COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION Ex post Evaluation of the 2014-2020 European Social Fund (ESF) and Youth Employment Initiative (YEI)
Date: 2026-02-10
Institutions: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, European Commission
Subjects: EU employment policy, EU initiative, European Social Fund, employment aid, fight against unemployment, job creation, labour market, social integration, youth employment, youth unemployment

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 10.2.2026  SWD(2026) 61 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION  Ex post Evaluation of the 2014-2020 European Social Fund (ESF) and Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) {SWD(2026) 60 final}  
 
 
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE EVALUATION 

This executive summary presents the main findings from the ex-post evaluation of the 2014-
2020  European  Social  Fund  (ESF)  and  Youth  Employment  Initiative  (YEI),  which  were 
implemented until 2022. In line with the Better Regulation Guidelines, the evaluation looked at 
the Funds’ effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence, and EU added value. In addition, the 
visibility criterion was assessed. The evaluation aims to provide relevant lessons learned for the 
implementation of the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and to contribute to the design of future 
policies and programmes beyond 2027.  

Over the 2014-20 programming period, the European Social Fund was the main EU funding 
instrument for labour market, education, and social inclusion policies. It had the objective of 
promoting  employment,  helping  people  access  better  and  fairer  job  opportunities,  supporting 
upskilling and reskilling, fostering social inclusion, and reinforcing the institutional capacities of 
public administrations, public services and stakeholders. In response to the persisting challenge of 
youth unemployment across the Union, the EU launched the Youth Employment Initiative in 2013, 
providing  financial  support  to  Member  States  to  implement  measures  helping  young  people’s 
integration in the labour market, with a focus on regions with youth unemployment rates over 25%. 
As part of its investment priorities, the ESF has supported the implementation of the YEI. The 
implementation of the funds1 took place in 27 Member States and the United Kingdom, covering 
interventions of EUR 131 billion, of which EUR 93.5 billion coming from the EU. The intensity 
of  the  support  per  inhabitant  was  higher  for  countries  receiving  Cohesion  Fund  support  than 
countries not receiving it, reflecting the ESF’s mission to contribute to territorial cohesion. 

This evaluation was launched in accordance with the Art. 57 of the Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, 
and  identifies  main  findings  and  lessons  learnt  at  the  level  of  each  evaluation  criterion 
(effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, relevance, EU added value and visibility). 

KEY FINDINGS 

During  the  2014-2022  evaluation  period,  ESF  and  YEI  proved  to  be  effective  tools  in 
addressing employment, education and social inclusion challenges across the EU. Together, 
these  funds  supported  a  total  of  64.6  million  participations,  reaching  a  significant  part  of  the 
general population of the EU27 and the UK. The funds led to considerable results. Overall, they 
contributed  to  22.3  million  immediate  positive  changes  captured  by  the  monitoring  framework 
using indicators related to employment, skills or job-searching among participants2. From those, 
more than 7 million people supported were in employment or self-employment after leaving an 
ESF or YEI intervention, and over 1.5 million previously inactive participants started searching 

1 The Youth Employment Initiative was implemented in 19 Member States and the United Kingdom. 
2 These results are assessed in the short term immediately after completing the operation.  

1 

 
 
 
 
for a job. The effects have also been sustained over time, with 6.9 million participants employed 
6 months after leaving. Over 10 million people obtained a qualification after participating in an 
ESF or YEI programme, and more than 3 million enrolled in further education and training. The 
funds also promoted social inclusion, reaching a broad spectrum of target groups, and promoted 
gender equality in areas such as  access to employment, career progression,  or reconciliation of 
work and family life. 

Available  evidence  shows  that  ESF/YEI  support  increased  the  probability  of  being  in 
employment  among  participants.  A  meta-analysis  of  110  national  counterfactual  impact 
evaluations indicates that ESF/YEI support made a difference by increasing participants' chances 
of being in employment, on average, by  nearly 6 percentage points (corresponding to +15% in 
relative terms) compared to similar non-participants. Importantly, these numbers should be read 
having in mind that they mostly refer to individuals who are difficult to employ. When it comes to 
macroeconomic impacts, such as changes to GDP, the amount of available evidence was limited 
but positive. In particular, a positive effect on employment levels and GDP was estimated. In terms 
of return from investment, for every euro invested through the ESF (including YEI and REACT-
EU3), an estimated EUR 1.26 increase in GDP is expected by 2030.  

At the policy level, the ESF made meaningful contributions across all three core policy areas 
(employment, education and training, and social inclusion), aligning well with the Europe 2020 
Strategy and the European Semester, and advancing key principles of the European Pillar of Social 
Rights. In addition, some examples of changes at a more systemic level were observed, especially 
in the context of the implementation of the Youth Guarantee. These include, for instance, a positive 
influence on youth policies, raising awareness on the NEET (young people neither in employment, 
nor  in  education  or  training)  issue,  and  provoking  some  changes  in  strategic  approaches  and 
services for young people.   

As concerns efficiency, the evaluation finds that ESF and YEI operations were, on the whole, 
highly cost-effective. A cost-benefit analysis was conducted as part of the evaluation, leveraging 
monitoring  data  on  output  and  result  indicators  as  well  as  financial  data  to  assess  the  cost-
effectiveness  of  operations.  The  analysis  shows  that  benefits  of  ESF  and  YEI  operations 
outweighed costs across most types of interventions, except for public work schemes. Notably, the 
highest ratios  of public and private  returns to  costs were recorded for  interventions contrasting 
school drop-out (43), supporting self-employment (20.5), promoting active inclusion (16.5) and 
access to employment (16). In some cases, certain benefits could not be monetised due to the lack 
of data and were therefore considered only qualitatively4.  

3 Recovery Assistance for Cohesion and the Territories of Europe 
4 Compared  to  the  macro-economic  modelling  carried  out  by  JRC,  the  CBA  led  to  higher  impact  results.  These 
differences in results can be explained by the used methodologies (CBA: discounting net returns; macro-modelling: 
simulating system responses) as well as underlying assumptions and timeframes considered. 

2 

 
 
 
Significant progress was made in simplifying the ESF/YEI process during the programming 
period, with the use of Simplified Cost Options (SCO) being widely recognised as a key factor 
in reducing administrative burden and facilitating efficiency. Nevertheless, some beneficiary 
organisations faced  challenges with  SCOs and digitalisation due to  limited knowledge.  Lighter 
monitoring  and  reporting  structures  compared  to  the  previous  period,  including  simplified 
reporting  and  self-evaluation  forms,  were  identified  to  facilitate  efficiency.  Monitoring  and 
reporting systems at Member State level are found to function well, with the number and quality 
of evaluations having improved in this programming period. Nevertheless, administrative burden 
in ESF programmes was still indicated as a concern by Managing Authorities and beneficiaries. 
Some hindering factors include high staff turnover, complex processes and guidance, leading to 
limited administrative capacity and lack of specialised skills. Simplification could be enhanced 
through  streamlining  application  processes,  notably  by  avoiding  redundant  information, 
simplifying  reporting  monitoring  and  requirements  (especially  for  small  institutions)  and 
streamlining  auditing  requirements.  Some  measures  in  these  domains  have  already  been 
incorporated in the 2021-2027 framework, such as a reduced list of policy objectives,  a clearer 
intervention logic through indicators, lighter reporting requirements and single audit arrangements.  

The  European  Social  Fund  and  Youth  Employment  Initiative  demonstrated  a  strong 
alignment  with  national  and  regional  strategies,  fostering  a  culture  of  collaboration  and 
synergy. The evaluation also provides robust evidence of ESF/YEI being coherent with other EU 
funds, such as the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the Fund for European Aid to 
the Most Deprived (FEAD), and Erasmus+ in terms of complementary objectives, scope and target 
groups. Complementarity was also observed between ESF and the objectives of the Recovery and 
Resilience  Facility  (RRF),  the  latter  providing  supplementary  financial  resources.  Minor 
substitution effects were identified between the ESF and RRF. Overall, some challenges remained 
due to complex institutional structures which hindered further coherence with other EU funding 
instruments. Finally,  dedicated EU support through the ESF  and YEI programme was strongly 
coherent with other EU policies. Member States used key EU-level policies as the main point of 
reference when designing interventions, especially the Europe 2020 Strategy, the European Pillar 
of Social Rights and the European Skills Agenda.   

Evidence from the evaluation suggests that the ESF/YEI were largely relevant in addressing 
the needs of the target groups concerned, and that those target groups were appropriately 
defined.  In  particular,  ESF/YEI  were  able  to  reach  a  considerable  share  of  people  from 
disadvantaged  backgrounds,  with  increased  numbers  compared  to  the  previous  programming 
period  (15%  of  participants  had  a  migrant,  foreign,  or  minority  background,  and  19%  of 
participants belonged to ‘other disadvantaged’ groups). Nonetheless, stakeholders also considered 
that there could be scope for better reaching out to some target groups such as Roma, refugees and 
migrants,  persons  with  disabilities  and  persons  with  intersecting  vulnerabilities,  including  with 
tailored  outreach  strategies.  The  evaluation  points  to  the  importance  of  supporting  particular 
groups by adopting a specific and targeted approach and placing a greater focus on promoting and 

3 

 
agreeing operations with specific objectives, to enhance effectiveness and support changes on a 
structural level. 

In view of emerging needs, the additional funds and reprogramming options introduced via 
CRII, CRII+5, REACT-EU6 and CARE7 further reinforced the funds’ relevance. These tools 
made a substantial contribution to the pandemic response, helped alleviate financial constraints in 
public services and prepared the ground for longer-term investments. The flexibility provided with 
these initiatives allowed supporting operations to address newly emerged needs. They also allowed 
formal amendments of the programmes to reflect new Member States’ priorities and contributed 
to continued relevance of the Funds. 

Stakeholder  involvement  in  designing,  implementing,  and  monitoring  interventions, 
alongside systematic needs assessments, was crucial for enhancing the relevance of ESF and 
YEI-supported operations. Managing authorities gained from understanding target groups' needs 
based on past experiences. Additionally, Member States could improve relevance by utilising ex-
ante impact assessments and needs assessments to tailor interventions to target groups' specific 
needs and vulnerabilities. A holistic approach could be beneficial to address the concrete needs of 
vulnerable groups. The evaluation highlights the importance of the partnership principle, capacity-
building, and sharing experiences and practices for effective intervention design, implementation, 
and monitoring. 

The  evaluation  has  demonstrated  significant  EU  value  added  by  ESF  and  YEI,  which 
enabled Member States to reach more individuals and entities than national funding alone. 
During the pandemic, they allowed increasing the volume of support and expanding the type of 
services.  The  funds  increased  the  support  for  hard-to-reach  groups  compared  to  previous 
programming  periods,  allowing  support  to  new  areas  of  intervention  lacking  national  funding. 
Their  implementation  supported  innovation  and  transfer  of  ideas,  enabling  strengthened  social 
partners and local institutions. ESF and YEI operations enabled Member States administrations 
and  participating  organisations  to  gain  new  competences,  enhancing  the  efficiency  of  their 
processes. However, evidence on structural changes was limited. To foster sustainable investments, 
early assessments by national authorities would be beneficial for identifying critical objectives and 
scalable  innovative  approaches.  In  this  sense,  it  is  essential  to  mitigate  the  risk  of  EU  funding 
substituting national funding by strengthening the alignment between EU and national investment 
priorities.  Lastly,  enhanced  programming  flexibility  helped  to  better  contribute  to  emerging 
objectives and challenges. 

The  ESF/YEI  programmes  have  achieved  good  visibility  among  organisations  and 
stakeholders directly involved in the projects, thanks to effective communication activities such 
as  websites,  events,  and  social  media.  However,  less  visibility  is  perceived  among  the  general 

5 Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative (CRII), Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative Plus (CRII+) 
6 Recovery Assistance for Cohesion and the Territories of Europe 
7 Cohesion’s Action for Refugees in Europe 

4 

 
 
public. Stakeholders have identified visibility as a key area for improvement, and the evaluation 
found that there is a need to better disseminate good practices and results of ESF/YEI support to a 
wider audience. To improve visibility of the funds, the evaluation points to the importance of a 
multi-faceted approach, combining various communication channels and tailored tools to specific 
target groups.  

5