU level initiatives or by encouraging national initiatives. The 
main topics addressed by the EUYS considered particularly relevant by national policy makers 
consulted as part of the country research include youth engagement and participation, mental 
health and well-being,  and inclusion:  in  most countries’ views, these were aligned with  the 
objectives  of  the  EUYS.  The  relevance  of  the  EUYS  is  highlighted  by  the  way  national 
policymakers  used  the  EUYS  as  a  framework  to  adopt  their  own  initiatives.  The  national 
policymakers  interviewed  considered  the  EUYS  relevant  for  addressing  youth  needs, 
particularly when it came to barriers to mobility, education, and digital skills development.   

The  stakeholders  reached  through  the  public  consultation,  and  civil  society  organisations, 
further confirmed the relevance of the EUYS, and that the core areas of ‘Engage’, ‘Connect’ 
and ‘Empower’ capture  most challenges  faced by youth  as well as the youth  initiatives put 
forward. According to the results of the public consultation, the three main challenges faced by 
young people between 2019 and 2022 were the rising cost of living, mental health and well-
being, and financial stability. The costs of living and financial stability were not seen to be 
specifically and directly addressed by EUYS instruments and activities in the period covered. 

According to civil society organisations, at the EU level, the EUYS is most relevant to address 
insufficient youth participation and social exclusion or discrimination, followed by the green 
transition. 

EUYS’ correspondence with current youth needs and challenges 

Many of the above issues were identified in the survey of young people and CSOs in the youth 
field, who overall converge about the fact that the highest priorities are:  

• 
Inflation and costs of living;  
•  Mental health and well-being;  
•  Unemployment; and  
•  Environment and sustainability.  

In general, the broadness of the EUYS objectives, core areas, principles, and European Youth 
Goals were found to respond to a range of challenges of young people. In particular, the results 
of the youth survey and the survey of CSOs on this question are shown below. 

56 

 
 
Figure 10. Issues important to young people based on survey with youth.  
Source: Kantar Public – survey of young people, 2023. 

According to the national policy makers, the three major youth needs identified at the national 
level  include  mental  health  and  well-being,  youth  participation,  and  inclusion.  In  most 
countries’  views,  these  were  aligned  with  the  objectives  of  the  EUYS.  The  national 
stakeholders interviewed had mixed views about the extent to which these issues are tackled 
by the EUYS. While some consider the alignment is good, others have more temperate views 
about it. 

Stakeholders at EU level identified several challenges currently facing young people. Among 
these, the lasting  effects of unforeseen  circumstances  such as the COVID-19 pandemic and 
Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine were the most frequently mentioned. At the same time, 
policy  makers  at  EU  level  reiterated  issues  such  as  the  increased  cost  of  living,  youth 
participation,  challenges  related  to  digitalisation,  mental  health  and  well-being,  youth 
unemployment and mainstreaming of youth policies. At the same time, it was pointed out that 
challenges such as the cost of living are complex issues tackled by several policy areas and that 
the EUYS could not be the main framework for addressing such issues and providing direct 
solutions.  In  their  view,  the  EUYS  has  been  particularly  useful  in  addressing  youth 
participation  and  involvement,  raising  the  visibility  of  the  youth  perspective  and  policies, 
promoting  networking  among  young  people,  supporting  young  people  with  fewer 
opportunities,  the  green  transition,  youth  work  and  volunteering.  Based  on  the  consultation 
activities, the EUYS could nevertheless more visibly address the impact of some of the new/re-
surging challenges (e.g. cost of living).  

Influence of the European Year of Youth on the relevance of the EUYS 

The  Year  increased  the  relevance  of  the  EUYS  through  several  activities  that  made 
stakeholders  more  aware  of  the  opportunities  available  to  young  people  and  youth 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
 
stakeholders. The Year was positively perceived by participants in the Year’ activities and by 
the stakeholders consulted as part of this evaluation.  

Based on  a survey conducted among young people, stakeholders, and national  coordinators 
involved in the Year, the Year brought a number of benefits to the participants. These included 
higher  involvement  of  young  people  in  youth-related  activities  through  conferences  and 
awareness campaigns, increased youth empowerment to become active and engaged citizens, 
improved  young  people’s  awareness  of  opportunities  and  resources  available  to  them, 
contribution  towards  better  connection  of  youth  through  stronger  networks,  and  increased 
participation  by  youth  in  decision-making  processes.  These  results  suggest  that  the  Year 
brought several benefits in line with the EYGs, thereby contributing to the achievement of the 
EUYS’ objectives.  

In  addition,  consultations carried out  as  part of this  evaluation,  showed that  national  policy 
makers  held  a  positive  view  of  the  Year,  considering  that  it  brought  a  number  of  benefits 
boosting the relevance of the EUYS, presented in the figure below. These benefits were also 
echoed by EU-level policymakers. 

Figure 11. Perceptions on results of the European Year of Youth mentioned by national policymakers boosting 
the relevance of the EUYS. 
Source: Kantar Public – interviews with national policymakers, 2023. 

Both national and EU-level policymakers emphasised the need for effective engagement and 
long-term legacy. The Year created an important momentum around youth mainstreaming at 
EU  level,  with  and  among  EU  Member  States,  and  other  stakeholders  such  as  civil  society 
organisations and networks, international organisations, experts and researchers. The challenge 
for the EUYS going forward will be to maintain the level of commitment of stakeholders in the 
aftermath of the Year. 

58 

 
 
 
 
5.  WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED? 

Overall conclusions and lessons learned 

The  evaluation  underlined  the  effectiveness  and  continued  importance  of  the  EU  Youth 
Strategy as a strategic framework for European cooperation, knowledge sharing and peer 
learning, channelling resources and concerted action towards common objectives in addressing 
youth challenges and complementing Member States action and initiatives. Notably, the EUYS 
remains vital  as  ‘catalyst’, i.e. acts  as  an example/model  for national  youth  strategies/youth 
policy developments, in particular in countries without a national youth strategy or where it is 
being  constructed  or  renewed,  to  support  convergence  of  policy  approaches.  This  role  also 
extends beyond the EU as demonstrated in the Youth Action Plan in EU external action through 
which the EUYS can also inspire third countries to adopt similar approaches. 

The evaluation has highlighted the continued relevance of the EU Youth Strategy objectives 
with  a  strong  focus  on  inclusion  and  diversity,  and  on  youth  participation  and  civic 
engagement. Generally, the broadness of the objectives, and the European Youth Goals, were 
found to respond to a range of challenges and needs of young people. The instruments operate 
in an interlinked manner to contribute to the effectiveness of the EUYS and allow the EUYS 
to  have  influence  at  multiple  levels,  including  on  EU  and  national  policies,  civil  society 
organisation practices and young people.   

Nevertheless, consultation activities identified that there is scope to tackle more visibly and 
concretely the impact on young people of some new/re-surging challenges, notably cost of 
living, housing, environment and climate, digitalisation, physical and mental health and well-
being, and challenges of rural youth. This underlines the importance of the dual approach of 
the EU Youth Strategy, i.e. to pursue youth mainstreaming and cross-sectoral cooperation 
across  policy  areas,  while  relying  also  on  strong  youth  participation  and  youth 
representation,  alongside  continuing  to  mobilise  and  enhance  the  specific  instruments  and 
initiatives in the youth sector. 

The 2022 European Year of Youth brought the EU closer to young people, raising awareness 
of the many and diverse opportunities available to them. It boosted youth participation and 
accelerated  youth  mainstreaming  and  increased  the  relevance  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy.  
Sustaining  and  building  on  these  positive  effects  of  the  European  Year  of  Youth,  as  also 
outlined in the Communication on the European Year of Youth 202298, will further reinforce 
the performance of the EU Youth Strategy in the coming years.   

The main conclusions and lessons learned from the evaluation are geared towards enhancing 
the influence of the EU Youth Strategy through further boosting some of its instruments. These 
have  been  grouped  in  blocks  below  covering  1)  youth  participation  and  youth 
mainstreaming, 2) enabling instruments, and 3) scope for simplification. 

Youth participation and Youth mainstreaming 

98 Communication on the European Year of Youth 2022.pdf (europa.eu) 

59 

 
 
 
➢  EU Youth Dialogue: becoming more inclusive, attention to follow-up 

The EU Youth Dialogue celebrates more than 10 years of existence and is the largest EU level 
participatory instrument for involving young people in policy making. Almost 90 000 young 
people have engaged in the consultation in the period 2019- (first half) 2023, of which 22 000 
during the 9th  cycle (January 2022–June 2023).  The EU Youth Dialogue needs to continue 
evolving and growing. It is vital to safeguard the good achievements on inclusion over the 
last three cycles, to  keep up the progress  for involvement  of young people from  ethnic and 
religious minority groups, young people with disabilities, and young LGBTQIA, and increase 
the  participation  in  the Dialogue  process  of  any  under-represented  groups,  including  young 
people  not  in  education,  employment  or  training  and  rural  youth,  at  national  and  EU  level. 
Finetuning outreach and communication can be part of the measures here as well as better 
preparation and support of participants in the EU Youth Dialogue, in particular young people 
with fewer opportunities.  

A  key  area  for  attention  is  to  further  develop  and  support  a  process  of  sharing  and 
channelling outcomes and recommendations from the EU Youth Dialogue to all relevant 
stakeholders at EU and national level (or at all levels), in particular policy makers. There is 
also a need for systematic mechanisms for informing participants in the EU Youth Dialogue 
and stakeholders about the follow-up planned at EU and national level. At EU level, this could 
also imply seeking a closer alignment of the EU Youth Dialogue’s focus with the Commission 
work programme. 

It would also be opportune to create more synergies with other child and youth participation 
instruments, such as the EU Children’s Participation Platform and the BIK Youth participation 
activities99,  at  EU  and  national  level  for  more  transparency  and  joined-up  efforts  to  engage 
young  people  and  youth  representatives,  with  the  help  of  civil  society  organisations  and 
networks.  

Priority actions to further develop youth participation and the EU Youth Dialogue are outlined 
in the Communication on the European Year of Youth100.  

➢  Youth Mainstreaming: accelerate, build on and press ahead 

The evaluation revealed examples of policy initiatives at EU level that have incorporated a 
youth perspective, some of which also refer explicitly to the EU Youth Strategy, such as the 
Commission  Communication  on  a  comprehensive  approach  to  mental  health,  which  was 
developed  with  input  from  young  people101..  However,  although  there  are  many  synergies 
across  EU  policies,  there  is  limited  evidence  of  concrete  actions  in  complementarities  and 
synergies, highlighting existing room for enhanced cooperation at EU level. 

Building on the achievements during 2022 European Year of Youth, and on its many legacy 
actions, there is an opportunity to step up efforts at EU and national level towards further 
progress  in  youth  mainstreaming  across  all  relevant  policy  fields,  including  considering 

99 www.bikyouth.eu/ 
100 Communication on the European Year of Youth 2022.pdf (europa.eu) 
101 For example through the Youth Cancer Survivors conference and the EU Youth Policy Dialogue on mental health in February 2023 

60 

 
 
 
concrete  mainstreaming  instruments  at  EU  and  national  levels  to  tackle  the  complex 
challenges of young people.  

When  designing  EU  policies,  the  Commission  will  use  the  full  potential  of  youth 
mainstreaming  as  part  of  the  Commission’s  Better  Regulation  framework  and  toolbox, 
resulting  in  a  youth  check,  as  outlined  in  the  Communication  on  the  European  Year  of 
Youth. Efforts will also include better outreach to civil society organisations, networks and 
young people to encourage their taking part in consultations for new EU initiatives, including 
in citizen panels (one-third of whom are young people). A new youth stakeholders’ platform 
will be set up to facilitate a continuous exchange with youth organisations, youth researchers, 
Member  State  representatives  and  other  EU  institutions.  Continuing  regular  youth  policy 
dialogues  with  European  Commissioners,  organising  dedicated  youth  mainstreaming 
roundtables,  and  further  mobilising  the  internal  Commission  Youth  Network  of  youth 
correspondents,  in  particular  through  the  EU  Youth  Coordinator,  will  also  be  important  to 
enhance mainstreaming.   

The European Commission can also support national efforts in this area by organising mutual 
learning activities on youth mainstreaming in cooperation with Member States, to exchange 
on how to involve young people and civil society organisations and better channel the youth 
perspective in policy making processes with an impact on youth. The European Commission 
also  encourages  Member  States  to  establish  national  or  regional  youth  coordinators, 
following the example of the EU Youth Coordinator.  

Member  States  and  the  European  Commission  could  also  identify  specific  areas  for 
intensifying  synergies  and  complementarities,  e.g.  creating  synergies  between  youth 
participation under the EU Youth Strategy and children participation under the EU Strategy on 
the Rights of the Child, and with national policies and initiatives in these areas, in line with 
measures for inclusive civic engagement and participation for European democratic resilience 
outlined in the Commission’s Citizenship Package and Defence of Democracy package102.  

Member States and the European Commission could also collaborate on specific policies and 
initiatives,  such  as  targeting  the  mental  health  and  well-being  challenges  of  young  people, 
considering  interconnections  with  digital  life,  sport  and  culture,  and  pursuing  holistic 
approaches on the basis of the Commission’s Communication on a comprehensive approach to 
mental  health103  and  Council  Conclusions104.  As  an  example,  in  the  implementation  of  the 
youth-related  flagship  initiatives  of  the  Communication  on  mental  health,  the  Commission 
works closely with the Member States through the sub-group on mental health of the Public 
Health  Expert  Group105.  Public  authorities  at  national  and  regional  level  can  also  request 
support under the EU Technical Support Instrument to design and implement policies targeted 
to  young  people,  including  in  the  form  of  multi-country/multi-regional  projects  involving 
several beneficiary authorities. Under this instrument, support has been provided to preserve 
and improve youth mental health and wellbeing in a number of EU Member States. Similar 

102 Documents on Defence of Democracy - European Commission (europa.eu) and Citizenship Package - European Commission (europa.eu) 
103 Commission Communication on a comprehensive approach to mental health, June 2023.pdf (europa.eu) 
104 Council Conclusions on a comprehensive approach to mental health of young people in the EU, November 2023 
105 Expert Group on Public Health | (health.ec.europa.eu)  

61 

 
 
 
collaboration can be facilitated on a range of other key areas, based on the challenges identified 
by young people and youth stakeholders.  

There is also a need and potential for engaging with stakeholders, communicating better on 
the youth  mainstreaming objective and cross-sectoral  nature of the EU Youth Strategy, and 
disseminating and raising awareness about successful youth mainstreaming at EU and national 
level among all stakeholders.  

Priority actions to strengthen youth mainstreaming are also outlined in the Communication on 
the European Year of Youth.  

➢  EU Youth Coordinator: instrumental for youth mainstreaming, attention to role 

The evaluation showed that  the EU  Youth Coordinator function is  instrumental for youth 
mainstreaming achievements at EU level, notably through the internal Youth Network, and 
has  high  potential  and  importance  for  the  continuation  of  efforts.  Stakeholder  feedback 
indicated scope to increase visibility and awareness of the role and work of the EU Youth 
Coordinator to external stakeholders, and to better communicate on and potentially further 
clarify the mandate of the function which is very broad.  

Regular and broad stakeholder involvement in the design, implementation and follow-up of 
the  EUYS  is  vital  for  the  participatory  governance  and  overall  performance  of  the  EUYS.  
Building on the positive experiences with the European Year of Youth national coordinators 
and stakeholders’ group, the EU Youth Coordinator will be able to rely on a more permanent 
Youth  stakeholder’s  platform  group,  to  be  mobilised  for  consultations,  discussions  and 
exchanges,  co-creation,  dissemination  of  knowledge  and  outputs  from  different  EUYS 
instruments, and as a community of practice, including also capacity building sessions on topics 
of interest to the community. This is also outlined in the Communication on the European Year 
of Youth.   

Enabling instruments 

➢  EU programmes: explore further synergies 

The  Erasmus+  and  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  programmes  are  key  instruments  for 
supporting the EUYS at EU level. It is therefore important to safeguard links between these 
programmes and the EUYS objectives and activities. There is also scope to further  explore 
synergies between these programmes and other programmes/funds/instruments (e.g. Horizon 
Europe, cohesion policy funds and the Technical Support Instrument at EU level) as well as 
national programmes/funds. The Youth Network in the Commission as well as mutual learning 
activities can facilitate work on this. 

➢  Youth information and communication: development of a communication plan 

Awareness of the EUYS among stakeholders is a precondition for its success as it allows the 
stakeholders  to  engage  with  the  different  activities  and  their  outputs.  The  communication 
activities are primarily directed at young people and especially cover opportunities for young 

62 

 
 
 
people to  participate in  EU programmes  and schemes and  there is  a lack of comprehensive 
communication towards policy makers and civil society organisations. 

The  evaluation  found  a  good  degree  of  awareness  of  the  EUYS  among  all  consulted 
stakeholders, however more often of some of the key instruments, in particular the EU youth 
programmes and the European Youth Portal. The European Youth Portal is in particular well 
known by young people and civil society organisations. There was less clarity over what the 
EUYS aims to achieve overall and how the different components of the EUYS fit together.  

There  is  thus  scope  for  clearer  overall  communication  on  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  and  its 
interlinked  components.  At  the  same  time,  there  is  also  a  need  for  more  targeted 
communication for policy makers and civil society organisations/practitioners, to strengthen 
communication on the EU Youth Dialogue consultations and recommendations and on youth 
mainstreaming, and to still finetune information and communication products on the European 
Youth Portal for young people. While there is a visible effort to use appropriate style, format 
and channels, the focus groups with young people suggested that even more could be done in 
this area, e.g. by testing communication products and means/channels with a panel of young 
people. 

This could be addressed by developing a communication  plan for the EU Youth Strategy, 
including  user-friendly  access  and  relevant  resources  for  policy  makers  and  civil  society 
organisations. This can also involve specific communication products for communicating on 
implementation and performance of the EU Youth Strategy.  

➢  Evidence-based tools: continuous improvement, attention to communication 

Continuous  efforts  are  needed  to  provide  and  communicate  relevant  data  on  the 
implementation and performance of the EU Youth Strategy and on the evolving situation of 
young  people  to  policy  makers,  civil  society  organisations,  practitioners,  young  people  and 
other stakeholders in  a timely,  user-friendly  and  digestible way.  The websites and tools  for 
knowledge- and evidence building, such as the Youth Wiki, the Eurostat EU Youth Dashboard, 
the  Erasmus+  and  European  Solidarity  Corps  Dashboards,  and  for  communication  and 
outreach, such as the European Youth Portal, are highly valued and used. There is also a wealth 
of research, studies and data available through the EU-Council of Europe Youth Partnership, 
the RAY network and the SALTOs in the EU youth programmes, stakeholder organisations 
such as the European Youth Forum, OECD and other international organisations. 

The evaluation identified specific needs which could be addressed at EU and national levels to 
better capitalise on and use achievements so far and areas for further developments. There is 
e.g. potential to create an ‘entry-point’ and streamline/curate resources for policy makers 
and civil society organisations/practitioners, today spread over several portals and websites. 
The Youth Wiki, already the most utilized platform by this audience, could be considered here, 
to create a clear distinction between channels for informing youth (European Youth Portal) and 
those more targeting policy makers and civil society organisations (Youth Wiki). Recognizing 
the differing needs of these audiences, it is advisable to use adapted and distinct resources. The 
EU Youth Report contains rich and useful information on activities implemented and progress 
under  the  EUYS,  drawing  on  all  evidence-based  tools  and  sources,  however  the  evaluation 
found that many stakeholders require more specified and more frequent information. This calls 

63 

 
 
for reviewing the EU Youth Reportfrequency, volume and form of information to cater for 
needs of different audiences and facilitate communication on the progress and evidence-base 
of the EUYS.  

To  facilitate  monitoring  and  evaluation,  the  evaluation  suggests  developing  few  key 
indicators  to  help  track  progress  and  provide  a  bridge  between  the  higher-level  strategic 
objectives  and the more  direct  sphere of influence of  the EUYS (on the evolution  of youth 
policies,  practices  of  youth  organisations,  youth  participation).  The  evaluation  grouped  the 
EUYS  instruments  in  a  simplified  manner  and  elaborated  medium-term  impact  pathways 
linked  to  the  specific  objectives,  which  could  be  useful  to  consider  in  the  indicator 
development. Efforts should also continue on the availability of data, possibly considering also 
additional systematic surveys, based on the proposals of the ad hoc expert group on youth 
indicators for a unified monitoring framework of quantitative and qualitative indicators.  

Member  States  and  the  European  Commission,  also  involving  youth  stakeholders,  could 
cooperate  on  further  developing  key  indicators,  methodologies,  and  data  for  evidence-
based monitoring of the EU Youth Strategy’s implementation and performance.  

Scope for simplification 

➢  Future National Activities Planners: consider alternatives 

The evaluation identified scope to simplify and reduce Member States’ reporting burden for 
the  Future  National  Activities  Planners106.  In  the  consultations,  policy  makers  found  them 
burdensome to complete and with limited use, while most other stakeholders indicated limited 
involvement and awareness of the Planners. The number of completed FNAPs also declined in 
2021  compared  to  2019.  This  indicates  a  need  to  consider  substituting  the  Future  National 
Activities Planners by an alternative way of gathering information on national youth policy 
priorities and developments, in cooperation with Member States. Alternatives to explore could 
include the Youth wiki instrument and simplified ad hoc surveys of national representatives.  

106 

Future National Activities Planners | European Youth Portal (europa.eu) 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX I. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 

Lead  Directorate-General:  European  Commission,  Directorate-General  for  Education, 
Youth, Sport and Culture, DG EAC 

Agenda planning reference:  PLAN/2022/1741 

Organisation: The main preparatory steps for the evaluation in 2022 included the set-up of an 
Inter-Service-Group to accompany and steer the evaluation, publication of a call for evidence 
and  preparation  of  technical  specifications  for  a  supporting  external  evaluation  assignment 
(service  contract  EAC-2023-0086).  The  service  contract  was  awarded  under  the  DG  EAC 
framework  contract  for  evaluations  and  impact  assessments  to  a  consortium  led  by  Kantar 
Public and started in February 2023.  

The  external  evaluation  assignment  included  a  public  consultation  and  multiple  targeted 
consultations and provided the main evidence base for the Staff Working Document. The full 
final report of the service contractor has been published here: Support study for the Interim 
evaluation  of  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  2019-2027;  Annexes  -  Support  study  for  the  Interim 
evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 

The factual summary on the public consultation and call for evidence has been published and 
is available here: EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 – interim evaluation (europa.eu). The synopsis 
report  on  all  the  consultation  activities  in  the  evaluation  is  annexed  to  the  Staff  Working 
Document.  

Timing (general chronology of the evaluation): 

TIMING  
DESCRIPTION  
6 September 2022 
First Inter-Service-Group meeting  
23 September-21 October 2023 
Call for evidence on ‘Have your Say’-portal 
Second Inter-Service-Group meeting 
26 October 2022 
Signature of contract for external evaluation assignment   3 February 2023 
8 February 2023 
Third Inter-Service Group meeting: kick-off meeting 
3 March 2023 
Inception report  
14 March 2023 
Fourth Inter-Service Group meeting: inception meeting 
26 April-2 August 2023 
Public consultation on ‘Have your Say’-portal  
28 June 2023 
Interim report  
5 July 2023 
Fifth Inter-Service Group meeting: interim meeting 
September-December 2023  
Draft final report submitted by contractor 
Sixth Inter-Service Group meeting: final with contractor  19 October 2023 
Exchanges  and  written  consultations  of  Inter-Service-
Group  (in  dedicated  Teams  channel)  on  the  draft  final 
report versions 
Final  version  of  final  report  by  external  contractor 
approved 
Sixth Inter-Service Group meeting: kick off COM Report 
and SWD  
Seventh Inter-Service Group meeting: Draft COM Report 
and SWD  
Inter-Service-Consultation  on  Draft  COM  Report  and 
SWD  
Publication of COM Report and SWD  

October-December 2023 

17 November 2023 

13 December 2023 

March-April 2024 

2 February 2024 

January 2024 

65 

 
 
DGs  participated  in  the  Steering  Group  (ISSG):  An  Inter-Service-Group  of  relevant 
Commission departments oversaw the evaluation and met regularly throughout the evaluation 
process. In addition to DG EAC, the Inter-Service-Group was composed of representatives of 
17 Commission departments107.  In line with the Better Regulation guidelines, the Inter-Service-
Group  was  involved  in  all  the  key  steps  of  the  evaluation  work,  including  the  evaluation 
mandate,  call  for  evidence,  evaluation  questions,  technical  specifications  for  selecting  the 
external  contractor,  the  public  consultation  questionnaire  and  survey  questionnaires, 
monitoring progress and steering the evaluation, providing comments to and ensuring quality 
and objectivity of evaluation reports.  

In connection with the meetings of the Inter-Service-Group and key deliverables, consultations 
were  carried  out  in  the  dedicated  Teams  channel.  The  feedback  periods,  deadlines  and 
arrangements  for  managing  comments  and  approval  of  deliverables  were  agreed  in  the 
meetings.  

Work/studies carried out by the external contractors: The Commission’s interim evaluation 
was  supported  by  an  independent  external  evaluation  assignment.  In  line  with  the  Better 
Regulation Guidelines the contractor analysed the effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, added 
value and relevance of the EUYS at mid-point. The contractor used a mixed-method approach 
to  data  collection  and  analysis,  including  qualitative  and  quantitative  data  and  contribution 
analysis.  The  contribution  analysis  consisted  of  assessing  the  extent  to  which  the  EUYS 
contributed  to  the  intended  changes  and  included  developing  an  intervention  logic  for  the 
EUYS instruments, unpacking their implementation and using primary evidence validating the 
assumptions.  In  addition,  a  cost-effectiveness  analysis  was  conducted  using  a  defined 
framework to assess the costs associated with the EUYS.  

The external evaluation assignment was carried out between February and December 2023 and 
included public consultation and multiple targeted consultations. The consultation strategy for 
the evaluation was based on a mapping of stakeholders and quantitative and qualitative data 
was mainly gathered through the following consultation activities: 

•  Call for evidence on the Commission’s 'Have Your Say' portal from 23 September to 21 

October 2022.    

•  Public consultation on the ‘Have Your Say’-portal from 26 April to 2 August 2023.  
•  Quantitative data on awareness of the EUYS and engagement with its instruments, collected 

through:  

-  Online survey of young people  
-  Online survey of youth civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth 

informal groups  

•  Qualitative data on perceptions of the EUYS and examples of progress in its 

implementation, collected through:  

-  Key informant interviews with policy makers at EU and national level and focus 

groups with national policy makers, from 3 May to 20 June 2023; 
-  Focus groups with young people from 14 June to 8 August 2023;  

Focus groups with civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth informal 
groups from 14 June to 23 August 2023. 

107 AGRI, BUDG, CLIMA, COMM, EMPL, ENV, HOME, INTPA, JRC, JUST, MARE, MOVE, REGIO, RTD, SANTE, SG, SJ 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX II. METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED 

Overall methodology  

The  external  evaluation  assignment  encompassed  five  tasks,  as  presented  below,  each 
contributing to support a comprehensive assessment of the EUYS performance and impact.  

Figure 1. Overall process and methodology of this interim evaluation 

Task 1 – Inception and desk research 

Task 1.1 Inception phase  

•  Kick off  

The kick-off meeting with members of the EUYS Inter-service Group (ISG) took place on 8 
February 2023. During the kick-off meeting, the evaluation team introduced the objectives of 
the EUYS 2019-2027 interim evaluation, the intervention logic and the evaluation framework. 
Discussions with the ISG members and comments received helped to revise the stakeholder 
consultation  approach  in  view  of  enhancing  engagement  of  youth  with  different  social, 
political, economic and cultural backgrounds in the youth survey and focus groups.  

•  Scoping desk research and interviews  

The  scoping  interviews  were  conducted  with  representatives  of  DG  EAC,  DG  INTPA  and 
EACEA. The purpose of the scoping interviews was to better understand the EUYS and the 
instruments  implementation.  The  interviews  helped  to  refine  the  intervention  logic  and 

67 

 
 
 
 
evaluation  matrix.  Scoping  desk  research  was  carried  out  in  preparation  for  the  Theory  of 
Change Workshop. 

•  Theory of Change Workshop  

The Theory of Change workshop was conducted on 20 February 2023 with representatives of 
DG EAC and EACEA. The purpose of the workshop was to gain better understanding to refine 
the intervention logic and evaluation framework and develop detailed impact pathways linked 
to the expected results and desired impacts of the EUYS. The implementation of the EUYS 
relies on multiple strands  of activities. At the design  stage of the interim evaluation,  it was 
important  to  develop  a  solid  understanding  of  the  impact  pathways  linked  to  the  EUYS 
implementation mechanisms. During the Theory of Change workshop, the evaluation team:  

•  Harnessed the thoughts and reflections of seven representatives from DG EAC working 

on different instruments of the EUYS; 

The evaluation team documented the discussions on the intervention logic and on the policy 
context of the EUYS, which allowed the team to finetune the intervention logic and develop 
the impact pathways used in the evaluation.  

Task 1.2 – Desk research  

Under  the  task  1,  the  desk  research  was  carried  out  at  the  EU  and  national  level.  The 
methodological and analytical process for the desk research contained two phases, firstly the 
scoping desk research and secondly the EU and national level desk research. The purpose of 
the scoping desk research was to analyse the information that exists around the EUYS to ensure 
that our understanding of the theory of change was soundly rooted in the policy context and 
backed up by existing academic or grey literature about the EUYS and youth-related policies 
and measures.  

•  Desk research at the EU level  

EU level desk research was based on the literature about EUYS activities, inputs and outputs. 
The  EU  level  desk  research  mainly  analysed  Staff  Working  Documents,  Communication 
documents and Reports, other documents on all the eleven instruments of the EUYS.  

The study team gathered key documentation and DG EAC provided further literature which 
allowed the team to revise the list of preliminary secondary data sources and create a document 
repository containing over 300 documents. Analysis was carried out by analysing documents 
in line with the evaluation matrix and gathering the secondary data on indicators. The results 
of EU level desk research fed into identifying the EUYS implementation via its instruments. 
The results were also used to contextualise the evaluation findings presented in the final report. 

•  Desk research at the national level  

The national level desk research covered all EU Member States. The aim was to gather key 
insights  that  could  be  difficult  to  capture  with  quantitative  tools  about  potential  synergies 
between national youth strategies and the EUYS, and examples of EUYS effects. The national 
desk research was based on documentation gathered via FNAPs, YouthWIKI, national youth 
policies and strategies, national reports on youth policy area and other available documents. 
National desk research was also coupled with stakeholder consultations carried out under the 
task 2, such as:   

68 

 
 
•  undertaking  interviews  with  national  youth  policymakers in  all the EU27 (described 

• 

under the task 2 – stakeholder consultation);  
follow-up  focus  groups  with  national  policymakers  in  three  countries  in  Denmark, 
Germany and Slovakia (described under the task 2 – stakeholder consultation).  

The first step was a review of available secondary data – reports and national youth strategies 
and policies implemented in the context of the EUYS. On this basis, we developed the template 
for the country research to collect evidence in a systematic way and the study team carried out 
interviews  and  focus  groups  with  the  national  policymakers.  The  researchers  elaborated 
country  reports  summarising  key  information  from  the  interviews  and  national-specific 
literature, helping build a picture of the EUYS effects at the national level across EU27. 

Task 2 - Stakeholder consultations  

The  consultation  strategy  for  the  evaluation  was  based  on  a  mapping  of  stakeholders  and 
included the following consultation activities to involve a broad range of EUYS stakeholders 
and the public: 

•  A  call  for  evidence  open  to  any  stakeholder  and  the  public  on  the  European 

Commission’s 'Have Your Say' portal during 23 Sep. - 21 Oct. 2022.    

•  A  public  consultation  open  to  any  stakeholder  and  the  public,  on  the  European 

Commission’s ‘Have Your Say’-portal during 26 Apr. - 2 Aug. 2023.  

•  Quantitative activities gathering data on awareness of the EUYS and engagement with 
different EUYS activities and instruments, collected through two targeted surveys:  

-  Online survey of young people, reached through a general population sample in 

10 EU Member States108 during 10-29 July 2023;  

-  Online survey of youth civil society organisations, youth researchers active at 
EU and national  level,  and youth  informal groups, during 15 June  - 14 Aug. 
2023.  

•  Qualitative activities gathering perceptions of the EUYS and examples of progress 

made in its implementation, collected through:  

-  Key informant interviews with policy makers at EU and national level and focus 

groups with national policy makers, during 3 May - 20 June 2023; 

-  Focus groups with young people during 14 June - 8 Aug. 2023;  
-  Focus  groups  with  civil  society  organisations,  youth  researchers  and  youth 

informal groups during 14 June - 23 Aug. 2023. 

The  targeted  consultation  activities  (surveys,  interviews,  focus  groups)  have  involved 
stakeholders based on:  

•  The relevance of the EUYS 2019-2027 to them;  

108 Czechia, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden  

69 

 
 
 
•  Their expertise in the subject;  
•  Their involvement in EUYS 2019-2027 activities and instruments.  

Specific attention was paid to ensuring inclusion and diversity in the online survey of youth. 
Respondents were selected to ensure a distribution that reflected the population of each country 
in  terms  of  age  group  (16-29),  gender  and  region.  In  addition,  during  the  survey 
implementation, the respondents were selected with respect to several characteristics such as 
educational attainment, employment status, rural/urban residence and self-reported disabilities. 

Task 3 – Analysis and key issues for possible mid-term review  

Contribution analysis  

The EUYS tackles multifaceted challenges affecting  young people during their transition to 
adulthood, spanning education and training, employment, social inclusion, and more. It also 
addresses broader concerns like youth unemployment, inequality gaps, and exposure to harmful 
content. Moreover, unexpected events such as the COVID-19 pandemic and geopolitical shifts 
have significantly influenced the EUYS’ operating landscape. 

Given the complexity of the EUYS,  which encompasses a diverse  array of instruments  and 
measures,  assessing  its  impact  demands  a  structured  approach.  In  addition  to  the  refined 
intervention logic - to capture this complexity, the impact pathways were developed for each 
of  the  EUYS  instruments.  The  implementation  of  the  EUYS  relies  on  several  strands  of 
activities  or  different  instruments.  Each  of  these  instruments  has  its  own  logic  and  a  set  of 
assumptions about key success factors.  

•  The  following  methodological  steps  were  taken  by  the  study  team  to  carry  out  the 

contribution analysis:  

•  developing  the  impact  pathways  for  each  EUYS  instrument  and  mapping  what  they 

were intended to achieve and under what assumptions;  

•  developing the  assumptions  associated with  each instrument's  activities,  outputs and 

outcomes;  

•  gathering  the secondary  and primary evidence from  this evaluation  to  determine the 

extent to which the intended activities, outputs and results have been achieved;  

•  assessing the validity of the assumptions using the evidence gathered.  

Developing impact pathways and assumptions  

To evaluate the EUYS, it was important to unpack the different implementation instruments, 
make  assumptions  about  their  own  impact  and  carry  out  the  contribution  analysis  -  an 
assessment of how a given set of activities feeds into the overarching intervention logic of the 
EUYS. Impact pathways help us trace the connections between the EUYS’ activities and the 
intended outcomes, illuminating how different interventions contribute to overarching goals.  

In order to unravel the effects of the EUYS through impact pathways, we engaged in a twofold 
process. First, we dissected the different instruments and actions within  the EUYS. Each of 
these  instruments  functions  as  a  unique  entity,  targeting  specific  objectives  and  outcomes. 

70 

 
 
 
Developing impact pathways for these instruments involved outlining the sequence of actions, 
changes and influences that occur as a result of their implementation. 

In essence, by outlining these pathways, we gain insight into how individual actions contribute 
to the broader picture of youth development, empowerment, and change. Following the four 
groups  of  activities  of  the  EUYS,  the  impact  pathways  have  been  clustered,  allowing  us  to 
unpack the impacts of the EUYS across its core areas. 

Figure 2. Clustering of impact pathways against four core areas of the EUYS. 

Secondly, impact pathways require the identification and examination of assumptions. These 
assumptions are the underlying beliefs about how the instruments will lead to certain outcomes. 
By scrutinising these assumptions, we ensure a clear understanding of the logical links between 
activities and impacts. This process allowed us to validate the intervention logic of the EUYS, 
ensuring that the expected impacts are plausible and supported by evidence. We identify the 
critical elements and assumptions that need to be assessed during the evaluation. This approach 
allowed us to collect primary and secondary data to verify the existence of the impact pathways 
outlined and the accuracy of the underlying assumptions. 

Validating the assumptions  

Identifying  the  contribution  of  the  instruments  to  the  EUYS  requires  validation  of  the 
assumption. In order to validate the assumptions, the secondary and primary data collected in 
this evaluation were used in the translation. This process was carried out in four steps:  

•  Mapping which of the activities, outcomes and results have been achieved.  
•  Validating the assumptions based on the available evidence.   
• 
•  Developing a contribution story for each instrument.  

Identifying the extent to which the instrument has contributed to the EUYS. 

Task 4 – Systematic review  

The purpose of the systematic review was to:  

71 

 
 
 
•  produce  an  updated  comprehensive  assessment  of  the  impact  of  the  EUYS  on  the 

selected topic;  

•  attempt to provide a systematic overview of the direction and magnitude of the impact 

of EUYS on the selected topic; 

•  attempt to identify factors that may explain the heterogeneity of the results that have 

been found in individual studies or national evaluations.  

•  Based on the in-depth review of the comprehensive portfolio of documents and grey 
literature  we  have  conducted,  the  systematic  overview  team  together  with  DG  EAC 
have chosen the following topic for the analysis: digital life and well-being of young 
people. 

Context and research question 

One of the overall objectives of the EUYS is to ‘improve policy decisions with regard to their 
impact on young people across all sectors, notably employment, education and training, health 
and social inclusion’. There has been an increasing impact of digitalisation on everyday work, 
education and training, and social life, which was intensified by the COVID-19 Pandemic and 
there is a call for a systematic overview of how this shift has impacted the well-being of young 
people.  

On this behalf, it is interesting to investigate the topic further; hence, we proposed the following 
research question: How has digital life impacted well-being of young people? 

Limitations of the chosen topic 

The topic ‘digital life and well-being of young people’ is an emerging field. Hence, it is justified 
to conduct an up-to-date review of the topic. The subject is also fairly broad which provides 
several different sub-topics to choose from. However, it could also be seen as a disadvantage 
to select an emerging field, such as digital life and youth well-being, because of the presumably 
limited access  to  secondary data and research conducted. Also,  the restricted availability of 
secondary  data  might  be  a  drawback  in  terms  of  robustness,  which  is  something  we  have 
considered  when adjusting the method to  a systematic review  rather than a full-scale meta-
analysis. The full systematic review is published as an annex of the external study report. 

Conceptual framework 

The concept of well-being is broadly defined as a state of “optimal psychological experience 
and functioning”.109 Such definition leads to various interpretations on what aspects the well-
being  encompasses. Traditionally,  the well-being  is  associated with  mental  health, although 
broader definitions of the well-being include the following dimensions110: 

•  Physical  well-being  –  e.g.,  good  state  of  (mental  and  physical)  health  and  physical 

capabilities; 

•  Cognitive well-being – e.g., successful participation in a learning process (education 

and training); 

109  Deci,  &  Ryan,  R.  M.  (2008).  Self-determination  theory:  A  macrotheory  of  human  motivation,  development,  and  health.  Canadian 

Psychology / Psychologie canadienne, 49(3). 

110 Rees, G., Savahl, S., Lee, B.J. and Casas, F. (Eds.) (2020). Children’s worlds report 2020. Children’s views on their lives and well-being 

in 35 countries: A report on the Children’s 115 Worlds project, 2016-19.  

72 

 
 
 
•  Psychological/emotional well-being – e.g., positive self-esteem, agency, satisfaction 

with life; hope for the future, sadness, anger; 

•  Social well-being – e.g., developing healthy relationships with others, participating in 

the community, and having a sense of belonging. 

Such broader conceptualisation of the well-being is in line with the approach of the EU Youth 
Strategy, since it aims to support the health and well-being of young people with a focus on111: 

•  Promoting mental and sexual health, sport, physical activity and healthy lifestyles; 
•  Preventing and treating injury, eating disorders, addictions and substance abuse; 
•  Education on nutrition; 
•  Promoting cooperation between schools, youth workers, health professionals and sport 

organisations; 

•  Making health facilities more accessible and attractive for young people; 
•  Raising  awareness  of  how  sport  can  promote  teamwork,  intercultural  learning  and 

responsibility. 

Task 5 - Reporting and dissemination  

The final task consisted in the analysis and synthesis of the data in view of drafting the final 
report. The report structure follows the Better Regulation Guidelines template for evaluation 
reports and includes the required annexes.  

111 EU Youth Strategy: Health and Well-Being | European Youth Portal. 

73 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX III. EVALUATION MATRIX  

Effectiveness  

The approach to assess the effectiveness of the EU Youth Strategy 2019-2027 (Hereafter EUYS 
of  the  EUYS)  uses  a  theory-based  contribution  analysis.  Beyond  the  development  of  the 
intervention logic and related theory of change, this implies: 

•  Development of the detailed impact pathways between the individual components of 
the EUYS implementation and the expected results and impacts. This recognises that 
not all elements of the EUYS contribute to all the results and impact but that there is a 
more detailed set of pathways between the actions taken and the expected changes;  
•  Explicit formulation of assumptions that underpin the impact pathways. These reflect 
under  what  conditions  we  assume  the  changes  will  follow  from  the  activities 
implemented;  
Identify the critical assumptions and critical segments of impact pathways and focus 
data collection and compilation on those elements of the theory of chain;  

• 

•  Collect evidence from primary and secondary data against the impact pathways so as 

to confirm or disconfirm whether these pathways have materialised;  

•  Assess  the  strength  of  the  evidence  gathered  and  subsequently  the  credibility  of  the 
emerging narrative of contribution of the EUYS to the changes observed and measured; 
and  

•  Revise  the  contribution  theory  and  present  the  actually  achieved  theory  of  change 
(rather than the expected one) showcasing what the EUYS has achieved to deliver.  

Evaluation question 

Judgement criteria  

Indicators  

Methods/sources  

1. To what extent has the EUYS, at 
mid-term,  proven  to be an  effective 
strategic  framework,  in  terms  of 
turning the objectives, priorities and 
actions 
and 
sustainable  achievements  (outputs, 
results  and  impacts)  at  European 
and national levels? 

concrete 

into 

Objectives, priorities and actions 
of the EUYS have been translated 
into concrete and sustainable 
achievements (outputs, results and 
impacts) at European and national 
level. 

The outputs produced are 
thematically aligned with EUYS 
goals  

The outputs produced are used  

The outputs produced are 
considered as useful  

There is evidence that the EUYS 
influenced national youth policies 
and priorities  

See other indicators 
for effectiveness 
below  

This an overarching question 
that we answer through an 
overall assessment of all 
effectiveness questions 

Volume and thematic 
focus of outputs  

Desk research  

Stakeholders reached  

Use of EUYS outputs  

Extent of usefulness 
of these outputs  

Key informant interviews with 
stakeholders at the national and 
EU level 

Youth survey and focus groups  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Public consultation  

Desk research  

Key informant interviews with 
stakeholders at the national and 
EU level  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Analysis of examples 
of specific influence 
of the EUYS on 
national policies exist  

Analysis of 
contribution of the 
EUYS to shaping 
national policies  

74 

 
 
 
There is evidence that the EUYS 
influenced EU-level youth policies 
and priorities 

Progress has been made in the 
three core areas of the EUYS 

Youth perspectives have been 
mainstreamed at national and EU 
level  

1.a  What  are  the  actual  effects 
achieved  (or  progress  made)  at 
mid-term at EU and Member State 
level,  in  each  of  the  3  core  areas 
(‘Engage’, 
‘Connect’, 
‘Empower’)?  

The majority of Member States 
have in place clear actions in line 
with the three core areas of 
engage, connect, empower and 
implementation instruments.  

And  in  the  contribution  to  the 
Youth Goals? 

Contribution has been made to the 
Youth Goals: 

Connecting EU with Youth 

75 

Public consultation 

Desk research  

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Public consultation 

Desk research  

Youth survey and focus groups 

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Contribution analysis  

Desk research  

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups 

Youth survey and focus groups  

Examples of specific 
influence of the 
EUYS on EU policies 
exist  

Identified contribution 
of the EUYS to 
shaping EU policies 

Level of engagement 
and consultation of 
youth at EU and 
national level  

Extent of 
mainstreaming of 
youth perspectives in 
policy making  

Analysis of situation 
of young people in 
areas covered by the 
youth strategy goals  

Analytical description 
of the type of effects 
achieved (or progress 
made) at EU and MS, 
civil society levels 
across four impact 
areas:  

Youth active 
citizenship, social 
inclusion, solidarity; 

Youth mainstreaming 
across policy;  

Continuous youth 
work 

International 
influence 

Via EUYS activities 
in the area of 
implementation 
instruments, engage, 
connect and empower 

Analytical description 
of success stories at 
the EU, National and 
civil society levels on 
how the EUYS helped 
young people to be 
more engaged, more 
connected and more 
empowered. 

Key stakeholders 
identifying the 
contribution of the 
EUYS to the Youth 
Goals 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Equality of All Genders 

Inclusive Societies 

Information & Constructive 
Dialogue 

Mental Health & Wellbeing 

Moving Rural Youth Forward 

Quality Employment for All 

Quality Learning 

Space and Participation for All 

Sustainable Green Europe 

Youth Organisations & European 
Programmes 

1.b In what way and to what extent 
have the Guiding principles of the 
EUYS influenced its effectiveness? 

The Guiding principles of the 
EUYS have influenced its 
effectiveness.  

Guiding principles: 

Equality and non-discrimination 

Inclusion 

Participation 

Global 

European, national, regional and 
local dimension 

Dual approach 

1.c  To  what  extent  has  the  EUYS 
influenced  or  created 
already 
synergies  with  Member  States' 
youth policies? 

The EUYS has influenced and/or 
created synergies with Member 
States’ youth policies. 

Analytical description 
of which Youth Goals 
and how the EUYS 
contributed to. 

Key stakeholders 
recognise that these 
principles have been 
present in the 
implementation of the 
EUYS 

Extent to which the 
Guiding principles of 
the EUYS have 
influenced the 
effectiveness of the 
EUYS. 

Analytical description 
of how the Guiding 
principles have 
influenced the 
effectiveness of the 
EUYS. 

Key stakeholders 
recognise that these 
principles have 
facilitated changes at 
EU and national 
levels  

Key stakeholders 
recognise that EUYS 
influenced or created 
synergies with 
Member States' youth 
policies   

Analytical description 
of how the EUYS has 
influenced and/or 
created synergies with 
MS’ youth policies  

Extent to which the 
EUYS has influenced 
and/or created 
synergies with MS’s 
youth policies. 

Desk research  

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups 

Youth survey and focus groups  

Desk research  

Key informant interviews with 
the stakeholders at the national 
level 

Civil society survey and focus 
groups 

Youth survey and focus groups  

76 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1.d  Which  main  factors  have 
the 
to  or 
contributed 
progress towards the objectives at 
mid-term? 

limited 

The role of external factors in 
influencing the effectiveness of 
EUYS (covid-19, war in Ukraine, 
digital and green transition, 
globalisation, inflation)  

Stakeholders’ 
perception of the role 
of other factors and 
policies/ interventions 
in shaping the youth 
agenda  

Desk research  

Key informant interviews with 
stakeholders at national level 

Civil society focus groups  

The role of other EU policies and 
actions in influencing the 
effectiveness of EUYS (European 
Year of Youth, European 
Solidarity Corps, Erasmus+ 
programme)  

How  has  the  European  Year  of 
Youth contributed to progress? 

The European Year of Youth 
contributed to progress towards 
the objectives of the EUYS. 

1.e  Have 
unintended/unexpected effects? 

there 

been 

any 

Unintended/unexpected effects 
that have occurred are positive. 

No negative unexpected effects 
have been identified.  

1.f To what extent are the effects of 
the EUYS likely to last in the long-
term? 

The effects of the EUYS are likely 
to last in the long-term 

The EUYS has produced structural 
changes which are likely to last  

2. To what extent have the EUYS’ 
instruments proven to be effective 
in  supporting  the  implementation 
at mid-term? 

The EUYS’ instruments have been 
effective in supporting the mid-
term implementation of the 
EUYS. 

Instruments:  

77 

Identification of 
factors that have 
contributed to (or 
limited) the progress 
towards the objectives 
of the EUYS. 

Analytical description 
of how the European 
Year of Youth has 
contributed towards 
the objectives of the 
EUYS. 

Key stakeholders 
identifying 
unintended/unexpecte
d effects of EUYS 

Identification of 
unintended effects 
and their scope and 
scale. For example: 
instrumentalisation of 
youth engagement, 
divisive discourse 
between youth and 
older age groups   

Stakeholders 
identifying different 
EUYS impacts likely 
to last in the long-
term 

Analysis of the nature 
of impact produced as 
a result of the EUYS  

Analysis of which 
EUYS effects of the 
EUYS are likely to 
last in the long-term 

Stakeholders’ 
perceptions on which 
EUYS impact is to 
last long term 

Extent to which the 
effects of the EUYS 
are likely to last in the 
long-term. 

Extent to which the 
EUYS’ instruments 
have been effective in 
achieving the outputs 
and outcomes of the 
EUYS.   

Desk research  

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups 

Desk research  

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups 

Desk research 

Key informant interviews with 
stakeholders at national and EU 
level  

Civil society focus groups 

Desk research  

Key informant interviews with 
stakeholders at the national and 
EU level 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Evidence-based youth 
policymaking and knowledge 
building 

Mutual learning and dissemination  

Future National Activities Planner  

EU Work Plans for Youth  

Partnership with CoE 

Participatory governance  

EU Youth Dialogue  

EU Youth Coordinator  

Communicating the EU Youth 
Strategy  

Mobilising and Monitoring EU 
Programmes and Funds 

European Youth Work Agenda  

Youth Information and Support  

instruments 

2.a  Which 
or 
combination  of  instruments  stand 
out  as  particularly  effective  vs. 
needing adjustment at mid-term? 

There are instruments or 
combination of instruments that 
are particularly effective. 

Analytical description 
of which instruments 
(or combination of 
instruments) are 
particularly effective. 

Desk research  

Key informant interviews Youth 
survey  

Civil society survey  

There are instruments that need 
adjustments.  

the 

2.b  Are 
instruments  and 
implementing  tools  regarded  as 
sustainable  and  apt  to  continue 
facilitating  the  implementation  of 
the  EUYS  and  the  main  factors 
behind this? 

The instruments and implementing 
tools are sustainable and apt to 
continue facilitating the 
implementation of the EUYS. 

There are factors that enable the 
sustainability and implementation 
of the EUYS. 

Analytical description 
of which instruments 
need adjustment, 
reasons for the 
adjustments and 
possible changes. 

Assessment of 
whether the 
instrument and 
implementing tools 
are considered by 
stakeholders 
sustainable and apt to 
continue facilitating 
the implementation of 
the EUYS. 

Analytical description 
of factors which 
enable the 
sustainability and 
implementation of 
EUYS. 

Desk research 

Key informant interviews  

2.c  To  what  extent  have  the 
instruments  supported  a  cross-
sectorial  approach  and  effective 
mainstreaming of youth issues and 

Youth issues have been integrated 
into other policy fields. 

Extent to which the 
youth issues have 

Desk research 

78 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
greater  youth  involvement  into 
other policy fields? 

been mainstreamed in 
other policy fields.  

Key informant interviews Youth 
survey and focus groups  

Analytical description 
of how youth issues 
have been taken-into 
account in other 
policy fields.  

Analytical description 
of successful stories 
of how youth issues 
have been 
incorporated into 
other policy fields. 

Extent to which 
young people have 
been involved in other 
policy fields.  

Analysis of how 
young people have 
been involved in other 
policy fields.  

Analysis of success 
stories of how young 
people have been 
involved in other 
policy fields.  

Extent to which links 
and synergies exist 
between the EUYS 
and other EU 
programmes 
(Erasmus+, European 
Solidarity Corps, 
Horizon Europe, 
ESF+, RRF, Digital 
Europe, CERV, 
EU4Health, Creative 
Europe, etc.).  

Analysis of links and 
synergies between the 
EUYS and other EU 
programmes.  

Extent to which links 
and synergies 
between the EUYS 
and other EU 
programmes support 
the effective 
achievement of the 
objectives of the 
EUYS. 

Analytical description 
of how synergies can 
be improved between 
the EUYS and other 
EU programmes.  

There has been a youth 
involvement into other policy 
fields.  

Links and synergies exist between 
the EUYS and other EU 
programmes (Erasmus +, ESC, 
Horizon Europe, ESF+, RRF, 
Digital Europe, CERV, 
EU4Health, Creative Europe etc). 

Solidarity 

2.d  To  what  extent  have  the  EU 
programmes,  such  as  Erasmus+, 
Corps, 
European 
Horizon  Europe,  ESF+,  RRF, 
Digital 
CERV, 
Europe, 
EU4Health,  Creative Europe,  etc., 
been  mobilised  and 
linkages, 
alignments  and  synergies  created 
between  them  and  the  EUYS  to 
effectively address the objectives of 
the EUYS? 

Is  there  a  need  and  how  could 
synergies be improved further? 

Links, synergies and alignments 
between the EUYS and other EU 
programmes allow for effectively 
address the objectives of the 
EUYS.  

There is room for improvement in 
synergies between EUYS and 
other EU programmes. 

79 

Desk research  

Key informant interviews with 
the stakeholders at the EU 
services and at national level  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. How well was the EUYS able to 
unforeseen 
the 
to 
adapt 
developments  and 
impact  of 
Covid19-pandemic and of Russia’s 
full scale invasion of Ukraine?  

The EUYS adapted well to the 
developments of the Covid-19 
pandemic and the Russia’s full 
scale invasion of Ukraine.  

In  what  way  did  the  unforeseen 
events impact the implementation?  

The events impacted the 
implementation of the EUYS. 

have 

What 
the 
enabling/limiting factors impacting 
the adaptability?  

been 

There are enabling/limiting factors 
that impacted the adaptability of 
EUYS to the unforeseen events.  

What has been the role of solidarity 
in the EUYS’ adaptability?  

Solidarity had a role in the 
adaptability of the EUYS.  

in 

life  due 

4. To what extent and how has the 
EUYS  promoted  and  influenced 
the inclusion of young people with 
fewer  opportunities  and  facing 
obstacles 
to  e.g. 
disability,  health  problems  (incl. 
mental  health,  chronic  health 
conditions),  barriers 
to 
education  and  training  systems, 
social 
differences, 
cultural 
barriers, 
barriers, 
economic 
barriers  linked  to  discrimination, 
racism, and geographical barriers?  

linked 

The EUYS has promoted and 
influenced the inclusion of young 
people with fewer opportunities 
e.g.  

people with disabilities, health 
issues (incl. mental health issues, 
chronic health conditions), low 
education, little training, low 
income 

People facing social barriers, 
cultural differences, 
discrimination and racism, and 
geographical barriers  

80 

Desk research   

Key informant interviews  

Desk research  

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Youth survey and focus groups  

Public Consultations  

Extent to which the 
EUYS adapted well to 
the development of 
the Covid-19 
pandemic and the 
Ukrainian crisis. 

Analysis of how the 
EUYS adapted to deal 
with the Covid-19 
situation and the 
Ukrainian crisis.  

Analysis of how the 
Covid-19 and the 
Ukraine’s crisis 
impacted on the 
implementation of the 
EUYS. 

Analytical description 
of factors that have 
enabled or limited the 
adaptability of the 
EUYS to the Covid-
19/Ukrainian crisis. 

Extent to which 
solidarity had a role in 
supporting the 
adaptability of the 
EUYS. 

Analytical description 
of how solidarity had 
a role in supporting 
the adaptability of the 
EUYS. 

Analytical description 
of success stories of 
how the EUYS 
adapted to the 
unforeseen events. 

Extent to which the 
EUYS has promoted 
and influenced the 
inclusion of young 
people with fewer 
opportunities. 

Analysis of how the 
EUYS has promoted 
and influenced the 
inclusion of young 
people with fewer 
opportunities.  

Analytical description 
of success stories of 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In what way has the EUYS affected 
the inclusion of young people with 
diverse backgrounds in light of the 
recent health and political crisis? 

How  have  the  actions  stemming 
from  the  EUYS  adapted  to  better 
support  youth  people  with  mental 
health issues?   

The EUYS adapted well to include 
young people with diverse 
backgrounds in light of health and 
political crisis 

The actions stemming from the 
EUYS targeted and supported 
young people with mental health 
issues  

5.To what extent and how has  the 
EUYS  promoted  the  green  and 
digital transitions?  

The EUYS has promoted that 
green and digital transition.  

how the EUYS has 
promoted and 
influenced the 
inclusion of young 
people with fewer 
opportunities.  

Analysis of how the 
EUYS adapted to 
include young people 
with the diverse 
background during 
health and political 
crisis 

Analysis of how the 
actions stemming 
from the EUYS 
contributed to 
improving the 
situation of young 
people with mental 
health issues.    

Extent to which the 
EUYS has promoted 
the green and digital 
transition. 

Analysis of how the 
EUYS has promoted 
the green and digital 
transition.  

Analytical description 
of success stories of 
how the EUYS has 
promoted the green 
and digital transition. 

Desk research 

Key informant interviews Civil 
society survey and focus groups  

Youth survey and focus groups  

Table 1 Evaluation matrix – Effectiveness 

Efficiency 

The EUYS is implemented through a range of instruments. These instruments are funded from 
different funding sources and in addition to budgets they also mobilise the time of different 
stakeholders. Time of stakeholders is needed for participation in different events and activities. 
This time constitutes and important indirect costs for the implementation of the EUYS. In our 
approach to evaluating efficiency of this strategy we therefore propose to not only assess the 
direct costs (expenditure on the different activities) but also indirect costs meaning: 

•  Headcount dedicated to EUYS in DG EAC; and 
•  Time spent by different stakeholders engaging with the EUYS.  

These indirect costs is quantified and monetised using the EU standard cost model which will 
allow us to get a more comprehensive view of the costs of the implementation of this strategy. 
This is compared with the benefits of the EUYS as identified under effectiveness. 

81 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Evaluation question 

Judgement criteria  

Indicators  

Methods/sources  

6.  To  what  extent 
have 
the  EUYS 
instruments, 
structure,  processes 
and  activities  put  in 
place  at  EU  and 
national level for the 
EUYS  proved  well-
functioning, 
non-
burdensome and cost 
their 
effective 
implementation 
at 
mid-term? 

for 

6.a To what extent, at 
what  level  and  for 
the 
whom 
do 
and 
instruments, 
create 
activities 
(administrative 
or 
other)  burdens  for 
stakeholders?  

The EUYSinstruments, 
structures, processes and 
activities put in place at EU and 
national level have proved well-
functioning, non-burdensome 
and cost effective.  

The budgets allocated and the 
time needed for these activities 
is proportionate to the results 
and impacts achieved  

The instruments, processes and 
activities do not create excessive 
administrative or other burdens 
for stakeholders. 

Direct and indirect costs of the EUYS 
compared to benefits  

Cost-effectiveness 
analysis  

Extent to which the instruments, processes 
and activities created administrative or other 
burdens for stakeholders.  

Key informant 
interviews  

Description of which instruments, processes 
and activities created administrative or other 
burdens and for which stakeholders. 

Stakeholders agree that the 
burden is proportionate to the 
benefits of participation  

Description of other burdens and for which 
stakeholders.  

Description of factors which create 
administrative burdens. 

Costs data and time 
needed 

Survey of civil 
society organisations  

What  are  the  main 
factors behind this? 

The factors that create 
administrative or other burdens 
for stakeholders are understood 
and efforts exist to minimise 
them.  

n/a 

6.b What is the scope 
further 
for 
simplification 
and 
burden-reduction  in 
instruments, 
the 
processes 
and 
activities,  at  what 
level and for whom?  

n/a 

6.c 
Which 
instruments  can  be 
regarded  as  having 
the  highest 
cost-
benefits ratio? 

Description of how instruments, processes 
and activities can be simplified and for 
which stakeholder. 

Key informant 
interviews 

Focus groups  

Description of costs and benefits of each 
instrument for different stakeholders. 

Description of instruments which have the 
highest cost-benefit ration. 

Direct and indirect costs per instrument  

Cost-effectiveness 
analysis at the level 
of different 
instruments  

The resources dedicated to the 
implementation of the EUYS 
are proportionate to the what the 
objective of the EUYS. 

Extent to which the resources dedicated to 
the implementation of the EUYS are 
proportionate to the objectives of the 
EUYS.  

Cost-effectiveness 
analysis  

7 To what extent are 
resources 
the 
the 
dedicated 
to 
of 
implementation 
EUYS 
the 
proportionate 
to 
what  the  EUYS  has 
set out to achieve? 

Table 2. Evaluation matrix – Efficiency 

82 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Relevance 

As per the Better Regulation Guidelines112, the criterion of relevance looks at the relationship 
between the needs and problems in society and the objectives of the intervention and hence 
touches on aspects of design. Analysis under the criterion of Relevance requires a consideration 
to how the objectives of an EU intervention (i.e. the EUYS) corresponds to wider EU policy 
goals  and  priorities.  The  analysis  also  requires  the  identification  of  possible  mismatches 
between the objectives of the intervention and the (current) needs or problems. 

Evaluation question  Judgement criteria  

Indicators  

Methods/sources  

8.  To  what  extent 
the  EUYS’ 
did 
objectives  remain 
relevant  over  the 
2019-2023 period? 

Evidence demonstrates that 
the motivations of 
stakeholders to participate in 
the activities under the EUYS 
are in line with the EUYS 
objectives 

Desk research  

Key informant 
interviews 

Public consultation 

Civil society survey and 
focus groups  

Youth Survey and focus 
groups  

Evidence that stakeholders had 
(over the period 2019-23) an 
awareness of: 

Youth engagement tools at an 
EU level (e.g. the EU Youth 
Dialogue).  

Instruments to be connected to 
peers (e.g. EU Youth Portal and 
EU Youth Strategy Platform) 

Recognition tools of formal and 
informal and formal learning 
(European Youth Work 
Agenda).  

Existence of illustrative 
(qualitative) examples of how 
the EUYS responded to the 
needs of stakeholders over the 
period 2019-23 and youth 
problems addressed by the 
EUYS. 

Stakeholders’ views about the 
EUYS’ attractiveness to 
stakeholders, primarily to 
youth.  

Shares of different groups of 
consultees who consider that 
the EUYS addressed their 
needs in the period 2019-23. 

Evidence demonstrates that 
the EUYS continues to be 
visible and meet the needs of 
stakeholders (across all 
geographical levels and 
stakeholder types). The 
EUYS’ ethos remains strong. 

9.  How  well  do 
EUYS’ 
the 
objectives 
still 
correspond to the 
and 
needs 
challenges 
of 
young people and 
youth 
stakeholders 
today? And to the 
of 
activities 

Evidence / examples of 
alignment between Strategy’s 
objectives and the current needs 
of stakeholders  

Evidence of new needs that 
emerged that were not covered 
by the EUYS’ objectives  

Desk research  

Key informant interviews 

Public consultation 

Civil society survey and 
focus groups  

Stakeholder views on the 
degree to which the EUYS’ 

Youth Survey and focus 
groups   

112 Better Regulation Guidelines and Toolbox, Tool #47, p.405-406 

83 

 
 
 
 
 
 
national 
policy makers? 

youth 

There is direct/ indirect 
evidence that the European 
Year of Youth and its legacy 
increased the relevance of the 
EUYS 

10.  To  what 
extent  and  how 
has  the  EUYS’ 
relevance  been 
influenced by the 
European  Year 
of Youth and the 
legacy  of 
the 
Year?113 

objectives meet their current / 
future needs 

Existence of no significant gaps 
in terms of how the EUYS 
responds to the current needs of 
specific stakeholder groups 

Share of different groups of 
consultees who consider that 
the EUYS addresses their 
current needs 

Evidence demonstrating that 
the motivations of stakeholders 
to participate in activities under 
the EUYS is in line with its 
objectives 

Evidence / examples from 
activities under the Year of 
Youth (e.g. national initiatives, 
ALMA114, European Youth 
Event, debates held within the 
European Parliament, the 
European year of youth 
conference) having influenced 
the perceived relevance of the 
EUYS.  

Stakeholder views on the 
degree to which the legacy of 
the Year of Youth had a 
positive or negative impact 
upon the EUYS’ objectives.  

Evidence demonstrating that 
the motivations of stakeholders 
to participate in Year of youth 
impacted their motivations to 
participate in activities under 
the EUYS  

Desk research  

Key informant interviews 

Public consultation 

Civil society survey and 
focus groups 

Coherence  

Table 3. Evaluation matrix – Relevance 

The  methodological  toolbox  of  the  Better  Regulation  Guidelines  is  the  baseline  and  the 
reference for the overall conceptual design of the framework for assessing coherence. In this 
sense, we will check: 

• 

the  ‘internal’  coherence:  i.e.  how  the  various  core  areas,  instruments  and  guiding 
principles in different areas of the EUYS operate together to achieve its objectives. This 
also look at whether synergies have actively been sought across the EUYS’ core areas 
and instruments, as relevant.  

113 It should be noted that the original question from the ToR stated, “To what extent and how has the EUYS’ relevance, coherence and added 
value been influenced by the European Year of Youth and the legacy of the Year?”. The decision was made at the tender stage to slit this 
question across each of the criterions so that they could be adequately addressed in turn.  

114 Aim, Learn, Master, Achieve.  

84 

 
 
 
• 

the  ‘external’  coherence:  i.e.  the  relationship  between  the  EUYS  and  other 
interventions, at different levels: for example, between EU interventions within the field 
of education, training and youth (e.g. European Education Area, European Strategy for 
Universities,  Digital  Education  Action  Plan,  European  Skills  Agenda).  Also,  the 
relationship with other relevant EU policies and programmes with more high level and 
horizontal  policy  objectives  such  as  the  Green  Deal,  NextGenerationEU  and  the 
Recovery and Resilience Facility).  

Evaluation question 

Judgement criteria  

Indicators  

Methods/sources  

Desk research 

Public consultation 

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and 
focus groups  

Youth Survey and focus 
groups   

11.  To  what  extent  is  the  EUYS 
coherent with (current) wider EU 
and 
policies, 
priorities115. 

strategies 

EUYS is coherent with 
existing wider EU policies, 
strategies and priorities 
which relate to the EUYS’ 
challenges and objectives 

Extent to which the EUYS is 
coherent with existing wider 
EU policies and EU strategies 
which relate to the EUYS’ 
challenges and objectives 

To  what  extent  is  the  EUYS 
international 
coherent  with 
the 
obligations, 
Sustainable Development Goals?  

such 

as 

How could synergies be improved 
wherever gaps are detected? 

EU Youth Strategy is 
coherent with international 
obligations, such as the 
Sustainable Development 
Goals 

Extent to which the EUYS is 
coherent with international 
obligations, such as the 
Sustainable Development 
Goals 

Gaps and synergies are 
detected between the 
EUYS and wider EU 
policies, priorities or 
international obligations 

Number of actions within the 
three core areas of the EUYS 
which refer directly to other 
EU policies 

Share of stakeholders which 
perceive complementarities 
with relevant EU policies and 
priorities or international 
obligations which relate to the 
EUYS’ objectives 

Share of stakeholders which 
perceive overlaps to relevant 
EU policies and priorities or 
international obligations which 
relate to the EUYS’ objectives 

Examples of gaps with EU 
policies and priorities, or 
international obligations as 
well as synergies to be 
improved 

12. To what extent are the EUYS’ 
core areas and instruments 
coherent with one another? 

The EUYS’ core areas and 
instruments are coherent 
internally (i.e. with one 
another) 

Extent to which the EUYS’ 
core areas and instruments are 
coherent internally 

Desk research 

Public consultation 

Share of stakeholders which 
perceive the three core areas 
(i.e. ‘Engage’, ‘Connect’, 
‘Empower’) of the EU Youth 
Strategy as coherent internally 

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and 
focus groups  

115  In  particular,  the  evaluation  will  examine  the  coherence  with  the  following  strategies/  policies/  initiatives:  European  Education  Area, 
European Strategy for Universities, European Research Area, New European Innovation Agenda, European Green Deal, Digital Education 
Action Plan, European Skills Agenda, NextGenerationEU and the Recovery and Resilience Facility, Youth Action Plan in EU external 
action, EU Strategy on the Rights of the child, EU Human rights and Democracy Action Plan, Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025, EU 
Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation, Council Recommendation on Roma equality, inclusion and participation, 
Communication on an LGBTIQ Equality Strategy 2020-2025, Strategy for the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; the EU Anti-racism Plan 
2020-2025,  EU  Strategy  on  Combating  Antisemitism  and  Fostering  Jewish  Life  2021-2030,  EU  Citizenship  Report  2020  Empowering 
citizens and protecting their rights 

85 

 
 
 
Youth Survey and focus 
groups  

Share of stakeholders which 
perceive the instruments 
(Evidence-based youth 
policymaking and knowledge 
building, mutual learning and 
dissemination, Future National 
Activities Planner, EU Work 
Plans for Youth, EU-CoE 
Youth Partnership, 
Participatory governance, EU 
Youth Dialogue, EU Youth 
Coordinator, Communicating 
the EU Youth Strategy, 
Mobilising and Monitoring 
EU Programmes and Funds, 
European Youth Work 
Agenda, Youth Information 
and Support) of the EU Youth 
Strategy as coherent internally 

Examples of synergies and 
gaps within the EUYS’ core 
areas and instruments 

13.  To  what  extent  and  how  has 
the  EUYS’ 
coherence  been 
influenced by the European Year 
of  Youth  and  the  legacy  of  the 
Year?116 

The EUYS’ core areas and 
instruments were coherent 
with the activities under 
the Year of Youth  

Extent to which the EUYS 
was coherent with the 
activities under the Year of 
Youth.  

Desk Research 

Public consultation 

Key informant interviews  

Civil society survey and 
focus groups  

Youth Survey and focus 
groups  

Number of actions within the 
three core areas of the EUYS 
which interlinked directly to 
actions under the Year of 
Youth 

Share of stakeholders which 
perceived synergies with the 
Year of Youth (and its legacy) 
and the EUYS’ objectives and 
actions 

Share of stakeholders which 
perceive overlaps with the 
Year of Youth (and its legacy) 
and the EUYS’ objectives and 
actions. 

Table 4. Evaluation matrix – Coherence 

EU added value 

To operationalise the analysis of EU added value, the evaluation assesses four main aspects: 

•  Volume/scale effects: the extent to which the EUYS creates additional volume effects 

(scale of cooperation) which would not be achieved through national actions. 

•  Scope effects:  the  extent to  which  the EUYS covers stakeholders that would  not  be 

covered by national interventions. 

116 It should be noted that the original question from the ToR stated, “To what extent and how has the EUYS’ relevance, coherence and added 
value been influenced by the European Year of Youth and the legacy of the Year?”. The decision was made at the tender stage to slit this 
question across each of the criterions so that they could be adequately addressed in turn.  

86 

 
 
 
 
•  Role effects: the extent to which the EUYS and actions implemented through it allowed 
innovation and its uptake at national and organisational level. For example, the EUYS 
could emphasise focus on certain new priorities that are otherwise under-represented at 
national level. 

•  Process effects: the extent to which the EUYS created innovation in the process. This 
concerns notable spill-over effects  such as how  engaged, connected  and empowered 
youth across Member States have become. The provision of tools for managing as well 
as recognising outcomes of the EUYS and their use are possible examples of process 
effects.   

Evaluation question 

Judgement criteria  

Indicators  

Methods/sources  

14.  How  and  to  what  extent 
does  action  at  EU  level  add 
value 
the 
in  addressing 
objectives  of  the  EU  Youth 
beyond  what 
Strategy, 
individual MSs could achieve 
on their own? 

The EUYS had added 
value over and above 
what could be 
achieved by Member 
States alone in its 
absence 

Volume/scale effects: the additional 
scale in terms of engagement, 
connection and empowerment of youth 
that has been influenced/ achieved 
through the EUYS.  

Desk research 

Key informant interviews  

Public consultation 

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Youth focus groups  

Scope effects: the relevant stakeholders 
across sectors were covered through the 
EUYS and relevant 
programmes/policies. 

Role effects: the coverage of new issues 
or priorities, as well as target groups, in 
addition to what is covered at national 
and/or regionals level. 

Process effects: the scale and nature of 
process innovation compared to what is 
done at national and/or regional levels. 

Evidence from stakeholders that the 
same results could have been achieved 
at national and/or regional levels 
without the EUYS. 

Evidence of impacts from other support 
schemes targeting youth at national 
and/or regional levels. 

Data on outputs from programmes 
under the EUYS (e.g. results of these 
programmes, data on youth engagement 
etc.). 

Number of participants in programmes 
under the EUYS at national and 
international level. 

15. To what extent does the 
Youth  Strategy  promote 
cooperation 
between 
countries  (in  Europe  and 
beyond)? 

The EUYS outlined 
its added value 
through increased 
cooperation between 
countries on policies 
and matters relevant 
to youth. 

Evidence / examples of the EUYS 
having promoted cooperation between 
countries both within Europe and 
internationally (e.g. via EU-CoE youth 
partnership). 

Desk research 

Key informant interviews 

Public consultation 

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Stakeholder views on the degree to 
which cooperation between countries 
can be attributed to the influence of the 
EUYS 

Evidence demonstrating that 
stakeholders were motivated by the 
EUYS to undertake actions and 

87 

 
 
 
16. To what extent and how 
has the EUYS’ added value 
been 
influenced  by  the 
European  Year  of  Youth 
and 
the 
the 
Year?117 

legacy  of 

17.  What  would  be  the 
most  likely  consequences 
of a discontinuation of the 
EU Youth Strategy? 

There is direct/ 
indirect evidence that 
the European Year of 
Youth and its legacy 
influenced the added 
value of the EUYS, 
over and above what 
could have been 
achieved by Member 
States alone in its 
absence 

Majority of 
stakeholders believe 
discontinuing (parts 
of) the EUYS would 
have negative 
consequences 

cooperation across borders, both within 
the EU and internationally.   

Evidence / examples from activities 
under the Year of Youth (e.g. national 
initiatives, ALMA118, European Youth 
Event, debates held within the European 
Parliament, the European year of youth 
conference) having influenced the EU 
added value of the EUYS 

Desk research 

Key informant interviews 

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Stakeholder views on the degree to 
which the legacy of the Year of Youth 
had a positive or negative impact upon 
the added value of the EUYS.  

Stakeholder views on what would 
happen in terms of continuation of EU 
youth education, employment/social 
policies in the absence of the EUYS. 

Key informant interviews 

Public consultation 

Stakeholder views on what would 
happen to the different activities under 
the EUYS in the absence of EU funding 

Civil society survey and focus 
groups  

Table 5. Evaluation matrix – EU added value 

117 It should be noted that the original question from the ToR stated, “To what extent and how has the EUYS’ relevance, coherence and added 
value been influenced by the European Year of Youth and the legacy of the Year?”. The decision was made at the tender stage to split this 
question across each of the criterions so that they could be adequately addressed in turn.  

118 Aim, Learn, Master, Achieve.  

88 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  IV.  OVERVIEW  OF  BENEFITS  AND  COSTS  AND,  WHERE  RELEVANT,  TABLE  ON 
SIMPLIFICATION AND BURDEN REDUCTION.  

The evaluation has not identified measurable potential for simplification and burden reduction, 
hence no table summarising this aspect is provided in this annex. It should be noted that due to 
interactions, overlaps and impossibility of precise attribution of costs to individual instruments, 
the data presented in the table cannot be used to precisely compare cost-effectiveness of various 
instruments.  

Assessment typology 

The table below provides a typology which has been applied across each of the instruments 
under the EUYS so to classify the overall cost-effectiveness at the level of instruments. The 
EUYS instruments considered here are the same as presented in impact pathways.  

Assessment typology  Description  

High 
effectiveness 

(+) 

cost 

A  high  (+)  cost  effectiveness  assessment  suggests  that  the  EU  Youth  Strategy  is 
achieving  positive  outputs  and  outcomes  at  a  relatively  low  cost.  The  EUYS’ 
implementation is efficient,  resulting in positive impacts for youth. Resources are 
being utilised better than one could have expected.  

Adequate 
effectiveness 

(/) 

cost 

An adequate (/) cost effectiveness assessment indicates that the EU Youth Strategy 
is achieving positive outputs and outcomes that correspond to the resources invested. 
The benefits obtained from the EUYS’ implementation align reasonably well with 
the costs incurred.  

Low 
(-) 
effectiveness 

cost 

A low (-) cost effectiveness assessment implies that the EU Youth Strategy is not 
generating  outputs  and  outcomes  that  justify  associated  costs.  The  EUYS’ 
implementation might be inefficient or misaligned, resulting in benefits that fall short 
of  the  resources  invested.  Adjustments  to  resource  allocation,  design,  or 
implementation practice may be needed to enhance its cost-effectiveness. 

Undetermined (~) 

An undetermined (~) cost effectiveness assessment arises when information gaps on 
either cost or benefit size make it challenging to definitively evaluate whether the 
EU Youth Strategy/ its individual instruments are cost-effective. This could be due 
to a lack of sufficient data or conflicting information. Further assessment and data 
collection may be necessary to determine the EUYS’ efficiency. 

Table 6. Assessment typology for the cost-effectiveness per instrument. 

The table below provides the costs and benefits that were identified in this evaluation study. 
The table essentially summarises all the costs and benefits that are identified in the evaluation. 
The  main  source  for  the  quantitative  indications  is  the  results  from  the  cost-effectiveness 
analysis. Where quantitative indications are not available, information from all other sources 
used in this evaluation (interviews, desk research, focus groups, case studies) were used to give 
a more qualitative view on the costs and benefits for different actors. 

89 

 
 
 
Instrument 

Anticipated output 

Anticipated results/ impact 

Costs 

Benefits 

Cost effectiveness assessment 

EU  Youth  Strategy 
Work Plans 

Individual:  Stakeholders  and 
policy  makers  at  EU  and 
national  level  are  aware  of 
workplan and activities to reach 
EUYS  goals 
in  a  specific 
working period 

Product:  EU  Work  Plans  for 
Youth,  including  priorities  and 
actions for working periods 

Future 
Activities Planners 

National 

Individual:  MS  policy  makers 
learn  from  peers  and  engage 
strategically with them 

Product:  FNAP 
connecting 
national  and  EU  priorities, 
including  funding  programmes 
for youth 

Results 

Type - Recurring 

Type – Output and Results 

Assessment  

for  Youth  contribute 

Activities  outlined  in  the  EU  Work 
Plans 
to 
reaching the overarching goals of the 
EUYS during each working period 

Impact 

Youth  active  citizenship,  social 
inclusion  and  solidarity  enabled 
through  policies,  promotion  and 
support 

At the EU level: some 0.33 FTE.  

At  Member  State  level:  some 
0.7  FTE 
for  all  countries 
combined 

The calculations are based on an 
assumption of inputs in a range 
of around 1 FTE at the EU level 
in  a  year  when  a  work  plan  is 
prepared (i.e. every three years) 
and  some  15-20    working days 
per MS  in a year  when a  work 
plan is prepared (i.e. every three 
years).  These  calculations  use 
FTE as equivalent of around 220 
working days.  

Published  work  plans  –  creating  an 
opportunity  to  help  focus  and  co-
ordinate efforts of various stakeholders 

High CEA (+) 

Rationale 

from 

results 

Stakeholders’  awareness  of  planned 
the  Public 
actions: 
Consultation  showed  that  52%  of 
respondents  were  aware  of  the  work 
plans  to  a  great/  certain  extent,  with 
more  than  half  of  CSOs  and  Public 
Authorities  having  the  highest  degree 
of awareness. 

The  instrument  incurred  limited 
associated  costs,  hence  cost 
benefit  ratio  can  be  assessed  as 
high despite limited evidence on 
actual impact of the Plans. 

Among the CSOs that expressed 
a  view  in  a  targeted  survey 
question on cost-effectiveness of 
EU Work Plans, a majority (60% 
of  respondents  with  a  view) 
considered  benefits  to  outweigh 
costs  to  a  moderate  or  a  great 
extent.  

Results 

Type - Recurring 

Type – Output and Results 

Assessment  

Member States refer back to and/or 
integrate  objectives  or  tools  of  the 
EUYS  in  youth  policies,  plans  & 
programmes at national level  

Impact 

Youth  voices,  needs  of  and  impact 
on  young  people  systematically 
in  policy 
taken 
development  on  both  national  and 
EU levels 

into  account 

At the EU level: some 0.07 FTE 
annually.  

At  Member  State  level:  some 
for  all 
1.4  FTE  annually 
countries combined 

Borne  primarily  by  public 
authorities at the Member State 
level.  Country-level  research 
suggests  inputs  in  the  range  of 
20-25 days per MS per round of 
FNAP  development  (i.e.  once 
every 
the 
associated  EU  level  input  of 
some  30  working  days.  This 
adds  up  to  around  1.5  FTE  in 
total  on  an  annual  recuring 

two  years)  with 

90 

to 

learn  on 

Reference  source  exists  creating  a 
possibility 
(planned) 
actions  by  other  countries  across  a 
broad  range  of  youth-relevant  policy 
areas; large number of countries chose 
to participate and prepared FNAP 

Incentive  to  systematically  reflect  on 
national level youth polices in a format 
comparable across the EU;  

Limited  evidence  that  FNAP  was 
actually used by MS administrations to 
integrate  EUYS  objectives  and  tools 
into  national  level  youth  policies  and 
actions. 

Adequate CEA (/) 

Rationale 

are 

costs 

limited. 
Overall 
Effectiveness  described  as  not 
fully satisfactory by stakeholders 
from several countries – benefits 
are  limited  as  the  format  of 
is  not  user-
FNAP  outputs 
friendly  for  users  looking  for  a 
reference  source.  On  the  other 
hand,  a  majority  among  an 
overall  small  number  of  CSOs 
that replied to a question on cost-
effectiveness of FNAPs in an on-
that 
survey  considered 
line 

 
 
 
Mutual 
dissemination 

learning  and 

Individual:  Participants  in  the 
working 
peer 
learning  activities  learn  about 
best/good/promising practices  

group 

and 

Product: 
principles at EU level  

Guidelines 

or 

Evidence-based  youth 
policymaking 
and 
knowledge building 

Quantitative  and  qualitative 
data on young people at the EU 
and national level  

Research  and data available  on 
youth  via  EU  Dashboard  of 
youth  indicators,  Youth  Wiki 
and other platforms  

Results 

Participating  organisations  report 
the 
positive 
influence 
learning 
guidelines/peer 
activities/practices 
national 
policies and measures 

on 

of 

New  or 
strengthened  networks 
between  policy  makers  and  other 
stakeholders 

Impact 

Youth  active  citizenship,  social 
inclusion  and  solidarity  enabled 
through  policies,  promotion  and 
support 

levels 

of 

youth 

Increased 
participation 

Results 

basis, of which around 1.4 FTE 
falls on MS level (all countries 
combined).  

benefits outweigh costs to a great 
or very great extent  

falling 

primarily 

information 

No 
available 
enabling precise estimate. Costs 
on 
are 
organisers  and  participants  of 
peer 
the 
expert 
counselling, 
Limited 
evidence gathered suggests that 
overall  costs  are  likely  to  be 
low.   

groups, 
etc. 

Type – Output and Results 

Assessment – Undetermined (~) 

Different outputs of expert groups, e.g. 
a proposal for a revision of the Council 
Recommendation  on  mobility  of 
young volunteers across the European 
Union. Learning at individual level by 
participants of activities. 

Rationale 

Cost-effectiveness  difficult 
to 
assess  given  small  scale  and 
dispersed character of actions  

Surveyed  CSOs  that  expressed 
opinions on the balance of costs 
and  benefits  of  mutual  learning 
activities  were  fairly  sceptical 
significantly 
about 
outweighing 
the  costs.  The 
prevailing view was that benefits 
outweighed 
to  a 
moderate extent.  

the  costs 

benefits 

Type  - Recurring 

Type – Output and Results 

Assessment  Adequate CEA (/) 

Youth policies are developed based 
on the evidence gathered at EU and 
national level 

Data  is  used  to  feed  into  policy 
deliberation  through  participatory 
governance 

Inputs & information gathered from 
youth influence policymaking 

Evidence-based  monitoring 
evaluation of EUYS 

and 

Impact 

Borne by EU budget (at the EU 
level):  EUR 
2.8  million 
annually  (calculated as average 
funds  during 
of  committed 
2020-2022 for work programme 
to 
items: 
better 
knowledge 
in  youth  policy; 
Studies  &  EU-CoE  Youth 
Partnership). 

Support 

Member 
States’ 
Administrations  –  generally 
small human resources inputs to 
update Youth Wiki and oversee 
or  contribute  to  analytical  and 
information sharing efforts.   

Maintenance and updates of EU Youth 
Wiki 
https://national-
policies.eacea.ec.europa.eu/youthwiki  

the  youth 

Knowledge  Hub:  COVID-19  impact 
on 
sector  https://pjp-
eu.coe.int/en/web/youth-
partnership/covid-19-impact-on-the-
youth-sector  

Easier  access  to  evidence  for  design, 
implementation  and  evaluation  of 
youth  policies:  youth-related  data 
gathered together and presented on the 
platforms;  an  overview  of  national 
level  policies and assessments  related 
to  youth;  references  to  studies  and 

Rationale 

Among the CSOs that responded 
to  a  survey  question  on  cost-
effectiveness  of  evidence-based 
tools,  a  majority  considered 
benefits  to  outweigh  costs  to  a 
moderate or a great extent 

The  difficulty 
in  attributing 
effects  makes  the  assessment 
cost effectiveness challenging. 

91 

 
 
Participatory 
Governance 

Policy  makers, 
Individual: 
young  people  and  stakeholders 
learn and exchange information 
about policy developments  

Product:  EU  Youth  Strategy 
dialogue, 
Platform, 
civic 
dedicated  meetings 
offer 
opportunities to exchange 

Voices  of  youth  are  systematically 
in  EU  and 
into  account 
taken 
national policymaking 

Increased 
participation 

levels 

of 

youth 

analyses  gathered 
together.  The 
completeness and updates of some data 
and  information  on  the  platforms 
remains uneven. It remains difficult to 
assess to what extent policy makers use 
data  provided  on  Youth  Wiki  and 
similar platforms rather than relying on 
original sources of data (e.g. Eurostat). 

30% of youth responding to the public 
consultation  were  of  the  view  that 
young  people  had  been  sufficiently 
involved in the implementation of the 
EUYS. Of this group 47% were aware 
of 
a 
evidence-based 
great/certain extent.  

tools 

to 

Results 

Type - Recurring 

Type – Results 

Assessment  Adequate CEA (/) 

Rationale 

Cost-effectiveness appears to be 
broadly  satisfactory,  mainly due 
to low costs.  

of 

perception 

The 
cost-
effectiveness  among  CSOs  is 
somewhat negative. Around half 
of surveyed CSOs that expressed 
a  view,  indicated  that  benefits 
outweigh  costs  to  a  small  or 
moderate extent. 

Mainstreaming  of  youth  into  other 
EU and MS policy areas 

Identifying  and  shaping  specific 
initiatives in the youth sector 

Small  costs  overall,  mainly 
related to time of preparing and 
participating  in  the  EU  Youth 
Strategy Platform. 

Impacts 

Voices  of  youth  are  systematically 
taken 
in  EU  and 
into  account 
national policymaking 

Youth  active  citizenship,  social 
inclusion  and  solidarity  enabled 
through  policies,  promotion  and 
support 

92 

initiatives 

and 
Policy-related 
declarations  related 
to  EU  Youth 
Strategy Platform activities. Examples 
include  the  Council  Conclusion  on  a 
Sustainable  Future  for  Youth  (May 
2023) and Conclusions of the Council 
and 
the 
Governments  of  the  Member  States 
the  Council  on 
meeting  within 
promoting 
intergenerational 
the 
dimension in  the youth  field to  foster 
dialogue 
cohesion 
(December 2022). 

representatives  of 

social 

and 

the 

30% of youth responding to the public 
consultation  were  of  the  view  that 
young  people  had  been  sufficiently 
involved in the implementation of the 
EUYS. 

6  out  of  16  Public  authorities 
answering  to  the  Public  Consultation 
believed that the EUYS assisted them 
as  a  national  or  regional  policymaker 
in their daily work, to a great/ certain 
extent. 

 
 
EU Youth Dialogue 

Individual:  Young 
people, 
policy makers and stakeholders 
participate in the dialogue  

Product: 
of 
recommendations and priorities 
are identified 

Set 

Results  

Type - Recurring 

Type – Results 

Assessment Adequate CEA (/) 

Dialogue 
stakeholders  

between 

youth 

and 

The  priorities  are 
reflected 
national and EU decision making 

in 

Impact 

Voices  of  youth  are  systematically 
in  EU  and 
taken 
national policymaking  

into  account 

Borne by EU budget (at the EU 
level):  EUR 
1.5  million 
annually (calculated as a sum of 
grants under Erasmus+ Youth to 
the  national  working  groups  of 
ca. EUR 1 million annually and 
Presidency  grant  of  EUR  0.5 
million  that covers  the costs of 
the EU Youth Conference). 

Rationale 

Among the CSOs that responded 
to  a  survey  question  on  cost-
majority 
effectiveness, 
considered  benefits  to  outweigh 
costs  to  a  moderate  or  a  great 
extent. 

a 

Three dialogue cycles completed since 
2019. Tens of thousands of participants 
(a combination of in-person and virtual 
engagements)  with  a  large  share  of 
participants  from  minority  groups 
(well  above  shares 
total 
population). Diverse set of activities.  

the 

in 

Thematic  focus  of  successive  cycles 
created  a  forum  for dialogue between 
youth  and  policy  makers.  Several 
activities  also  aimed  at  capacity 
building 
to 
empowering  young  people  to  have  a 
say, while no data have been identified 
to quantify the strength of that impact. 

contributed 

hence 

It is impossible to determine the extent 
to  which  youth  dialogue  helped  in 
having  their  priorities  reflected  in 
decision 
and  EU-level 
national 
making. 

7th cycle Youth Dialogue participants: 
56 287  

More than half, 58% of respondents to 
the  youth  survey  declared  knowing 
Youth  Dialogue  at  least  by  name. 
Among  respondents  who  indicated 
knowing the instrument at least a little, 
35%  declared  having  taken  part  in  a 
Youth  Dialogue,  a  high  figure  which 
suggests  caution 
interpretation 
(respondents  may  have  had  in  mind 
other initiatives of  a  similar  character 
or name). .  

in 

EU Youth Coordinator 

Individual:  EU  policy  makers 
participate  in  cooperation  and 
exchange  with  other  COM 
services 

Results 

Type - Recurring 

Type – Results 

Assessment   Adequate CEA (/) 

Mainstreaming  of  youth  into  other 
EU policy areas  

1  full  time  position,  Brussels-
based  European  Commission 
official 

A single contact point or a platform for 
sharing 
increased 
information; 
visibility  of  youth  policies,  also  from 
perspectives; 
Member 

States 

Rationale 

Small  costs  suggest  favourable 
the 
cost-effectiveness,  given 

93 

 
 
 
Cross-sectoral 
Product: 
is 
youth 
on 
cooperation 
established, Platform of sharing 
information  

development 

Knowledge 
and 
exchange on youth issues within the 
European Commission services  

Alignment  of  activities  within  the 
EU services 

Coordination  between  different  EU 
activities 

Impact 

Youth  active  citizenship,  social 
inclusion  and  solidarity  enabled 
through  policies,  promotion  and 
support  

contribution to mainstreaming of youth 
topics into other EU and Member State 
policy  areas;  successful  coordination 
within 
services, 
the  Commission 
primarily through  the  development of 
the  Youth  Network  and  the  Year’s 
National Coordinators and Stakeholder 
group. 

evidence 

output/results  from  one  FTE. 
from 
However, 
interviews  at  EU  level  suggests 
that  an  increase  of  resources 
allocated  to  this  function  could 
improve  benefits  more 
than 
proportionally,  i.e.  improve  cost 
effectiveness  

65%  of  surveyed  youth  had  heard  of 
the  EU  Youth  Coordinator  by  name 
only/ not at all.  

40% of stakeholders responding to the 
PC  were  aware  of  the  EU  Youth 
Coordinator role.  

CSOs  that  expressed an opinion 
in  a  survey,  a  majority  of 
responses  indicated  benefits  to 
outweigh costs to a moderate or a 
great extent. 

Communicating the EU 
Youth Strategy 

Individual: 
Relevant 
stakeholders  are  aware  of  the 
EU Youth Strategy and ongoing 
implementation  

Product:  Comprehensive  and 
youth-friendly  communication 
outputs  around  the  EU  Youth 
Strategy (e.g. posts, videos) 

Result 

Type - Recurring 

Type – Results 

Assessment  

New  and  positive  narrative  of  EU 
youth work policy and Youth Work 
in Europe 

precise 

No 
information 
identified; costs are expected to 
be small 

Impact 

Youth  active  citizenship,  social 
inclusion  and  solidarity  enabled 
through  policies,  promotion  and 
support 

Undetermined (~) 

Rationale 

intensive 

Cost-effectiveness  is  difficult  to 
assess  due  to  time  lag  between 
more 
information 
campaign  and  measurement  of 
effects.  Small 
costs  would 
suggest broadly favourable cost-
effectiveness. 

Multilingual  material  promoting  the 
EUYS prepared in 2019; The primary 
for  communication 
channels  used 
include  the  European  Youth  Portal, 
various social media platforms such as 
Facebook, 
Instagram, 
Twitter, 
websites 
of  National  Agencies, 
Eurodesk,  and  Support,  Advanced 
Learning  and  Training  Opportunities 
(SALTO). 

Relevant  stakeholders  are  generally 
aware  of  the  EUYS.  Indeed,  63%  of 
respondents  to  the  survey  of  youth 
indicated  knowledge  of  the  EUYS  at 
least  by  name, 
including  13% 
declaring  knowing very  well or a  fair 
amount  about  it  (these  figures  are 
broadly  similar  to  figures  reflecting 
knowledge  about  national level  youth 
policies  declared  by  respondents). 
Indeed,  88%  of  surveyed  CSOs  were 
also  found  to  be  aware  of  the  EUYS 
and its instruments. 

94 

 
 
 
and 
Mobilising 
EU 
monitoring 
programmes and funds 

Individual: 
Better 
understanding of EU finding by 
policy makers and stakeholders  

Product:  Better  design  of  EU, 
national,  regional  and 
local 
level  funding  programmes  for 
youth initiatives  

Youth  information  and 
support 

Individual:  Youth  are  aware  of 
their  rights  and  opportunities 
available to them  

Product:  EU  Youth  Portal, 
DiscoverEU, 
EUYS 
platform is developed and used 
by youth 

and 

Result 

Type - Recurring 

Type – Results 

Effective use of EU programmes and 
funds  to  tackle  youth  needs  at  EU, 
national, regional and local level   

Impact 

Youth  active  citizenship,  social 
inclusion  and  solidarity  enabled 
through  policies,  promotion  and 
support 

Youth  transitioning  into  adulthood 
and  working  life  through  increased 
and 
in 
inclusive  opportunities 
learning  mobility,  education  and 
training and labour mobility. 

to 

suggests 

mapping 

zero.  Gathered 
Close 
the 
that 
evidence 
relevant 
and 
monitoring activities take place 
as  part  of  programmes  such  as 
Erasmus+  and 
is  not  an 
additional  element  brought  by 
the EUYS 

EU  programmes  and 
funds  are 
consistently found to have comparably 
high 
by 
of 
levels 
stakeholder and youth.  

awareness 

turn, 

In 
attended 
those  who 
programmes  such  as  Erasmus+  were 
found to have increased knowledge of 
the  issues  young  people  face  and 
allowed  them  to  feel  that  they  could 
influence what happens in Europe (PC 
and Youth Survey) 

Assessment  

High CEA (+) 

Rationale 

Favourable 
cost-effectiveness 
given the successful utilisation of 
EU  programmes  and  funds  to 
support  the  EUYS  and  youth 
initiatives,  and  no  or  negligible 
costs. 

Result 

Type - Recurring 

Type – Outputs/ Results 

Assessment  

Equal  access to quality information 
on  youth 
rights,  opportunities, 
services and EU programmes 

Impact 

Youth  transitioning  into  adulthood 
and  working  life  through  increased 
and 
in 
inclusive  opportunities 
learning and labour mobility 

The EUYS platform is covered 
activities 
under 
different 
mentioned  above 
(e.g.  EU 
Youth Coordinator).  

The average cost per year for the 
implementation of the European 
Youth Portal was EUR 771,999. 
This  is  paired  with  an  average 
annual cost EUR 1.4 million for 
support  to  better  knowledge  in 
youth policy 

Information  available  at  EU  Youth 
Portal,  EU  Youth  Strategy  Platform, 
DiscoverEU and used by the youth. 

Undetermined (~) 

Rationale 

On  average  22%  of  surveyed  youth 
were  aware  of  available  youth 
resources  (e.g.  EU  Youth  Portal, 
DiscoverEU  and  EUYS  platform)  by 
name only.  On  average 14% knew of 
the  resources  very  well  or  a  fair 
amount.  

45 out of 71 (63%) youth responding to 
the  Public  Consultation  had  used  the 
European  Youth  Portal,  while  only  8 
(11%) had used the EUYS platform. 

Cost-effectiveness  cannot  be 
reliably  assessed  based  on 
existing 
evidence.  Evidence 
however  suggests  youth  are 
broadly  aware  of  available 
resource,  and  that  the  European 
Youth  Portal  and  Eurodesk 
network  provided 
information 
about  opportunities  for  young 
people  and  encouraged 
their 
participation,  leading  to  more 
active 
enhanced 
citizenship, 
skills, and personal fulfilment. 

European  Youth  Work 
Agenda 

Individual:  Young  people  are 
able to strengthen key skills and 
qualifications  obtained  through 
non-formal learning  

Results 

Type - Recurring 

Type – Outputs/ Results 

Assessment   

Youth people are equipped with key 
skills  and  qualifications  allowing 
them to transition to adulthood 

Negligible.  Gathered  evidence 
suggests 
take 
place  as  part  of  programmes 
such  as  Erasmus+  or  ESC  and 

that  activities 

Improved  skills  of  participants  of 
activities  and  their  recognition  by 

High CEA (+) 

Rationale 

95 

 
 
Favourable 
cost-effectiveness 
given no or negligible costs. The 
contribution  analysis  also  found 
that the EYWA has strengthened 
the 
policy 
framework  in  conjunction  with 
other  EU  developments  such  as 
the  SALTO  network  and  EU 
youth funding programmes.  

youth 

work 

Product:  Recognition 
quality tools are provided  

and 

Impacts 

do  not 
require 
resources at the EUYS level. 

additional 

qualifications  (the  scale  of  this  is 
difficult to assess).  

Youth  transitioning  into  adulthood 
and  working  life  through  increased 
and 
in 
inclusive  opportunities 
learning and labour mobility 

on 

Several  policy  documents:  Council 
conclusions 
raising 
(e.g. 
opportunities for young people in rural 
and  remote  areas  (December  2020)) 
and Council Resolutions (e.g. on a EU 
Youth Work Agenda (June 2020). 

The  implementation  of  the  European 
Youth Work Agenda was also seen as 
the  second  most  relevant  topic  for 
cooperation  in  the  2021  FNAP,  only 
quality  youth  work  was  viewed  as 
more important.  

A  part  of  the  implementation  of  the 
European  Youth  Work  Agenda 
occurred  through  the  Sub-Group  on 
Youth  Work 
times 
between 2021 –2022. 

that  met  six 

Table 7. Overview of costs and benefits identified in the evaluation

96 

 
 
 
ANNEX V. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION – SYNOPSIS REPORT 

Introduction  

This Synopsis Report summarises all consultation activities that took place in the context 
of the interim evaluation of the European Union Youth Strategy (the EUYS) 2019-2027 
and presents the main results.  

Consultation strategy 

The consultation strategy for the evaluation was based on a mapping of stakeholders and 
included  the  following  consultation  activities  to  involve  a  broad  range  of  EUYS 
stakeholders and the public: 

•  A  call  for  evidence  open  to  any  stakeholder  and  the  public  on  the  European 

Commission’s 'Have Your Say' portal from 23 Sep. to 21 Oct. 2022.    

•  A public consultation open to any stakeholder and the public, on the European 

Commission’s ‘Have Your Say’-portal from 26 Apr. to 2 Aug. 2023.  

•  Quantitative  activities  gathering  data  on  awareness  of  the  EUYS  and 
engagement with different EUYS activities and instruments, collected through 
two targeted surveys:  

-  Online  survey  of  young  people,  reached  through  a  general  population 

sample in 10 EU Member States119 from 10 to 29 July 2023;  

-  Online survey of youth civil society organisations, youth researchers active 
at EU and national level, and youth informal groups, from 15 June to 14 
Aug. 2023.  

•  Qualitative  activities  gathering  perceptions  of  the  EUYS  and  examples  of 

progress made in its implementation, collected through:  

-  Key informant interviews with policy makers at EU and national level and 
focus groups with national policy makers, from 3 May to 20 June 2023; 

-  Focus groups with young people from 14 June to 8 Aug. 2023;  
-  Focus groups with civil society organisations, youth researchers and youth 

informal groups from 14 June to 23 Aug. 2023. 

Stakeholder group 

General Public 

Youth  

EU institutions/bodies 

Authorities at national level 

Call  for  Evidence 
and 
Public 
Consultation 
✓   

Online 
surveys 

Key 
informant 
interviews 

Focus 
groups 

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

119 Czechia, Germany, France, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden  

97 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Experts and youth researchers  

CSOs/NGOs,  platforms  and 
networks 
or 
working with youth 

representing 

International  organisations  & 
bodies 

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

✓   

Table 8. Types of stakeholders consulted. Source: Kantar Public 

Figure 1. Stakeholders’ participation in consultation activities.  
Source: Kantar Public 

Call for Evidence 

Prior to the Public Consultation, a Call for Evidence was open from the 23rd of September 
until the 21st of October 2022 to gather opinions on the performance of the EUYS. Overall, 
36 responses were provided, a majority from NGOs (58.3%, 21 out of 36) and EU citizens 
(16.7%, 6 out  of 36). 12 countries120 were represented across the respondents,  with  the 
largest proportion being from Belgium (28%, 10 out of 36) and Germany (14%, 5 out of 
36). 

Respondent category 

Number of responses   % of total 

Non-governmental organisation 

21 

58.3% 

120 N = Belgium (10), Germany (5), France (4), Portugal (3), Switzerland (3), Slovakia (2), Italy (2), Greece (2), Finland (2), Romania 

(1), Netherlands (1), Austria (1).  

98 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EU citizens 

Other 

Public authority 

Environmental organisation 

Academic/research institution 

TOTAL 

6 

4 

3 

1 

1 

36 

16.7% 

11.1% 

8.3% 

2.8% 

2.8% 

100% 

Table 9. Call for evidence overview. Source: Kantar Public 

Respondents expressed their overall support for the EUYS, its aims, and its function in 
promoting youth engagement, social and civic involvement, as well as providing resources 
for young individuals. Recommendations for enhancing the implementation of the EUYS 
encompassed broadening the range of young people in the EU Youth Dialogue, making 
cross-border mobility initiatives more accessible, and concentrating on informal learning 
and youth work to empower young individuals. Emphasis was placed on amplifying the 
representation of vulnerable youth groups, maintaining a focus on inclusion and diversity, 
increasing  the  visibility  of  combating  climate  change  and  digital  transformation,  and 
addressing  the  consequences  of  digital  technologies  on  mental  and  physical  health  and 
well-being of young people. 

Public Consultation  

The Public Consultation (PC) was launched on 26 April 2023 and remained open until 2 
August 2023. The PC was based on a questionnaire, in all 24 official EU languages, and 
included  four  sections:  [1]  profiling  questions,  [2]  questions  to  all  respondents,  [3] 
questions  to  youth,  [4]  questions  to  stakeholders  (excluding  youth),  and  [5]  closing 
questions.  

Respondent category 

Number of responses   % of total 

EU citizens 

Non-governmental organisation 

Other 

Public authority 

Non-EU citizen 

Academic/research institution 

Business association 

Company/business 

120 

45 

16 

16 

13 

10 

3 

1 

53.6% 

20.1% 

7.1% 

7.1% 

5.8% 

4.5% 

1.3% 

0.4% 

TOTAL 

224 
Table 12. Public Consultation overview121 Source: Kantar Public 

100% 

The largest  group among EU and non-EU citizens were those aged between 18 and 23 
years old (38% - 51 out of 133), as shown in the figure below.  

121 As per the Better Regulation Guidelines, the responses were checked for the presence of campaigns or coordinated answers that could 
skew the overall answers per question. I 10 or more responses are identical across all open questions, they were considered to be part 
of a campaign. Upon review, no campaigns were identified. 

99 

 
 
 
 
Figure 2. Age of respondents under the PC.  
Source: Kantar Public - Public consultation 

While  these  findings  offer  insights  into  the  participating  respondents,  it  is  essential  to 
consider that the PC is not a representative sample of the entire EU. As the PC gathered 
224 responses, the sample size is relatively small, which limits the generalisability of the 
results.  

Summary of Public Consultation results 

Under the criterion of relevance, the following main points were found in the PC: 

•  Three issues were recognised as challenges faced by young people in 2019-2022 
consistently across all respondents. These were: the cost-of-living crisis (95%122 
, 213 out of 224), followed by mental health and well-being (91%, 204 out of 
224), and financial stability (90%, 197 out of 224).  

•  The  instruments  of  the  EUYS  that  respondents  were  most  aware  of123  were 
Erasmus+  (95%,  169  out  of  178),  followed  by  the  European  Solidarity  Corps 
(80%, 143 out of 178), and the European Youth Portal (73%, 130 out of 178).    
•  Notably 52% (116 out of 224) of all respondents indicated that they were familiar 

with the EUYS to a great/certain extent.  

•  Among  the  youth  respondents  who  indicated  their  familiarity  with  the  EUYS 
(n=71),  the  three  most  renown  EUYS  instruments  were  the  European  Youth 
Portal (63%, 45 out of 71), Erasmus+ (48%, 34 out of 71), and evidence-based 
tools (25%, 18 out of 71).  

•  Among respondents who identified themselves as public authorities (n=16), there 
were mixed opinions regarding the extent to which the EUYS was relevant to 
their daily work.  

The following results were found from the PC in relation to effectiveness:  

•  Regarding the contribution of the EU and the respondents’ country in mitigating 
the challenges124, the PC revealed that both the EU and national authorities in the 
respondents' countries have primarily helped in tackling limited access to green 
transportation and to digital technologies (46%, 107 out of 230, and 48%, 108 
out of 223 respectively). The primary contribution from the EU alone was found 

122 Combination of the options “strongly agree” and “agree” 
123 Combination of the options ‘’to a great extent’ and ‘to a certain extent’ 
124 Including Access to public services, Barriers to education, Barriers to learning mobility, Impact of the cost-of-living crisis, Financial 
stability, Job loss, Mental wellbeing, Risk of poverty, Differences in opportunities between rural and urban settings, Social exclusion, 
Youth unemployment, Barriers to youth participation, Limited access to digital technologies, Limited access to green transportation, 
such as public transport or bike lanes. 

100 

 
 
 
 
to  be in  mitigating barriers to  learning mobility  (48%, 110 out  of 239),  youth 
participation (43%, 105 out of 239) and education (42%, 99 out of 232). 

•  Youth policy cooperation between Member States (supported by the EUYS) was 
noted to have been effective to a great/ certain extent by 44% of stakeholders (40 
out  of  91,  excluding  youth).  Among  the  respondents  that  held  this  view,  the 
majority (62%, 24 out of 40) were NGOs.  

The PC did not contain specific questions in relation to the efficiency of the EUYS, and 
only a few respondents provided some feedback in the open questions to the PC:   

•  Seven  respondents  called  for  enhanced  funding  flexibility  in  different  youth 
programmes under the EUYS, including the possibility to transfer unused funds 
between  Erasmus+  and  European  Solidarity  Corps,  and  to  optimise  resource 
utilisation125.  

•  Six  respondents126  acknowledged  in  their  input  papers  that  the  role  of  youth 
organisations in the implementation of the EUYS requires more financial support 
and  empowerment.  Engaging  young  people  and  their  organisations  in  various 
instruments was considered essential for fostering ownership and effectiveness. 

The following points were found from the PC in relation to coherence: 

•  Most  respondents  (70%  -  64  out  of  91,  excluding  youth)  reported  that  the 
instruments under the EUYS were coherent and complementary to strategies and 
policies at the international/national level to a great/certain extent. Among these 
respondents, the majority (62%) were NGOs.  

 The main points from the PC on EU added value included:  

•  Most respondents ( 68%, 62 out of 91, excluding youth) indicated that the EUYS 
had provided additional value beyond what Member States could have achieved 
on their own to a great/certain extent. Within this group, the majority were NGOs 
(56%). 

Online surveys of youth and civil society organisations 

Online survey of young people 

An online survey was conducted among young people, aged 16-29, in 10 Member States 
between  10  July  and  29  July  2023,  gathering  400  responses  in  each  MS.  The  survey 
covered questions relating to all evaluation criteria, except efficiency.  

125 This point was raised by 7 stakeholders: Two business associations, four NGOs and one “other”.  
126 Including 5 NGOs and one International organisation.  

101 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Target 
Survey  of  young  people 
aged 16-29127 

Sample size 
Sample 
respondents128 
Member State 

of 

400 
in  each 

Country coverage 
Sample  of  10  EU  Member 
States  (CZ,  DE,  ES,  FR,  IT, 
NL, PL, PT, RO, SE)129 

Table 12. Youth survey overview. 
Source: Kantar Public 

The survey was completed by a diverse set of young respondents across several 
characteristics including gender, age, and region of residence. 

Figure 3. Survey respondents’ characteristics. 
Source: Kantar Public – Youth survey 

Figure 5. Survey respondents’ characteristics in terms of education, working status and self-reported 
disabilities. 
Source: Kantar Public – Youth survey 

The survey of young people primarily explored two evaluation criteria relevant to youth:  
relevance and effectiveness of the EUYS. 

127 To capture the views and experiences of young people, the age group 16-29 was targeted by this survey to gather insights from both 
the younger population entering adulthood, as well as the young working population navigating the opportunities available to them. 
128 Respondents were selected to ensure a distribution mirroring that of the population of each given country with respect to age range 
(16-20, 21-25 and 26-29), gender, and region (NUTS 1). In addition, the pool of respondents was diverse with respect to a number of 
characteristics, such as attained education, employment status, residence in a rural/urban area, and self-reported disability. While a 
target of 400 respondents per country was aimed towards, in certain countries a few extra responses were collected prior to closing 
the fieldwork, leaving the overall number of responses collected at 4,011. 

129 These countries were selected to optimally capture the diversity of potential country effects that may affect the responses collected. 
The criteria used to select countries were the level of adoption and implementation of youth strategies and action plans at the national 
level, including the existence of a national youth strategy, the level of mainstreaming of youth policies in the national and local policy 
environment  based  on  our  initial  assessment,  geographical  diversity  ensuring  a  mix  of  countries  from  central,  eastern,  northern, 
western and southern Europe, and country size. 

102 

 
 
 
 
 
 
On  the  criterion  of  relevance,  over  a  third  of  respondents  reported  knowing  about  the 
EUYS (38% responded ‘know very well’, ‘know a fair amount’ or ‘know a little’; 1538 
out  of  4011).  The  national  youth  policies  were  slightly  better  known  (43%  responded 
‘know  very  well’,  ‘know  a  fair  amount’  or  ‘know  a  little’;  1733  out  of  4011).  This  is 
somewhat  in  contrast  with  the  results  of  the  PC,  where  35%  of  the  young  people  who 
participated were aware of the EUYS, while only 23% were aware of their national youth 
strategy. The best-known youth initiatives were: 

•  Erasmus+ for students,  with  34% (1351 out  of  4011) knowing it very  well or 
fairly and an additional 28% (1121 out of 4011) knowing it at least a little; 
•  Erasmus+ for pupils, with 27% (1101 out of 4011) knowing it very well or fairly 

and an additional 27% (1083 out of 4011) knowing it at least a little; 

•  Erasmus+ for youth exchanges, with 26% (1026 out of 4011) knowing it very 
well or fairly and an additional 27% (1083 out  of 4011) knowing it at  least  a 
little; 

•  Erasmus+ for apprentices, with 21% (885 out of 4011) knowing it very well or 

fairly and an additional 23% (907 out of 4011) knowing it at least a little; 

•  The European Youth Portal, with 16% (637 out of 4011) knowing it very well or 
fairly and an additional 25% (1011 out of 4011) knowing it at least a little; 
•  Different EU information platforms, known by 39% of respondents (combined 
responses ‘know very well’, ‘know a fair amount’ or ‘know a little’, 1580 out of 
4011). 

Despite  the  EU  Youth  Coordinator  being  in  function  only  since  June  2021,  and  with  a 
focus on cross-sectoral cooperation within the European Commission, 35% of respondents 
reported knowing about this function (responding ‘know very well’, ‘know a fair amount’ 
or ‘know a little’, 1410 out of 4011). 

Figure 5. Awareness of EUYS initiatives.  
Source: Kantar Public – Youth survey 

The most important issue identified by the respondents to the youth survey was the rising 
cost of living (74%, 2987 out of 4011), followed by mental health and well-being (74%, 
2970 out of 4011) and public health, including access to health services (73%, 2920 out of 

103 

 
 
 
 
4011). The overall economic situation was also an important issue according to 69% of 
respondents (2755 out of 4011), as well as unemployment, with 68% (2717 out of 4011) 
of respondents considering it important.  

Figure 6. Youth needs at country level. 
Source: Kantar Public – Youth survey 

Regarding  effectiveness,  while  the  European  Youth  Portal  was  known  by  41%  of 
respondents  (1648  out  of  4011;  combined  responses  ‘know  very  well,  ‘know  a  fair 
amount’,  ‘know  a  little’),  42%  of  these  indicated  to  have  used  it  (698  out  of  1648). 
Different  EU  information  platforms  were  known  by  39%  of  respondents  (1580  out  of 
4011), of which 38% (605 out of 1580) indicated having used them.  

Through  involvement  in  different  organisations  (CSOs,  NGOs)  at  the  local  level,  most 
respondents agreed that they learned a lot of new skills (67%; 679 out of 1016), and a lot 
about youth-related issues (64%; 652 out of 1016).  

Most  respondents  (67%;  2690  out  of  4011)  found  that  CSOs  were  at  least  somewhat 
effective at addressing their needs, followed by their local government (58%; 2343 out of 
4011) and EU institutions (58%; 2324 out of 4011). 

When it comes to being involved in EU programmes, the biggest benefit of taking part in 
Erasmus+ was making new friends and connections, with 65% of respondents agreeing 
(1053  out  of  1625),  followed  by  improving  competences  and  skills  (62%;  1007  out  of 
1625). The biggest benefit of participating in DiscoverEU was increased knowledge of the 
issues faced by young people (64%; 603 out of 941), and the biggest benefit of participating 
in  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  was  feeling  the  ability  to  influence  what  happens  in 
Europe (64%; 574 out of 897).  

Online survey of youth CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups130 

130 Group of at least four young people which does not have legal personality under the applicable national law, provided that their 
representatives have the legal capacity to undertake legal obligations on their behalf. These groups of young people can be applicants 
and partners in some Actions of Erasmus+ (Erasmus+ Glossary of terms – Youth). 

104 

 
 
 
An  online  survey  was  conducted  between  15  June  and  14  August  2023  targeting  civil 
society organisations, youth researchers, and youth informal groups across the 27 Member 
States. The survey contained closed and open questions covering all evaluation criteria.  

Table 14. CSO survey overview. (Source: Kantar Public) 

Target 
Survey  for  CSOs,  youth 
researchers  and  youth 
informal groups 

Sample size 
144 respondents 

Country coverage 
The  sample  covered  27  EU 
Member States 

Table 14. CSO survey overview.  
Source: Kantar Public 

The respondent distribution and key characteristics are presented in the figures below. 

Figure 8. Respondent types. 
Source: Kantar Public – Survey of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups 

Looking  into  effectiveness,  the  EUYS  instrument  used  most  as  part  of  respondents’ 
activities is Erasmus+, with 93% of those aware of it (130 out of 140) using it (combined 
answer  options  ‘always’,  ‘often’,  ‘sometimes’  and  ‘rarely’),  and  75%  (105  out  of  140) 
using  it  more  often  (combined  answer  options  ‘always’  and  ‘often’).  Out  of  the  list  of 
instruments proposed, the FNAPs were used the least by respondents who were aware of 
them  (76%,  29  out  of  38,  combined  answer  options  ‘always,  ‘often’,  ‘sometimes’  and 
‘rarely’). 

105 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure 9. Participation or use of EUYS instruments.  
Source: Kantar Public – Survey of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups 

According to most respondents (73%; 92 out of 126), the EUYS brought young people 
together via learning mobility at the local, national or EU level, followed by youth work 
activities and volunteering (each 67%;  85 out  of 126). At the international  level,  youth 
conferences and events are considered the most effective way in which the EUYS brought 
young people together (17%; 21 out of 126).  

EUYS activities were deemed useful for their organisation’s work by 77% of respondents 
who were aware of either the EUYS or any of its instruments (110 out of 143), with 47% 
(67 out of 143) finding them very useful.  

Figure 10. Areas of youth empowerment fostered by the EUYS. 
Source: Kantar Public – Surveys of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups 

At all levels, 71% of respondents who were aware of the EUYS or of any of its instruments 
(102  out  of  143)  considered  that  the  EUYS  helped  improve  the  quality  of  youth  work, 
while 71% (101 out of 143) considered that it increased the recognition of youth work.  

In terms of efficiency, the most cost-effective instrument, according to those respondents 
who have participated in it or used it, is Erasmus+, as 60% (78 out of 130) indicated that 
the benefits associated with it for their work outweighed the costs they incurred to a very 
great or great extent. The benefits that the participation or use of the European Solidarity 
Corps brought to respondents’ work were also found to greatly outweigh the costs incurred 
by 55% of respondents (56 out of 102 responding ‘to a very great extent’ or ‘to a great 
extent’).  

Regarding  coherence,  Erasmus+  is  the  instrument  considered  to  be  complementary  to 
existing  initiatives  at  the  national  level  by  the  greatest  number  of  respondents  who  are 
aware of it, as 61% (86 out of 140) indicated that it was complementary to a very great or 
great  extent.  Similarly, 
is  considered  greatly 
the  European  Solidarity  Corps 
complementary with national initiatives by 60% of respondents (77 out of 128).  

Concerning EU added value, European  -level  CSOs expressed that better engagement, 
increased  connection,  and  empowerment  of  young  people  in  the  EU  would  not  have 
happened to the same extent without the support of the EUYS. 57% of CSOs disagreed 
that increasing connection of young people at EU level would have been achieved without 
the EUYS. The pattern was very similar for the two other core areas.  

106 

 
 
 
 
Figure 10. EUYS added value to youth engagement, connection and empowerment in the EU.  
Source: Kantar Public – Survey of CSOs, youth researchers and youth informal groups. 

On  relevance,  most  of  the  respondents  who  are  aware  of  the  EUYS  and  work  at  the 
European level  or beyond considered the EUYS  relevant  to  address  youth participation 
(82%; 64 out of 78), followed by social exclusion or discrimination (72%; 56 out of 78), 
and preparing for the green transition (68%; 53 out of 78), in the EU.  

Most respondents aware of the EUYS found that the Year made the EUYS more relevant 
to their organisation (combined responses ‘to a very great extent’, ‘to a great extent’, ‘to a 
moderate extent’ and ‘to a small extent’) (63%; 80 out of 126). 

Interviews  and  focus  groups  with  policy  makers,  young  people  and  civil  society 
organisations 

Key informant interviews with EU level and international organisations  

A total of 21 key informant interviews with EU-level and international stakeholders were 
conducted  between  3  May  and  20  June  2023,  comprising  14  interviews  with 
representatives  from  EU  institutions  and  bodies,  interviews  with  representatives  of  EU 
Agencies, and interviews with representatives of international organisations. 

Stakeholder group 
EU Institutions 

EU Agencies  

International 
Organisations 

DG CLIMA 
DG CNECT 
DG EAC 
DG EMPL 
DG ENV 
DG INTPA 
European Parliament 
European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee 
EACEA 
Eurofound  
OECD 
UNICEF 
The EU-CoE Youth Partnership 

TOTAL NUMBER OF INTERVIEWS 

107 

Number of interviews 
1 
1 
6 
1 
1 
1 
2 
1 

2 
1 
1 
2 
2 
21 

 
 
 
 
Table 15. Overview of EU-level and International organisations interviews. 
Source: Kantar Public 

The  primary  objective  of  these  interviews  was  to  gain  a  better  understanding  of  the 
evaluation criteria, especially by validating the correctness of the information previously 
gathered through desk research on the evaluation criteria.  

Summary of results 

Under the criterion of relevance131, the following main points were found in the interviews 
with EU-level and international organisations: 

•  Most interviewees were aware of the EUYS. However, 5 out of 21 interviewees, 
reported having limited knowledge of the EUYS and its key components.  
•  Six out of 21 interviewees highlighted the importance of the EUYS in providing 

• 

financial support for youth organisations.  
Interviewees  from  international  organisations  remarked  that  the  EUYS  would 
become more relevant if it ensured better alignment with human rights, which, 
according to them, are not sufficiently highlighted in the current version of the 
EUYS.  

Under  the  criterion  of  effectiveness132,  the  following  main  points  were  found  in  the 
interviews with EU-level and international organisations: 

• 

•  Almost all interviewees uniformly agreed on the benefits of establishing the EU 
Youth Coordinator, whose role in knowledge-sharing on youth needs for cross-
sectoral cooperation within the European Commission is seen as very effective.  
Interviewees  from  the  Commission  considered  that  the  EUYS,  in  particular 
through the EU youth programmes, has been highly effective in responding to 
crises and advancing the green and digital transition among young people.  
Under  the  criterion  of  efficiency133,  the  following  main  points  were  found  in  the 
interviews with EU-level and international organisations: 

•  Almost all interviewees consider that the costs linked to implementing the EUYS 

• 

are minimal and sufficient to meet the EUYS’ objectives.  
It  was  also  highlighted  that  the  COVID-19  pandemic  had  an  impact  on  the 
budgets of national youth organisations for implementing youth related projects, 
leading these organisations to rely more heavily on EU programmes. 

Under  the  criterion  of  coherence134,  the  following  main  points  were  found  in  the 
interviews with EU-level and international organisations: 

•  All interviewees agreed on the coherence of the EUYS instruments. For example, 
the  interviewees  reported  that  the  EUYS’  instruments  complement  each  other 

131 For a definition of relevance, please refer to the definition provided in the introduction of this synopsis report.  
132 For a definition of effectiveness, please refer to the definition provided in the introduction of this synopsis report. 
133 For a definition of efficiency, please refer to the definition provided in the introduction of this synopsis report. 
134 For a definition of coherence, please refer to the definition provided in the introduction of this synopsis report. 

108 

 
 
 
 
 
and offer various means to achieve common objectives, such as ensuring youth 
participation through different instruments.  

•  3 out of 21 interviewees noted that the EUYS would become more coherent with 
international  obligations  if  it  was  more  aligned  with  UN  Sustainable 
Development Goals (UN SDGs). For example, an explicit link could be drawn 
between the European Youth Goals (Hereafter EYGs) and the UN SDGs.  

Under the criterion of EU added value135, the following main points were found in the 
interviews with EU-level and international organisations: 

•  All  interviewees  believed  the  EUYS  offered  substantial  value  beyond  what 
individual Member States could achieve on their own, fostering collaboration, 
knowledge sharing, and capacity building.  
Interviewees also commented that a discontinuation of the EUYS could lead to 
reduced  investments  from  Member  States  in  youth  related  initiatives  at  the 
national level, which could diminish the influence and empowerment of young 
people.  

• 

Key informant interviews with policy makers at national level 

A total of 83 interviews were conducted across 27 Member States between 3 May and 20 
June 2023 with national stakeholders, including ministries responsible for youth policy, 
national youth or education agencies, national youth councils, and agencies implementing 
EU youth programmes.  

Concerning effectiveness, the interviewed stakeholders acknowledged positive outcome 
of the EUYS to mainstream the youth perspective across different policy domains at the 
national  level.  This  was  mainly  possible  via  the  instruments  and  by  being  used  as  an 
overarching  framework  for  national  youth  policies.  While  stakeholders  were  generally 
satisfied with most of the EUYS instruments (e.g., Erasmus+, EU Youth Dialogue), they 
mentioned that certain instruments could be improved, such as the EU Youth Coordinator 
or the FNAPs.  

National policy makers agreed that the EUYS is highly efficient but mentioned the need 
for  more  financial  resources  to  better  implement  its  objectives,  namely  in  terms  of  the 
funding provided to various youth initiatives supported by the EUYS at the national level.  

The  EUYS  was  considered  to  be  highly  coherent  within  its  own  core  areas  and 
instruments, which, according to national policy makers, has been achieved through the 
EYGs and guiding principles of the EUYS. National policy makers also expressed that the 
EUYS is largely coherent with national policies in their respective countries.  

In terms of EU added value, national policy makers mentioned that the EUYS positively 
affected youth policies beyond what individual Member States could achieve on their own. 
The broadness of the EUYS, its ability to be an overarching framework, and its capacity 
to  mainstream  youth  perspective,  were  key  in  covering  new  topics  in  addition  to  those 
covered at national level. In addition, the EUYS  has helped foster cooperation between 
Member States and across organisations working on youth within different policy areas.  

135 For a definition of EU added value, please refer to the definition provided in the introduction of this synopsis report. 

109 

 
 
With regards to relevance, a large share of the national policy makers interviewed across 
most  countries  confirmed  alignment  between  the  EUYS  and  national  strategies.  The 
EUYS’ objectives have remained highly relevant for the national policymakers. However, 
some mentioned that the EUYS could only partially cover country-specific needs, such as 
youth unemployment in certain Member States. 

Number of 
interviews 

Member States 

Ministry responsible for youth policy at national 
or regional level 

39 

AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, 
EL, FI, FR, HR, HU, IE, IT, LU, 
NL, PL, RO, SE, SI, SK 

National 
Governmental 
Agency responsible 
for the 
implementation of 
youth policy 

Agency for Higher 
Education and Science136  

National Agency for 
Education137 

Landesjugendamt138 

Agency of Youth Affairs 
(JRA)139 

Agency for International 
Youth Programs (JSPA)140 

Aġenzija Żgħażagħ141 

Portuguese Institute of Sport 
and Youth142 

National Institute of 
Education and Youth 
(NIVAM)143 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

1 

DK 

FI 

DE 

LT 

LV 

MT 

PT 

SK 

136 The Danish Agency for Higher Education and Science is an agency in the Ministry of Higher Education and Science and handles 
tasks within preparation and administration of grants for research, higher education and research-based innovation, as well as the 
State Educational Grant and Loan Scheme. 

137 The Finnish National Agency for Education (EDUFI) is the national development agency responsible for early childhood education 
and care, pre-primary, basic, general and vocational upper secondary education as well as for adult education and training. Higher 
education is the responsibility of the Ministry of Education and Culture. 

138 The Landesjugendamt supports the local youth welfare services, the youth welfare offices and the independent youth welfare agencies 

in their work. 

139 The Agency of Youth Affairs implements the established national youth policy measures which encourage young people’s motivation 
to engage in active public life and take part in addressing youth problems. The key objectives of the agency include: coordinating the 
activities  of  state  institutions  and  agencies  with  regard  to  youth  policy,  developing  and  implementing  national  youth  policy 
programmes  and  instruments,  and  analysing the  situation of youth, youth organisations and organisations  working  with youth in 
Lithuania. 

140 The JSPA is a direct administrative institution under the authority of the Minister of Education and Science, whose purpose is to 
promote youth activity and mobility, participation in youth voluntary work, non-formal education and youth information programs 
and projects, and non-formal education of young people in relation to lifelong learning. 

141 Aġenzija Żgħażagħ provides information on services and opportunities for young people and listens to their views on issues that 
impact  on  their  lives.  It  participates  in  Eurodesk,  the  European  Youth  Card  and  EU  programmes.  It  manages,  implements  and 
coordinates  the  National  Youth  Policy,  and  promotes  and  safeguards  the  interests  of  young  people.  It  is  operating  under  the 
Government of Malta – Ministry for Education, Sports, Youth, Research and Innovation 

142 The Portuguese Institute of Sport and Youth’s is a governmental body and its mission is to implement an integrated and decentralized 
policy  for  the  areas  of  sport  and youth, in  close collaboration  with  public  and  private entities, namely  with  sports bodies,  youth 
associations, students and local authorities. 

143 The National Institute of Education and Youth implements activities such as education and counselling for teaching and non-teaching 
staff, methodological guidance of schools and school facilities, applied pedagogical research, organization of subject Olympiads and 
competitions, external testing at schools, informal education of youth, and management of the library fund. 

110 

 
 
 
 
INJUVE144 

Agency for Youth and Civil 
Society145 

National Agency for the implementation of EU 
youth programmes 

National Youth 
Council 

Cyprus Youth Council146 

Czech Council of Children 
and Youth147 

Bundesjugendring148 

2 

1 

23 

1 

1 

1 

ES 

SE 

AT, BE, BG, CY, CZ, DE, EE, HR, 
IE, IT, FR, LT, LU, PL, RO, SI 

CY 

CZ 

DE 

Table 15. Interviews conducted for the country research 

Focus groups with national level policymakers 

Three focus groups were conducted with 15 national policy makers in Denmark, Germany 
and  Slovakia149  between  21  and  29  June  2023,  to  examine  the  extent  to  which  there  is 
alignment  between  the  EUYS  and  national  youth  policies.  As  part  of  this  activity, 
qualitative  data  was  collected  on  perceptions  on  the  relevance  and  effectiveness  of  the 
EUYS, success stories on achieving its objectives, and barriers to youth engagement and 
inclusion in policymaking. 

The  influence  of  the  EUYS  differs  in  these  three  Member  States.  Interviewed  national 
policy  makers  in  Denmark  mostly  set  national  youth  initiatives  independently  of  the 
influence  of  the  EUYS,  while  interviewed  national  policy  makers  in  Germany  align 
national initiatives with EUYS core areas and objectives. 

Effectiveness of the EUYS 

DE  Certain instruments are considered very effective in involving young people and 
promoting youth participation, such as the EUYD and the EYY. However, policy 
makers mentioned that the EUYD could have a greater reach, and that there could 
be more information  about  how the results of the national  processes within the 
EUYD are dealt with at the EU level.   

144 INJUVE (the Youth Institute) is a public body, attached to the Ministry of Social Rights and Agenda 2030, whose main activity is 

aimed at promoting actions for the benefit of young people. 

145 The Swedish Agency for Youth and Civil Society is a government agency that works to ensure that young people have access to 

influence and welfare. It also supports the government in issues relating to civil society policy. 

146 The Cyprus Youth Council aims at promoting dialogue and cooperation between youth in Cyprus and also connecting them with 

youth in Europe and the world. CYC is in continuous cooperation with the European Youth Forum. 

147 The Czech Council of Children and Youth concentrates on advocacy of youth interests and lobbying within institutions, as well as 
involvement in the activities of the European Youth Forum, Youth Events of the European Union Presidency, and international youth 
exchanges, seminars and trainings. 

148 As a working group of youth organisations and regional youth councils (Landesjugendringe) in Germany, the Bundesjugendring 
represents  a  strong  network  of  about  six  million  children  and  young  people  who  are  members  of  youth  organisations  and  youth 
councils. Youth organisations are places for children and young people to experience a sense of community, learn, spend leisure time 
and be active. 

149 These three countries were selected to ensure a diversity with respect to criteria including the size and complexity of the government 
structure, the presence of national programmes for cross-border mobility and youth volunteering, the presence and prominence of a 
strategy promoting the social inclusion of young people, the presence of initiatives fostering innovation skills through non-formal 
learning,  the  presence  of  measures  furthering  entrepreneurial  competences  through  non-formal  learning,  and  the  mechanisms  of 
quality assurance for youth work that are in place in the country. After initially planning to conduct a focus group with youth policy 
makers in Croatia as well, this was ultimately not possible due to their limited availability. They were, nevertheless, interviewed as 
part of the country research on Croatia, therefore their views are reflected in the analysis of interviews with national policy makers. 
111 

 
 
 
DK  Policy makers consider the EUYS instruments effective for engaging with youth 
and making youth engage with each other. However, they consider that  there is 
room for improvement as some instruments, such as the FNAPs, require a lot of 
reporting and administrative processes in order to use them. 

SK  The outcomes of the EUYD are considered applicable to national youth policy, 
and data from the EUYD were used in the creation of the national youth strategy. 
Youth Wiki provides inspiration for national policymaking based on what is being 
done in other countries.  

Table 17. Policy makers’ perceptions of effectiveness of the EUYS (DE, DK, SK).  
Source: Kantar Public – Focus groups with national policy makers. 

Youth engagement was encouraged through a range of initiatives introduced at the country 
level  in  Denmark,  Germany,  and  Slovakia.  These  were  considered  successful  and 
contributed to the EUYS’ objectives. 

Focus groups with young people  

The participants in each country were divided into two groups: one composed of young 
people who are or have been involved in youth activities at the local, national or EU level, 
and one composed of young people who had not been involved in any youth activities.  

Success stories were identified both for EU-level youth activities and national/local youth 
activities. All participants mentioned that their participation in these national and EU-level 
youth activities was an enriching experience that helped them feel empowered, engaged 
with policy making, or connected with people from other countries and cultures.  

Concerning the barriers to accessing youth activities, the main issue mentioned across all 
focus  groups  was  the  lack  of  awareness  of  the  different  youth  opportunities.  All 
participants  criticised  a  sub-optimal  and  inconsistent  use  of  social  media  promotion  of 
these  instruments,  which  limits  access  to  a  smaller  group  of  individuals  who  are 
intrinsically more motivated to learn about this topic and know where to look to find the 
information they need.  

Group Interviews with CSOs and youth researchers 

In addition to the CSO survey, CSOs were also able to express whether they would like to 
take part in a follow up interview as part of a group of CSOs. In total, 7 CSOs and youth 
researchers took part in three group interviews and two individual interviews. Three out of 
the  7  interviewed  CSOs  are  active  at  EU  level,  two  interviewed  CSOs  are  active  in 
Germany,  one  is  active  in  France  and  one  in  Italy.  Their  areas  of  interest  cover  youth, 
students, and the intersectionality between youth and climate action.  

Concerning relevance of the EUYS, the following main points were raised:  

•  The  interviewed  CSOs  mentioned  the  challenges  currently  faced  by  young 
people relate to COVID-19 and mental health, as well as barriers to engagement 
in national youth strategies for the youth with fewer opportunities. There was a 
general consensus among all interviewees that the EUYS has played an important 
role in addressing such challenges.   

112 

 
•  All CSOs mentioned the role of the EUYS in supporting their areas of work. For 
example,  some  CSOs  mentioned  the  role  of  the  EUYS  in  promoting  the 
environmental and sustainability initiatives, and just transition. 

•  According to two CSOs, two emerging needs were not yet visibly addressed by 
the EUYS. One CSO highlighted the specific challenges faced by young people 
in rural areas and the importance of tailor-made measures to support them, while 
another CSO highlighted the need for a more inclusive approach to ensure access 
to  opportunities  for  all  young  people,  regardless  of  their  socio-economic 
background. 

Concerning effectiveness of the EUYS, the following main points were raised:  

•  All  interviewed CSOs mentioned the valuable support provided by the EUYS 
through instruments such as the European Solidarity Corps and Erasmus+, which 
have  served  as  pivotal  means  for  engaging  young  people  in  their  initiatives. 
Furthermore, all interviewed CSOs mentioned that they use the European Youth 
Goals as a reference point to assess whether their activities align with the EUYS 
when engaging with young people at the local and regional levels. 

•  One  central  theme  from  the  interviews  with  CSOs  and  youth  researchers, 
however,  was  a  lack  of  awareness  and  accessibility  of  the  EUYS  among 
stakeholders,  particularly  among  CSOs  and  young  people  themselves.  Both 
interviewed  CSOs  and  the  interviewed  youth  researchers  provided  that  their 
organisations and the youth they work with are not fully aware of the EUYS and 
its objectives, resulting in a possible divergence between EUYS' intentions and 
its actual impact.  

•  All interviewed CSOs and youth researchers noted the need for better support, 
collaboration, and synergies between different stakeholders, particularly  at the 
regional and national levels.  

Concerning efficiency of the EUYS, the following point was raised: 

•  Perspectives  on  the  efficiency  of  the  EUYS  instruments  revealed  varying 
viewpoints and suggestions for improvement among interviewees. One concern 
shared  by  three  interviewed  CSOs  and  both  youth  researchers  was  the 
bureaucratic burden associated with applying for funding under the instruments 
of the EUYS. 

•  Only one CSO provided  a concrete example of such bureaucratic burden, and 
they referred to Erasmus+ projects. They mentioned that the application process 
often  entails  filling  out  extensive  documentation,  sometimes  up  to  a  hundred 
pages, despite the relatively low chance of receiving funding for the applicant. 
This concern about extensive application requirements was also raised by three 
CSOs and one youth researcher for programs such as Erasmus. 

•  Two CSOs put forward the suggestion that simplifying the application processes 
for  funding  and  enhancing  communication  on  the  opportunities  for  youth 
available  under  the  EUYS  would  help  improve  the  efficiency  of  the  EUYS 
overall. 

Concerning coherence of the EUYS, the following main point was raised:  

113 

 
•  All  interviewed  CSOs  and  researchers  considered  the  EUYS  coherent  with  
international/  national  policies  and  initiatives.  Nevertheless,  four  CSOs 
highlighted the importance of creating a strong alignment between the EUYS and 
national, regional, and local youth policies.  

Concerning EU added value of the EUYS, the following main point was raised:  

•  All  CSOs  highlighted  the  added  value  of  the  EUYS  in  fostering  international 
cooperation,  knowledge  exchange,  and  collaboration  between  various 
stakeholders across the EU.  

•  Two CSOs reiterated the value of the EUYS in providing opportunities for youth 
engagement  and empowerment.  Through for example the European Solidarity 
Corps  and  Erasmus+,  the  EUYS  was  considered  to  have  facilitated  the 
participation  of  young  people  in  various  initiatives,  thus  positively  impacting 
their personal development and growth. 

•  Finally, one CSO and one youth researcher mentioned the EUYS’ added value 
in promoting and improving the implementation and coherence of youth policies 
across Member States.  

Cross-synthesis of results  

The following section aims to synthesise and triangulate the findings across each of the 
stakeholder consultation activities with regards to each of the evaluation criteria. 

Effectiveness 

The role of the EUYS in supporting youth empowerment and skill development was 
highlighted  across  consultation  activities.  For  example,  both  CSO  surveys  and  focus 
groups, as well as youth survey, corroborate this finding. Respondents across each of the 
consultation  activities  consistently  report  that  their  involvement  in  EUYS  activities  has 
resulted in the acquisition of new skills and a deeper understanding of youth-related issues 
The effectiveness of the EUYS in addressing social and economic disparities among 
youth and ensuring inclusivity of youth with fewer opportunities was also raised as 
another  important  theme  across  consultations.  The  consultations  also  underscored  the 
important  role  of  the  EUYS  in  fostering  collaboration  and  partnerships.  The  CSO 
survey  and  focus  groups  highlighted  that  the  EUYS  has  been  pivotal  in  fostering  the 
creation of new partnerships among organisations.  

Efficiency 

With  regards  to  the  cost-effectiveness  of  EUYS  instruments,  the  CSO  survey  outlined 
disparities in the perceived cost-effectiveness of various instruments. Erasmus+ was 
identified as the most cost-effective instrument, with 60% of respondents (86 out of 144) 
indicating that its benefits significantly outweighed the costs incurred for their work. In 
contrast, mutual learning activities were considered less cost-effective, with only 29% of 
respondents (22 out of 77) sharing the same perspective.  

114 

 
 
 
Coherence  

National  stakeholders  expressed  that  the  EUYS,  through  the  EYGs  and  the  guiding 
principles, is aligned with national level policies and that there are synergies between EU 
and national policies. The CSOs consulted also confirmed that coherence is also ensured 
through EU programmes. Stakeholders particularly highlighted the increased influence of 
the EUYS in ensuring the coherence of EU policies with the UN Sustainable Development 
Goals and Council of Europe youth-related initiatives.  

EU added value  

Policymakers at EU and national level expressed the added value of the EUYS in terms of 
its benefits in generating exchanges on youth-related issues at EU and national level, and 
in. mainstreaming youth policy.  

Relevance  

CSOs confirmed that the EUYS has been instrumental in addressing the challenges faced 
by young people, particularly in areas such as employment, education and training, health 
and social inclusion. CSOs who were aware of the EUYS also found it highly relevant to 
youth participation, social exclusion and the green transition.  

Some emerging needs of young people were identified in different consultation 
activities. Public consultations highlighted that young people's main concerns were 
related to the cost of living, mental wellbeing, and financial stability.  

115