REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the evaluation of the European Union's External Financing Instruments for the 2014 - 2020 and 2021 - 2027 Multiannual Financial Frameworks
Date: 2024-05-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for International Partnerships, European Commission
Subjects: EU financial instrument, European neighbourhood policy, Greenland, development aid, financial aid, international cooperation, multiannual financial framework, nuclear safety, overseas countries and territories, pre-accession aid

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 15.5.2024  COM(2024) 208 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the evaluation of the European Union's External Financing Instruments for the 2014 - 2020 and 2021 - 2027 Multiannual Financial Frameworks {SWD(2024) 133 final}  
 
 
Contents 

1.  Background ..................................................................................................................................... 2 

2.  Evaluation ....................................................................................................................................... 4 

3.  Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 6 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.  Background 

This  evaluation  has  the  overall  objective  to  assess  whether  the  current  External  Financing 

Instruments (EFIs) are better fit for purpose and enable the EU to better engage in  external 

cooperation than the previous ones. The specific objectives are to assess the performance of 

EFIs in terms of EU added value, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, flexibility and ability to 

react to changing political and policy priorities, scope for simplification, coherence, synergies 

and  the  continued  relevance  of  the  objectives  of  the  EFIs.  Furthermore,  the  use  and  the 

functioning of the External Action Guarantee (EAG), including its maximum amount, is also 

assessed in terms of its additionality and contribution to the overall objectives and results. 

The following EFIs are subject to this evaluation:  

MFF 2021-2027 

•  The Neighbourhood, Development, and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) 

– Global Europe including its European Fund for Sustainable Development+/External 

Action  Guarantee  (EFSD+/EAG)  component,  as  well  as  the  Commission  Delegated 

Regulation supplementing NDICI-Global Europe Regulation1, 

•  The Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance2 III (IPA III) as well as the Commission 

Delegated  Regulation  supplementing  IPA  III3  Regulation  and  the  Commission 

Implementing Regulation on the specific rules for implementing IPA III4 

•  The European Instrument for International Nuclear Safety Cooperation (INSC) 5, 

•  The Decision on the Overseas Association, including Greenland (DOAG)6. 

MFF 2014-2020  

•  The Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI)7, 

•  The European Instrument for Democracy and human rights (EIDHR)8, 

1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32021R1530 
2 IPA III: the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (2021–2027) | EUR-Lex (europa.eu) 
3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R2128 
4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2021/2236/oj  
5 Regulation - 2021/948 - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu) 
6 Decision - 2021/1764 - EN - EUR-Lex (europa.eu) 
7 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32014R0233 
8 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014R0235  

2 

 
 
 
 
•  The European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI)9, 

•  The Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP)10, 

•  The Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA)11, 

•  The Partnership Instrument for Cooperation with third countries (PI)12, 

•  The Overseas Association Decision (OAD)13,  

•  The Greenland Decision (GD)14, 

•  The European Fund for Sustainable Development (EDF)15, 

•  The Common Implementing Regulation laying down common rules and procedures for 

the implementation of the Union’s instruments for financing external action16, 

•  The  11th  European  Development  Fund  (EDF)  which,  although  not  an  EU  budget 

instrument, is also covered by the evaluation17. 

This evaluation is undertaken in compliance with Article 42(2) of the NDICI – Global Europe 

Regulation, Article 13(6) of the IPA III Regulation, Article 81 of DOAG and Article 14(1) of 

INSC. It encompasses and builds upon the final evaluation of the EFIs under the 2014 – 2020 

Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). 

The evaluation of the EFIs under the 2014-2020 MFF covers the period from 1 January 2014 

until 31 December 2020. As for the EFIs under the 2021-2027 MFF, the evaluation covers the 

period from 1 January 2021 until 31 December 2022. 

The geographic scope of the evaluation corresponds to that referred to in the legal acts subject 

to the evaluation. 

This report presents conclusions drawn by the Commission following the evaluation presented 

in the accompanying Staff Working Document.  

9 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0232&from=EN 
10 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0230&from=EN 
11 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32014R0231 
12 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014R0234&from=EN 
13 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32013D0755 
14 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2014.076.01.0001.01.ENG 
15 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2017.249.01.0001.01.ENG 
16 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/43f92a44-af94-11e3-86f9-01aa75ed71a1/language-en  
17 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32015R0322 

3 

 
 
 
 
2.  Evaluation 

•  Effectiveness and efficiency 

The  current  state  of  implementation  of  the  EFIs  indicates  that  they  are  on  track  to  deliver 

against  the  objectives  they  were  expected  to  fulfil  at  the  time  of  their  adoption  and  these 

objectives continue to be relevant. 

NDICI-Global Europe addressed the fragmented nature of the previous architecture, merging 

several EFIs of the previous MFF. It also integrated the 11th EDF funded outside the EU budget 

that covered Sub-Saharan Africa, Caribbean and Pacific countries. NDICI-Global Europe also 

covers the Neighbourhood alongside other regions, while preserving its specificities. 

IPA III represents a shift towards a more policy-driven and responsive approach compared to 

its predecessors. It has evolved from a sector-based instrument to a more holistic policy-first 

instrument.  Furthermore,  IPA  III  mirrors  the  EU  priorities  and  policy  developments  in 

preparing beneficiaries for the future membership of the Union. IPA III has been effective in 

promoting  socio-economic  development  and  leveraging  necessary  investments  under  the 

Economic and Investment Plan while there is a need to further accelerate convergence with the 

EU. 

In terms of efficiency of EU resources, the integration within NDICI-Global Europe and IPA 

III  of  the  EFSD+  enables  the  increased  use  of  limited  EU  public  financial  resources  as  a 

leverage for public and private investments. 

Following  the  conclusions  of  the  2017  Mid-term  Review  (MTR),  the  current  EFIs  include 

flexibility features, which have proven their relevance in response to the COVID-19 and the 

Russian war of aggression against Ukraine.  

In IPA III, the absence of pre-set country financial envelopes has allowed more flexibility to 

programme assistance according to urgent and evolving needs. 

•  Coherence 

NDICI-Global Europe is underpinned by the geographisation principle, i. e. implementing the 

instrument  primarily  via  geographic  programmes,  to  be  complemented  by  thematic 

programmes and rapid response actions. This has clarified the articulation between geographic, 

thematic and rapid response actions, thus increasing coherence and geopolitical influence, and 

addressing issues stemming from the overlaps between the large number of 2014-2020 EFIs. 

4 

 
 
 
Applying  the  geographisation  logic  has  enhanced  the  EU’s  engagement  with  actors  at  both 

country  and  regional  levels,  leading  to  a  more  targeted  approach.  Integration  of  EFSD+  in 

NDICI-Global Europe increased the coherence of EU external action. Geographisation could 

further address the specific challenges faced by fragile and crisis-affected countries.  

IPA  III  ensures  complementarity  between  different  programmes  supported  under  the 

instrument. 

There is also an in-built coherence between the current EFIs, as IPA III, DOAG and INSC refer 

to NDICI-Global Europe concerning their implementation. 

Besides strengthening synergies with  other  EFIs  not  covered by this evaluation,  the current 

EFIs have sought to enhance the coherence with EU internal policies. 

•  EU added value 

EFIs  allow  the  EU  to  better  exert  leverage  as  a  development  actor,  a  global  player  and  a 

geopolitical actor. NDICI-Global Europe has brought significant added value by providing a 

more  integrated,  sizeable  and  coherent  offer  to  the  world  compared  to  the  previous  MFF, 

improving partner countries’ capacity to address joint priorities with the EU and tackle global 

challenges. The current EFIs have increased collective engagement of European actors in EU 

external cooperation in a Team Europe approach, building upon knowledge and expertise of 

EU Member States. The added value of IPA III  stems from its distinct objective to prepare 

beneficiaries for future membership in the Union, grounded in European values.   

Despite  being  in  its  early  stages,  EFSD+  has  already  demonstrated  its  catalytic  effect  in 

mobilising additional finance and expertise, thereby contributing to sustainable development 

and growth. This contribution aligns with the implementation of the Global Gateway initiative 

which is the EU’s strategy to boost smart, clean and secure links in digital, energy and transport 

sectors and to strengthen health, education and research systems across the world, including 

through  the  Economic  and  Investment  Plans  in  the  Neighbourhood.  They  parallel  the  role 

played by the Western Balkans Investment Framework under IPA III.  

5 

 
 
 
3.  Conclusions 

The conclusions of the 2017 MTR report covering EFIs under the MFF 2014 2020 remained 

valid for the whole period of that past MFF and they have been largely factored in the design 

of the current set of instruments. 

The  NDICI-Global  Europe,  IPA  III,  DOAG  and  INSC  Regulations,  as  well  as  the  related 

delegated Regulations do not require legislative amendment at mid-term. 

NDICI-Global Europe 

•  NDICI-Global  Europe  has  overall  shown  to  be  fit  for  purpose.  Its  current  state  of 

implementation  indicates  that  it  is  on  track  to  deliver  against  the  objectives  it  was 

expected to fulfil at the time of its adoption and these objectives continue to be relevant. 

• 

In the evolving geopolitical context, NDICI-Global Europe also effectively serves as a 

key  tool  to  roll  out  the  Global  Gateway  strategy,  including  the  Economic  and 

Investment Plans for the Eastern Partnership and Southern Neighbourhood. 

•  NDICI-Global  Europe  has  also  enabled  the  EU  to  promote  its  internal  policies  and 

priorities  in  a  more  coherent  manner  towards  the  external  world.  To  enhance  the 

coherence between internal and external action objectives, it needs to better contribute 

to an integrated approach balancing EU interests, partnerships and values. 

• 

In terms of simplification gains, NDICI-Global Europe provides a unified legal basis 

for a large share of the EU’s external interventions and their implementing modalities.  

•  By superseding a large number of the EFIs of the past MFF, NDICI-Global Europe has 

brought  about  a  major  increase  in  coherence  and  complementarity  as  regards  the 

geographic, thematic and rapid response actions and other EFIs.  

•  Even  though  the  implementation  of  the  EFSD+  is  at  an  early  stage,  it  has  already 

demonstrated  its  catalytic  effect  to  leverage  additional  finance  and  expertise 

contributing to sustainable development and growth and implementation of the Global 

Gateway, including through the Economic and Investment Plans in the Neighbourhood. 

•  The contribution of private sector via EFSD+ is key for an efficient use of EU budget 

to support sustainable growth in partner countries. Placing EFSD+ in the NDICI-Global 

Europe has contributed to the streamlining of all implementing modalities. 

6 

 
 
 
•  Various flexibility features in the NDICI-Global Europe have proved their relevance to 

pursue EU priorities as well as to provide support to partner countries notably in the 

context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and 

the  migratory  pressures,  notably  in  the  Neighbourhood.  However,  three  years  into 

implementation the NDICI-Global Europe cushion has almost been depleted showing 

a  mismatch  between  available  funds  and  actual  needs.  Moreover,  NDICI-Global 

Europe was not designed to support countries at war at the scale needed by Ukraine. 

Therefore,  a  new  financing  instrument,  the  Ukraine  Facility  was  adopted  for  period 

2024-27, to support Ukraine both in the face of Russia’s ongoing war of aggression and 

on Ukraine’s path towards EU membership. 

•  On  the  one  hand,  NDICI-Global  Europe  is  generally  on  track  to  meet  the  spending 

targets, even though further efforts will be required in the next years for some of them, 

such as climate. On the other hand, their high number has also constrained the flexibility 

of the instrument. 

•  The programming exercise has successfully allowed to identify shared priorities with 

partner  countries.  As  programming  documents  cover  a  broad  range  of  objectives, 

further  prioritisation  is  needed  downstream.  Programming  remains  a  heavy  process, 

which in turn contributes to delays at the start of the implementation phase. 

•  The  inclusion  of  a  non-programmable  Rapid  Response  Pillar,  axed  around  three 

components,  of  which  two  are  new  (Resilience  and  Foreign  Policy  Needs),  has 

endowed  the  EU  with  a  wider  toolbox  to  quickly  address  urgent  unforeseen  and 

emerging political priorities that cannot be tackled through the programming exercise, 

as well as to implement the humanitarian-peace-development nexus. Greater efforts are 

required  to  make  the  overall  approach  more  effective  and  to  improve  coordination 

between relevant funding instruments, particularly in engaging with conflict-affected 

countries and other fragile contexts. 

•  NDICI-Global Europe brings significant added value to partner countries in providing 

a more sizeable and coherent offer. More efforts are required when it comes to bridging 

short-term rapid response actions with long-term actions. 

•  To  facilitate  learning,  improvements  to  monitoring  and  evaluation  need  to  focus  on 

maximising the use of qualitative analysis of results. 

•  To realise greater EU added value and a ‘whole of the EU approach’, more time and 

collaboration across services and with Member States will be required. To better exploit 

7 

 
 
windows of opportunity and maximise scope for EU leverage, differentiated response 

strategies may be required.  

IPA III 

• 

IPA III has demonstrated its general effectiveness as a pre-accession instrument and is 

on  track  to  deliver  its  main  objectives.  The  instrument  is  aligned  with  the  new 

enlargement methodology with  the fundamentals  of the EU  accession process  at  the 

forefront. It also mirrors the EU policy priorities and developments, such as the focus 

on  green,  digital  and  economic  priorities,  as  demonstrated  by  the  emphasis  on 

implementation the Economic and Investment Plans in the Western Balkans. 

• 

IPA III has been effective in promoting socio-economic development and leveraging 

necessary investments under the Economic and Investment Plan, while there is a need 

to further accelerate convergence with the EU. 

• 

IPA III is a more challenging instrument for the beneficiaries than its predecessors as it 

requires  strong  ownership  and  strategic  planning  capacity  by  them  on  bilateral 

programming. More efforts will be needed in the second part of the MFF to transform 

beneficiaries’ strategic responses into multi-annual strategic planning documents with 

prioritised and sequenced reforms and actions. 

•  While IPA III is designed as a performance-based instrument both in terms of scope 

and intensity of assistance, balancing the performance assessment with the fair share 

principle has limited the financial reward to well-performing beneficiaries. 

• 

IPA  III  has  been  particularly  efficient  in  deploying  a  mix  of  modalities  and  tools, 

including  budget  support,  grants  and  investments.  Efficiency  gains  have  also  been 

achieved  with  fewer  and  larger  actions,  but  there  is  further  room  to  streamline  and 

consider multi-annual programming for bilateral programming. 

•  The  new  unified  monitoring  and  reporting  system,  the  IPA  III  results  framework, 

presents  a considerable improvement compared to the results framework used under 

IPA II. It is expected to improve programming, monitoring, reporting and evaluation of 

IPA III. 

• 

IPA III has been flexible in responding to exceptional external events despite the lack 

of a similar cushion as in the NDICI-Global Europe instrument. The absence of pre-set 

8 

 
 
 
country  financial  envelopes  has  provided  the  required  flexibility  to  programme 

assistance according to urgent and evolving needs. 

• 

IPA  III  ensures  consistency  with  its  predecessor  instruments  and  complementarity 

between different types of programmes it supports. It is also coherent with other areas 

of external action and EU internal policies. Given that Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia 

have  now  become  enlargement  countries,  but  remain  funded  outside  of  IPA  III, 

coherence between IPA III and the instruments from which they receive EU assistance 

will need to be consistently ensured.  

•  With IPA III, the EU is the largest donor in the enlargement region. The EU’s added 

value  is  multiplied  by  long-standing  partnerships  especially  with  international 

organisations, international financial institutions and Member States. 

•  The overall objectives of IPA III to prepare beneficiaries for future membership of the 

Union by increasing alignment of national legislation and public administration to the 

EU acquis and EU standards remain relevant. IPA III will be complemented by a new 

financing instrument, the Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans, which 

aims  to  further  accelerate  fundamental  socio-economic  reforms  with  new  type  of 

funding and ex-ante payment conditionalities. 

DOAG 

•  The DOAG has proved its worth. By merging the Greenland Decision and the former 

OAD, this association instrument has provided a single legal basis for all 13 Overseas 

Countries  and  Territories  (OCTs),  including  Greenland,  with  a  dedicated  budget 

chapter, as was requested by the European Parliament. 

•  By including a referral clause to the NDICI-Global Europe for the implementation of 

cooperation (cf. Article 81 DOAG), it has significantly increased coherence with other 

EFIs.  However,  the  thresholds  applicable  to  comitology  contained  in  NDICI-Global 

Europe and referred to in DOAG could be adapted to the latter’s needs.  

•  The OCTs no longer benefit from a dedicated envelope under the European Investment 

Bank  Investment  OCTs  facility  funded  under  11th  EDF.  They  have  now  access  to 

InvestEU programme on a competitive basis, however it is too early to assess its impact 

on the private sector in the OCTs.  

9 

 
 
 
 
INSC 

• 

INSC is a unique instrument which complements NDICI -Global Europe in the area of 

nuclear  cooperation,  under  the  Euratom  legal  base.  It  is  well  suited  to  address 

challenges in the areas of nuclear safety, radioactive waste management and nuclear 

safeguards. 

• 

INSC  planning  was  sufficiently  flexible  to  respond  to  the  challenges  created  by  the 
Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. 

10