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 Report on the evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021
Date: 2026-06-29
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: EU migration policy, exchange of information, information network, migration control, migration statistics, project evaluation, refugee, right of asylum, third country

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 29.6.2026  SWD(2026) 173 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 Report on the evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021 {COM(2026) 322 final}  
 
 
Table of contents 

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 4 

1.1. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION ...................................................... 4 

1.2 METHODOLOGY OF THE EVALUATION................................................................. 4 

2. WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION .............. 5 

2.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE EMN AND ITS OBJECTIVE. ............................................... 5 

2.2 EMN OUTPUTS .............................................................................................................. 7 

2.3 POINTS OF COMPARISON .......................................................................................... 7 

3. HOW HAS THE SITUATION EVOLVED OVER THE EVALUATION PERIOD 8 

3.1 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT OF THE EVALUATION ...................................... 8 

3.1.1 Main trends in asylum and migration and key factors .............................................. 8 
3.1.2 Relevant policy developments .................................................................................. 8 

3.2 STATE OF PLAY IN THE EMN 2018-2021 ................................................................. 9 

3.2.1 EMN meetings and events......................................................................................... 9 
3.2.2 Budget ..................................................................................................................... 10 

4. EVALUATION FINDINGS .......................................................................................... 12 

4.1 TO WHAT EXTENT WAS THE INTERVENTION SUCCESSFUL AND WHY? ... 12 

4.1.1 Effectiveness ........................................................................................................... 12 
4.1.2 Efficiency ................................................................................................................ 17 
4.1.3 Coherence ................................................................................................................ 20 

4.2 HOW DID THE EU INTERVENTION MAKE A DIFFERENCE AND TO WHOM?23 

4.2.1 EU added value ....................................................................................................... 23 

4.3 IS THE INTERVENTION STILL RELEVANT? ......................................................... 26 

5. WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED? ........................ 28 

5.1 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................ 28 

5.2 LESSONS LEARNED................................................................................................... 30 

ANNEX I    PROCEDURAL INFORMATION .............................................................. 31 

ANNEX II    METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED .................. 32 

ANNEX III    EVALUATION MATRIX AND, WHERE RELEVANT, DETAILS ON 
ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS ............................................. 40 

ANNEX IV    OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND COSTS ............................................ 60 

ANNEX V     STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION. SYNOPSIS REPORT. ............ 68 

1 

 
 
 
Glossary 

Term or acronym 

Meaning or definition 

AHQ 

Ad hoc queries 

AHQ WG 

Ad Hoc Query Working Group 

AMIF 

ARMs 

Asylum Migration and Integration Fund 

Annual reports on migration and asylum 

ARM WG 

Annual Reports on Migration and Asylum Working Group 

CD WG 

Communication and Dissemination Working Group 

CdT 

CEAS 

CSO 

EASO 

EEAS 

EMN 

EQ 

EU 

EUAA 

FRA 

Frontex 

GDISC 

GT WG 

IOM 

JRC 

Translation Centre for the Bodies of the European Union 

Common European Asylum System 

Civil Society Organisation 

European Asylum Support Office 

European External Action Service 

European Migration Network 

Evaluation questions  

European Union 

European Union Agency for Asylum 

Fundamental Rights Agency 

European Border and Coast Guard Agency 

General Directors of Immigration Services Conference 

Glossary and Thesaurus Working Group 

International Organisation for Migration 

Joint Research Centre 

2 

 
 
KCMD 

NCP 

OECD 

RT WG 

SB 

TCNs 

Knowledge Centre on Migration and Demography 

National Contact Point 

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development 

Round Table Working Group 

Steering Board 

Third-country nationals 

UNHCR 

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
1. INTRODUCTION 

1.1. Purpose and scope of the evaluation 

The European Migration Network is an EU-funded network, established by Council Decision 
2008/381/EC1  and  amended  by  Regulation  (EU)  No 516/2014  of  the  European  Parliament 
and  of  the  Council,  with  the  aim  of  collecting  and  sharing  information  on  migration  and 
asylum in the EU. 

Under the provisions set out in the Council Decision 2008/381/EC (Article 13), the European 
Commission  regularly  presents  to  the European  Parliament, the Council,  and  the Economic 
and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions a report on the development of the 
European Migration Network (EMN), based on an external and independent evaluation. 

This  evaluation  report  assesses  the  four-year  period  from  2018  to  2021.  In  terms  of  the 
geographical  scope, it covered  all EU Member  States except for Denmark, as  well as three 
third countries that are EMN Observers (Georgia, Moldova and Norway). 

The  evaluation  focuses  on  the  effectiveness,  efficiency,  coherence,  EU  added  value  and 
relevance of the European Migration Network. It also considers whether the mandate of the 
EMN  is  up-to-date  and  if  it  matches  the  objectives  for  which  it  was  set  up  as  well  as  the 
effectiveness of the changes to the scope of activities. It also reviews the working practices of 
the EMN and the EMN  Service Provider, including  information  flow,  and provides lessons 
learned  and  recommendations  to  better  respond  to  the  challenges  posed  to  EMN  by  the 
constantly changing environment. 

1.2  Methodology of the evaluation 

The evaluation was supported by an independent study, completed in 20242, and a range of 
activities and products. Field research activities helped gather qualitative insights on how and 
why  specific  results  had  been  achieved  and  identify  lessons  learned.  The  reliability  and 
validity of results was ensured by applying a systematic triangulation of data and information 
collected through both desk and field sources. 

The main limitations of the evaluation related to the timing differences between the period in 
which  the  evaluation  was  conducted  (2023-2024)  and  the  temporal  scope  of  the  evaluation 
(2018-2021). As some of the current National Contact Point members and/or Steering Board 
(SB) members who were interviewed in the course of evidence collection for the supporting 
evaluation study had not been involved in EMN activities between 2018 and 2021, they were 
not  able  to  provide  relevant  first-hand  feedback  and  information  for  the  period  under 

1 Council Decision of 14 May 2008 establishing a European Migration Network (2008/381/EC). 
2 The independent evaluation study was carried out by Ernst &Young and is pending publication. 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
evaluation.  To mitigate this limitation,  guidelines for targeted interviews  with  SB members 
were  shared  in  advance  to  allow  interviewees  that  were  not  involved  in  the  EMN  between 
2018 and 2021 to be adequately briefed by former colleagues on activities between 2018 and 
2021 or accompanied by them during the interviews. 

The  lack  of  availability  of  certain  data  on  the  type  of  costs  incurred  by  National  Contact 
Points (NCPs) when implementing EMN activities did not allow a full quantification of the 
costs of EMN activities. Cost quantification was therefore focused on the type of costs (i.e. 
staff,  travel,  drafting  of  ad hoc  queries)  for  which  financial  data  was  available  and  budget 
allocations.  

The  evaluation  acknowledged  that  the  frequency  of  EMN  evaluations,  as  prescribed  by  the 
Council Decision 2008/381/EC, presented methodological constraints, in particular regarding 
the limited availability of financial data, including budget allocations, as financial reporting is 
not  available  for a calendar year, but  for the full duration of  each EMN  Work Programme. 
The  non-alignment  of  EMN  evaluations  with  EMN  Work  Programmes,  as  the  evaluation 
period covered one Work Programme fully (2019-2020) and two Work Programmes partially 
(2017-2018,  2021-2022),  made  it  unfeasible  to  derive  a  consistent  2018-2021  financial 
dataset.  Consequently,  the  financial  data  presented  in  the  evaluation,  in  part  and  as  noted, 
included financial data for the years 2017 and 2022.    

2. WHAT WAS THE EXPECTED OUTCOME OF THE INTERVENTION? 

2.1 Description of the EMN and its objective 

The aim of the European Migration Network is to collect and share information on migration 
and asylum in the EU. Articles 1 and 2(1) of the Council Decision 2008/381/EC identify the 
EMN objective and tasks, which are translated into activities listed and defined in EMN work 
programmes  that  are  drafted  and  approved  jointly  by  the  EMN  and  the  Commission3. 
According  to  that  Council  Decision,  the  objective  of  the  EMN  is  ‘to  meet  the  information 
needs  of  Community  institutions  and  of  Member  States’  authorities  and  institutions  on 
migration  and  asylum,  by  providing  up-to-date,  objective,  reliable  and  comparable 
information  on  migration  and  asylum,  with  a  view  to  supporting  policy-making  in  the 
European  Union  in  these  areas.  The  EMN  also  serves  to  provide  the  general  public  with 
information on these subjects. 

The  internal  structure  of  the  EMN  is  outlined  in  the  Council  Decision,  which  provides  for 
clear  roles  and  responsibilities  of  the  different  Network’s  components.  In  the  evaluation 

3  The  EMN  work  programmes  were  biennial  until  2022.  https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/funding/asylum-

migration-and-integration-funds/european-migration-network-emn_en. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
period  the  EMN  was  composed  of  representatives  of  the  Commission,  26  Member  States4, 
and three observers: Norway, which joined in 2011, and Moldova and Georgia, which joined 
in  2021.  The  various  Network  components  were  interlinked  through  both  top-down  and 
bottom-up mechanisms. The top-down dimension involves the following actors: 

-  The Steering Board that plays executive and monitoring roles and provides strategic 
guidance.  In  particular,  pursuant  to  Article 4  of  the  Council  Decision,  the  Steering 
Board  is  responsible  for  leading  the  EMN  political  and  strategic  management  and 
comprises: 

–  one representative from each Member State5; 
-  one representative from the European Commission acting as chair; 
- 
-  one representative of the European Parliament, who can participate as an observer 

two scientific experts; 

in the SB meetings. 

-  The Commission, which coordinates the NCPs’ activities and ensures  that the EMN 
objectives  and  actions  reflect  EU’s  political  priorities  (Article 6  of  the  Council 
Decision); 

-  The Service Provider, which assists the Commission and provides secretarial support 

for the EMN’s day-to-day activities; 

-  The NCPs designated by the Member States in coordination with the Commission that 
play the two-fold role of contributing to the design of the work programmes (policy-
design role) and implementing them (operational role). Each NCP is composed of at 
least three experts, one of which should act as ‘national coordinator’. 

The NCPs act as the interconnection with the EMN bottom-up dimension represented by the 
National  Migration  Networks  that  are  established  and  coordinated  by  each  NCP.  The 
networks comprise expert organisations (e.g. NGOs, scientific and research institutes, public 
administration institutions) and individuals active in the field of migration and asylum, who 
facilitate the exchange of information among national actors, offer better understanding and 
response to information needs, and provide up-to-date and accurate information to the EMN 
for EU-level analysis and reports. 

In  addition,  the  Council  Decision  envisaged  a  further  layer  to  the  EMN  governance,  by 
providing  for  horizontal  mechanisms  (the  EMN  meetings)  aimed  at  ensuring  regular 
communication and information exchange among the Network’s members6. 

4  Denmark  did  not  take  part  in  the  adoption  of  the  Council  Decision  and  is  not  bound  by  it  or  subject  to  its 

application. 

5 Each Member State appoints a representative to the Steering Board who is an institutional actor with specific 

expertise in the field of migration and asylum at the national level. 

6 Pursuant to Article 4(6), the SB should meet at least twice a year, allowing for exchanges among its national 
members. Moreover, Article 7 provides that the EMN should meet at least five times a year, thus allowing 

6 

 
 
 
 
The  EMN  developed  external  coordination  mechanisms  with  EU  agencies  (such  as  the 
European Union Agency for Asylum (EUAA), the European Union Agency for Fundamental 
Rights (FRA), and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex)), Commission’s 
bodies  and  networks  (such  as  the  European  Return  and  Reintegration  Network),  as  well  as 
international and civil society organisations. 

2.2 EMN outputs7 

The outputs of the EMN include providing various products, holding internal meetings, and 
organising  events.  EMN  written  deliverables  are  managed  and  shared  through  the 
Information  Exchange  System  (IES),  a  state-of-the-art  secure  web  platform  with  access 
restriction.  At  the  national  level,  EMN  NCPs  engage  in  information  sharing  through  their 
national EMN websites, conferences, social media, newsletters, and other events. 

2.3 Points of comparison 

The evaluation was aimed at capturing the changes that the EMN had brought to the area of 
migration  and  asylum  over  the  evaluation  period.  To  this  end,  EMN  performance  between 
2018 and 2021 was evaluated against specific points of comparison: 

- 

- 

the  explanatory  memorandum  accompanying  the  proposal  for  a  Council  Decision 
establishing the EMN8 with a view to identify the needs underlying the establishment 
of the Network; 
the  2015  EMN  evaluation  to  understand  the  progress  of  the  EMN  over  the  two 
evaluation periods9. 

for regular exchanges among NCPs. The Commission acts as chair of both SB and NCP meetings, which 
are all also attended by the Service Provider. 

7  A  detailed  list  of  EMN  outputs  produced  can  also  be  found  in  EMN  Status  Reports  published  annually: 
https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/networks/european-migration-network-emn/emn-publications/emn-status-
reports_en. 
8 European Commission (2008), Proposal for a Council Decision establishing the European Migration Network, 

COM(2007) 466 final. 

9 Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network. Final report. (2015). 

7 

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

3.1 Background and context of the evaluation 

3.1.1 Main trends in asylum and migration and key factors  
Between  2018  and  2021,  the  number  of  asylum  applications  in  the  EU  were  strongly 
impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting global mobility disruptions. Irregular 
arrivals during this period also fluctuated, with detections decreasing when mobility channels 
were  constrained  and  increasing  again  as  restrictions  eased.  Geopolitical  developments, 
including the Belarus-border crisis, also had an impact on the movement of migrants. 

Legal migration remained comparatively stable over between 2018 and 2021 but was shaped 
by  temporary  labour  market  needs  and  administrative  adaptations  introduced  during  the 
pandemic. Work-related, family-related and education-related residence permits continued to 
constitute  the  main  legal  pathways,  while  seasonal  and  other  employment-related  mobility 
remained  important.  Member  States  introduced  targeted  measures  to  address  labour 
shortages,  ensure  continuity  of  residence  for  workers  already  present  and  adapt  procedures 
through remote processing, online platforms and wider use of digital tools. Large-scale EU IT 
systems  such  as  the  Eurodac10  continued  to  support  border,  migration  and  asylum 
management,  and  labour-market  integration  outcomes  for  EU  nationals  and  third-country 
nationals remained stable throughout the period. 

3.1.2 Relevant policy developments 
Between  2018  and  2021,  several  EU  initiatives  contributed  to  shaping  the  policy  and 
operational framework in the area of migration and asylum. The Commission presented the 
Pact on Migration and Asylum11, comprising a set of legislative proposals and accompanying 
non-legislative measures aimed at establishing a more effective and predictable EU system. 
The revised EU Blue Card Directive (Directive 2021/1883/EU)12 introduced updated rules for 
the  admission  and  residence  of  highly  qualified  workers  from  third  countries.  The 
implementation  of  the  2015-2020  EU  action  plan  against  migrant  smuggling  continued  to 
support  efforts  to  prevent  and  combat  smuggling  in  line  with  the  European  Agenda  on 

10 Eurodac was originally created in 2000 (Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000) and has been operating since 2003. 
Its current legal basis is Regulation (EU) No  603/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 
26 June 2013. 

11 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and 
Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  on  A  New  Pact  on  Migration  and  Asylum 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
(COM/2020/609 
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52020DC0609. 

Available 

Final). 

at: 

12  Directive  (EU)  2021/1883  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  20 October  2021  on  the 
conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purpose of highly qualified employment, 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
repealing  Council  Directive 
and 
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32021L1883 
- 
:~:text=DIRECTIVE%20%28EU%29%202021%2F1883%20OF%20THE%20EUROPEAN%20PARLIA
MENT%20AND,highly%20qualified%20employment%2C%20and%20repealing%20Council%20Directive
%202009%2F50%2FEC. 

2009/50/EC.  Available 

at: 

8 

 
 
 
Migration13  and  the  European  Agenda  on  Security14.  In  2020,  the  Commission  also 
established  the  Migration  Preparedness  and  Crisis  Blueprint  Mechanism15  as  the  EU’s 
structured  framework  for  preparedness,  monitoring,  situational  awareness  and  coordinated 
response in the field of migration. Over the same period, the mandates of EUAA, FRA and 
Frontex were established or strengthened, enhancing their roles in supporting Member States 
and  EU  institutions  in  the  fields  of  asylum,  fundamental  rights  and  integrated  border 
management. 

3.2 State of play in the EMN 2018-2021 

3.2.1 EMN meetings and events 
The evaluation confirmed that EMN meetings and events were carried out in full accordance 
with  the  work  programmes16.  SB  and  NCP  meetings  were  held  regularly.  In  2021,  two 
additional  SB  meetings  were  organised  due  to  the  urgency  of  issues  to  be  addressed 
(including the impact of COVID-19 pandemic and the tensions at the EU external border with 
Belarus).  The  establishment  of  new  Working  Groups  between  2018  and  202117  led  to  an 
increase in the number of meetings during the analysed period. 

13 Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_15_4956. 
14 Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52015DC0240. 
15 Commission Recommendation (EU) 2020/1366 of 23 September 2020 on an EU mechanism for preparedness 
and management of crises related to migration. Available at: EUR-Lex - 32020H1366 - EN - EUR-Lex. 

16 Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 
17 In 2018, the Information and Awareness Raising Campaigns Working Group (INFO WG) was established and 
the  EMN  Statistics  Working  Group  was  re-instated  to  discuss  how  the  EMN’s  ambition  to  present 
comparable statistics could be achieved because different migration and asylum-related statistics were being 
generated due to lack of  alignment among the national data collection systems. In 2020, the  International 
Cooperation Working Group (ICWG) and the round tables Working Group started their activities. Finally, a 
new ad hoc Working Group was established in 2021 to supervise the production of an EMN corporate video 
showcasing the progress of the Network since its 10th anniversary (in 2018). 

9 

 
 
 
Planned per year 
218 

Table 1 Planned vs actual meetings and events (2018-2021) 
Output 
2021 
SB meetings 
4 
NCP meetings  At least 519 
7 
--20 
WG meetings 
17 
2 
Conferences 
2 
EMN Day21 
1 
1 
Round tables22  0 
3 
Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

2019 
2 
7 
10 
2 
-- 
-- 

2020 
2 
6 
23 
3 
1 
2 

2018 
2 
7 
11 
2 
-- 
-- 

In  addition  to  the  twice-yearly  EMN  conferences,  in  2019 two  conferences  at  the  EU  level 
were co-organised by the EMN and the Council of Europe and the OECD, respectively. Due 
to  pandemic-related  travel  restrictions  the  events  were  held  virtually,  which  contributed  to 
greater  participation.  Phasing  in  virtual  and  hybrid  meetings  facilitated  wider  participation 
and helped reduce attendance costs23. 

In 2020 and 2021, the EMN Days were  the EMN’s most attended  events, with  around 300 
participants. In 2020 two round tables were organised for the first time, while in 2021 three 
round tables were held in cooperation with the World Bank to discuss i.e. legal pathways and 
circular migration. 

Networking  and  information  sharing  by  NCPs  at  the  national  level  were  steadily  growing 
throughout  the  evaluation  period.  Whilst  most  2018  events  were  limited  to  national 
conferences, in subsequent years the range of events grew to include round tables, migration 
talks,  workshops,  educational  seminars  and  webinars,  study  forums,  and  screening  of 
documentaries24. 

3.2.2 Budget 
The  EMN  is  co-financed  from  Commission’s  Asylum,  Migration  and  Integration  Fund 
(AMIF). The EMN budget (as indicated in Table 2) is distributed through grants allocated to 
NCPs,  procurement  (including  allocations  for  the  EMN  Service  Provider,  and  for 
communication services  and evaluation  studies), other actions (including allocations for the 

18 As established by Article 4(6) of the Council Decision. 
19 As established by Article 5(6) of the Council Decision. 
20 The frequency of the WG meetings depends on the specific needs of each WG: usually, at the end of a WG 

meeting, participants decide when to meet the next time. 

21 The EMN Day was started in 2020. 
22  The  round  tables  were  started  in  2020  as  dialogue-based  events  to  promote  open  learning  with  the  aim  to 
bring together innovative thinkers and stakeholders to clarify viewpoints and to offer a space for exchange 
of perspectives on challenging issues. 

23 Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 
24 Idem. 

10 

 
 
 
 
Joint  Research  Centre  and  IT  services),  and  indirect  management  (for  international 
organisations and assimilated entities). 

As  EMN  allocations  are  reported  per  work  programme,  they  are  available  only  in  biannual 
aggregates  and  cannot  be  disaggregated  by  calendar  year.  Consequently,  the  analysis 
necessarily included data from 2017 and 2022, which fall outside the evaluation period.  

The  allocated  amounts  are  jointly  agreed  by  the  EMN  and  the  Commission  for  the 
implementation of each work programme. Based on a Steering Board decision, EMN grants 
are  awarded  to  NCPs  and  operationalised  in  the  work  programmes.  The  maximum  EU  co-
financing  of  the  EMN  grants  is  95%.  Following  the  Commission’s  approval,  the  NCPs 
receive  an  advance  payment  of  up  to  80%  of  the  allocated  budget,  while  the  remaining 
amount  can  be  released  following  reporting  of  the  expenses.  Allocated  resources  that  have 
not been exhausted are returned to AMIF at the end of the work programme. 

Unlike EU Member States, EMN Observer Countries cover the entirety of the costs of their 
involvement in the EMN from their respective national budgets. 

Grants for the NCPs constitute the bulk of the EMN budget and they are given on the basis of 
a call for proposals  for  each of the  work programmes and the  signing of grant agreements. 
The  implementation  of  the  grants  is  monitored  by  the  Commission  and  the  reporting 
obligations on the implementation apply to all the NCPs. 

Overall,  grants  awarded  to  the  NCPs  increased  from  78%  of  the  total  EMN  allocation  in 
2017-2018  to  87%  in  2019-2020,  and  then  decreased  to  69%  in  2021-2022.  Procurement 
decreased from 20% in 2017-2018 to 8% in 2019-2020 and then increased up to 13% in the 
period  2021-2022.  Finally,  the  budget  allocated  for  other  actions  consistently  grew  in  the 
evaluation period.25 

Table 2 – EMN budget allocation26 

Period 

Total allocation   Grants 

Procurements 

Other actions 

2017-18 

€24 240 000 

€18 910 000  €4 780 000 

2019-20 

€18 075 000 

€15 640 000  €1 400 000 

€550 000 
€1 035 000 

Indirect 
management 
n.a. 
n.a. 

2021-22 

€22 976 000 

€15 962 000  €3 100 000 

€1 500 000 

€2 414 000 

Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

The  grants  covered  the  costs  of  participation  in  EMN  meetings,  production  of  national 
contributions to EMN products, management of the AHQs, organisation of public events and 
dissemination activities at the national level. 

25 Member State–level allocation, award, and spending information is provided in Annex IV. 

26 EMN budget allocation is presented as the data on actual budget implementation in the  evaluation period is 

not yet available. 

11 

 
 
 
With regard to grant awards27, the 2019-2020 work programme recorded an overall increase 
compared with the preceding period, whereas allocations in the subsequent work programme 
remained broadly stable and, in some Member States, declined. 

The average level of grant spending rate by NCPs28 was around 85% of the maximum grant 
amount in the 2017-2018 and 2019-2020 work programmes. The EMN grants closed to date 
under  the  2021-2022  work  programme  have  a  budget  implementation  rate  of  78%.  The 
reason  for  the relative low level  of implementation  was  directly linked to pandemic-related 
restrictions  which  first  led  to  the  cancellation  of  travel  and  then  to  the  reduction  of  travel 
overall, with the NCPs resorting more to online meetings.. 

4. EVALUATION FINDINGS 

Key findings:  

•  EMN’s  mandate  and  objectives  remained  relevant  to  EU  and  national  information 

needs throughout 2018–2021. 

•  EMN delivered a steady output of reports, ad hoc queries, and events, despite varying 

national administrative structures and changing policy priorities. 

•  EMN  continued  to  provide  comparable,  up-to-date  information  that  supported 

evidence-based policy discussions at both EU and national levels. 

This  ex post  evaluation  assesses  the  performance  of  the  EMN  against  the  following  five 
criteria:  effectiveness,  efficiency,  coherence,  EU  added  value,  and  relevance.  The  overall 
analysis  is  based  on  evidence  from  both  the  Evaluation  Study  and  the  Commission’s  own 
sources. The analysis draws on the indicators presented in Annex III, including quantitative 
output indicators where available. 

4.1 To what extent was the intervention successful and why? 

4.1.1 Effectiveness 

Key findings:  

•  EMN  products  were  widely  used  by  the  Commission  and  Member  States  and  were 

considered timely and policy relevant. 

•  EMN  contributed  to  a  shared  understanding  of  migration  trends,  including  during 

periods of rapid policy change. 

•  EMN  outputs  supported  operational  and  policy  decision-making  and  addressed 

27 See Annex IV, Figure 4. 

28 See Annex IV, Figure 5. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
information needs not met through other EU instruments. 

The  evaluation  examined  how  effectively  the  EMN  delivered  its  planned  outcomes  and 
provided intended support. 

Question  1:  To  what  extent  have  the  EMN  activities  contributed  to  achieving  the 
specific  and  general  objectives  laid  down  in  Council  Decision  2008/381/EC  and  the 
actions carried out by the EMN? 

The Network’s activities29 which correspond  to  the tasks set  out  in  Article 2 of the Council 
Decision are: 

•  collect and share data and information from a wide array of sources; 
•  analyse information and make it available in a readily accessible format; 
•  contribute to developing migratory indicators and criteria; 
•  produce and publish periodic reports; 
•  cooperate with other relevant EU and international bodies. 

Information  produced  by  the  EMN  was  widely  considered  to  be  accessible,  comparable, 
easily readable, objective, reliable and  up-to-date. Updated information  was made available 
mainly  through  the  regular  publication  of  the  annual  reports  on  migration  and  asylum 
(ARMs) and their statistical annexes, as well as through quarterly bulletins. Objectivity and 
reliability  were  ensured  through  a  multi-stakeholder  and  multi-agency  approach  to  the  data 
collection  process,  which  entailed  the  direct  involvement  of  the  National  Migration 
Networks.  The  comparability  of  migration-related  data  produced  by  the  EMN  steadily 
increased as a result of the support provided by the EMN Statistics WG and the introduction 
of  structured  data  collection  tools,  such  as  the  guidelines  for  producing  AHQs,  studies  and 
ARMs  developed  in  2018.  Addressing  the  readability  and  accessibility  of  the  information 
produced by the EMN, the previous EMN evaluation of 2015 indicated the need for the EMN 
to  provide  more  concise  deliverables,  including  clear  facts  and  figures  on  migration.  The 
EMN  responded  to  that  recommendation  by  introducing  flashes  in  2018,  which  provide 
succinct information in a user-friendly format. 

29 A complete list of activities undertaken by the EMN can be found in annual EMN Status Reports: 
https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/networks/european-migration-network-emn/emn-publications/emn-status-
reports_en. 

. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
Table 3 Planned vs actual products (2018-2021) 
2021 
Planned per year 
Output 
n.a30. 
98 
AHQs 
1 
1 
ARMs 
4 
4 
Bulletins 
n.a31. 
7 
Flashes 
21 
up to 15 
Informs 
432 
Studies 
2 
Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

2018 
67 
1 
4 
4 
11 
4 

2019 
90 
1 
4 
7 
12 
4 

2020 
74 
1 
4 
6 
16 
4 

AHQs  ARMs  Bulletins  Studies 
49 
41 
12 
11 
17 
13 
10 

Table 4 Topics covered per product 
Topic 
Legal migration and mobility 
International protection and asylum 
Unaccompanied minors and vulnerable groups 
Integration and inclusion 
Citizenship and statelessness 
Borders, visa and Schengen 
Irregular  migration 
smuggling 
Trafficking in human beings 
Return and readmission 
Residence 
COVID-19 pandemic 
Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

16 
16 
16 
16 
16 
16 
16 

including  migrant 

4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 

4 
2 
- 
1 
1 
2 
1 

16 
16 
- 
- 

5 
17 
30 
5 

4 
4 
4 
- 

1 
1 
1 
- 

Informs 
11 
7 
4 
1 
2 
6 
2 

1 
11 
4 
6 

In  addition  to  its  high  quality,  the information  produced by the EMN was  considered to  be 
policy  relevant  as  it  met  the  needs  of  its  various  stakeholders  both  at  the  EU  and  national 
level.  Moreover,  evidence  confirmed  that  many  of  the  stakeholders  made  effective  use  of 
EMN products, e.g. the EMN mapping of national legislative frameworks and developments 
was  used  to  feed  into  the  assessment  of  the  implementation  of  the  Long-Term  Residence 
Directive.  The  information  made  available  by  the  EMN  also  served  to  simplify  and 
streamline the data collection conducted by other relevant EU bodies. At the national level, 
the EMN was an important contributor to national policy-making. 

The  evaluation  found  that  the  EMN’s  responsiveness  to  the  information  needs  of  its 
stakeholders was ensured also thanks to specific procedures set out in the EMN legal basis. 

30 AHQs are launched on a need basis. 
31 The number depends on the number of EMN products delivered in the given year. 
32 In accordance with the Annex to the WPs 2017-2018 and 2019-2020, the EMN shall initiate four studies per 

year. This information was not available for 2021. 

14 

 
 
 
 
Specifically,  Article 6(4)  of  the  Council  Decision  provides  that  the  work  programmes  are 
adopted  by  the  Commission  after  consultation  of  the  NCPs  and  approval  by  the  SB. 
Moreover, topics to be covered by the EMN products were selected based on a collaborative 
approach outlined in the work programmes. 

A significant improvement in safe access to the information produced by the EMN came with 
the transfer of the IES to a new platform which helped ameliorate its performance. A major 
overhaul  of the  IES, including  a new software, layout  and IES version  aimed at  addressing 
the remaining  issues  and at  improving the efficiency and user-friendliness, was planned for 
2024, beyond the period of this evaluation. 

Since the 2015 EMN evaluation, an increasing level of participation by EU-level stakeholders 
in  the  SB  and  NCP  meetings  has  been  noted.  At  the  Member-State  level,  the  EMN  has 
consistently stepped up cooperation among the Member States as a platform for knowledge 
exchange  in  the  field  of  migration  and  asylum.  The  EMN  enhanced  networking  among 
practitioners across the EU and made possible the participation of national policy experts in 
conferences  organised  by  other  NCPs.  Enhanced  operational  cooperation  and  knowledge 
sharing among the Member States were facilitated by the work carried out by the EMN WGs. 
The EMN also promoted collaboration between single NCPs and external actors. 

The  EMN  engaged  with  international  organisations  and  EU  agencies  for  the  preparation  of 
products  and  events:  four  Informs  on  the  impact  of  COVID-19  were  developed  in 
cooperation  with  the  OECD  in  2020  and  one  in  2021,  in  collaboration  with  EUAA  and 
Frontex33. Moreover, in 2021 a EMN conference was jointly organised by the NCP Finland in 
collaboration with the OECD and the CoE. 

The  EMN  contributed  to  fostering  the  sharing  of  good  practice  by  playing  the  role  of 
facilitator  in  enabling  access  to  the  good  practice  identified  in  other  Member  States  and 
exchanging information on migration practices adopted by the Member States. 

An  important  development  in  external  relations  was  the  EMN’s  engagement  with  third 
countries  over  the  evaluation  period.  In  2021,  Georgia  and  Moldova  joined  the  EMN  as 
observers34 while Armenia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Ukraine expressed an interest in joining 
the  EMN35.  The  Commission,  assisted  by  the Cooperation  with  Third  Countries  WG  (CTC 
WG), launched preliminary exchanges with these countries36. 

33  European  Commission 

(2020),  EMN  Status  Report 

2020.  Available 

at: 

https://home-

affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2021-11/00_eu_emn_status_report_2020_en.pdf. 

34 

35 

Status 

Report 

2021. 
01/EMN%20status%20report%202021%20final.pdf. 
2021. 
01/EMN%20status%20report%202021%20final.pdf. 

Available 

Available 

Report 

Status 

at: 

at: 

36 27th SB meeting. 

15 

https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-

https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023-

 
 
 
Question  2:  What  steps  have  been  taken  to  increase  the  visibility  of  the  EMN  and  its 
activities and have they been effective? 

The EMN implemented various activities aimed at increasing its visibility: 

Internet-based Information Exchange System (EMN IES) 

- 
-  EMN central and national websites 
-  EMN  products  (ARMs,  studies,  country  factsheets,  informs,  AHQs,  status  reports, 

flashes, information leaflets) 

-  EMN Twitter and LinkedIn accounts 
-  EMN events (conferences, EMN Day, webinars, round tables, workshops). 

All  the  above  EMN  information-sharing  activities  contributed  to  increasing  the  Network’s 
visibility within the EU and across relevant third countries. The EMN conferences and events 
were  particularly  useful  tools  for  the  Network’s  deliverables  and  benefited  from  the 
participation of experts from Member States. The EMN Communication and Dissemination 
WG played an important role in implementing dissemination tasks. 

A need for further strengthening of the role that NCPs played in mobilising national partners 
to promote EMN activities, including  better coordination  with  policymakers, was identified 
in the course of this evaluation. 

The 2021-2025 EMN communication strategy addressed most identified issues. The strategy 
also reflected the EMN’s increased focus on communication and information sharing targeted 
at  the  wider  public  in  order  to  ensure  circulation  of  confirmed,  accurate  and  reliable 
information  and  to  counter  the  spread  of  fake  news.  To  this  end,  the  presentation  of 
documents  was  streamlined,  including  new  formats  such  as  flashes  and  communication 
packages (press  releases, news items  on the website and social media posts) accompanying 
key EMN outputs. The strategy also prompted the NCPs to increase their presence on social 
media. 

The impact of the 2021-2025 EMN communication strategy could only have been observed 
after the cut-off date of this evaluation and could not therefore be analysed. The evaluation 
confirmed,  however,  that  increasing  efforts  to  enhance  the  provision  of  information  to  the 
general public, including the production of material that could be adapted to specific national 
needs, were felt already in 2021. 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.1.2 Efficiency 

Key findings: 

•  EMN activities were delivered with a proportionate use of resources, and stakeholders 

• 

perceived the EMN as financially efficient. 
Incomplete ex-post financial data limited the precision of the cost analysis; available 
data indicate balanced use of funds across staff, events, and analytical work. 

•  The  Work  Programme-based  financial  reporting  structure  constrained  year-specific 

analysis but did not impede the assessment of overall efficiency. 

The  overall  evaluation  of  the  programme’s  efficiency  is  composed  of  the  following  two 
analyses: 

• To what  extent was the scale of the EMN funding  proportionate to  the range of activities 
performed; 

• The adequacy of EMN governance for the implementation of the activities of the Network. 

Question 3 To what extent have the resources allocated to the EMN through the AMIF 
been sufficient for meeting the objectives of Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the 
actions carried out by the EMN? 

The EMN was co-financed through AMIF resources which were distributed through different 
funding mechanisms depending on the specific activity to be supported, as shown in Table 4. 

Table 5: Breakdown of the EMN-related funding 

Type of funding 

Activity 

Grants 
Procurement 

Other actions 

Indirect management 

Activities carried out by the NCPs 
Activities of the Service Provider 
Communication 
Evaluation studies 
Activities carried out by the JRC 
IT Services 
Activities by international organisations 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The  largest  share  allocated  to  grants  out  of  the  total  EMN  budget37  corresponded  to  a 
remarkable  higher  number  of  EMN  activities  carried  out  by  the  NCPs  as  compared  to  the 
other EMN components.  

Overall,  the  evaluation  confirmed  that  the  EMN  was  considered  financially  sustainable.  As 
for the 2015 evaluation, AMIF resources were sufficient to cover the incurred costs between 
2018 and 2021. 

Question 4: Is the EMN sufficiently equipped to support its stakeholders in an 
appropriate manner? 

The structure of the EMN is outlined in the Council Decision, which provides for clear roles 
and responsibilities of the different Network’s components. 
The  various  components  of  the  Network  are  all  interlinked  through  both  top-down  and 
bottom-up  mechanisms  which  together  provide  a  central  structure  (the  EMN)  that  is 
systematically fed by peripheral inputs (National Migration Networks). 

The top-down dimension involves: 

- 

- 

- 

- 

the Steering Board, which plays executive and monitoring roles, and provides 
the Network with strategic guidance. 
the Commission, which concerts the NCPs’ activities (coordination role) and 
ensures  correspondence  between  the  objectives  and  actions  of  the  EMN  and 
the EU political priorities (political role). 
the  Service  Provider,  which  assists  the  Commission  and  provides  secretarial 
support to ensuring proper functioning of the Network in the execution of its 
day-by-day activities. 
the  NCPs,  which  play  the  two-fold  role  of  contributing  to  the  design  of  the 
work  programmes  (policy-design  role)  and  implementing  them  (operational 
role). 

The  NCPs  act  as  the  interconnection  node  with  the  bottom-up  dimension,  which  involves 
their  respective  National  Migration  Networks  in  charge  of  feeding  the  EMN  products  and 
activities with data, information and knowledge gathered at the national level. 

The  Council  Decision  envisages  a  further  layer  to  the  EMN  governance,  by  providing  for 
horizontal mechanisms aimed at ensuring regular communication and information exchange 
among the Network’s members. The Steering Board meets at least twice a year, allowing for 
exchanges among its national members. Moreover, the EMN meets at least five times a year, 
thus  allowing  for  regular  exchanges  among  NCPs.  The  Commission  acts  as  chair  of  both 
Steering Board and NCP meetings, which are all attended also by the Service Provider. While 

37 As indicated in Table 2. 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
that mechanism was found to work well, it could be further improved by involving of JRC in 
the EMN meetings (both SB and NCP) due to its extensive work in migration policy. 

In terms  of governance,  the evaluation  confirmed that  the various components  of the EMN 
worked in accordance with the EMN legal basis throughout the analysed period. 
The analysis of the minutes of the SB meetings over the evaluation period showed that all SB 
meetings  were  attended  by  at  least  one  representative  per  Member  State  and  one 
representative  of  the  Commission.  During  its  meetings,  the  SB  performed  its  tasks  in 
compliance  with  the  Council  Decision  and  provided  substantial  strategic  and  political 
guidance  to  the  Network,  a  major  improvement  on  the  situation  described  in  the  2015 
evaluation, which at that time identified limited strategic support from the SB to the NCPs. 
However, scientific experts were not involved, marking no progress since the 2015 evaluation 
when scientific experts had likewise not yet been appointed. 

As regards NCPs, their composition was in line with the Council Decision and the analysis of 
the  minutes  of  the  NCP  meetings  confirmed  that  they  performed  their  tasks  in  accordance 
with the legal basis. 

A possible improvement in supporting key stakeholders would also be a systematic exchange 
of good national practice among NCPs in various migration policy areas, for example through 
a dedicated Section in EMN products. 

Finally, it was also found that it would be useful for the EMN at the national level to have a 
strategy in place on how to establish and manage the National Migration Networks. 

Overall,  the  evaluation  confirmed  the  appropriateness  of  the  EMN  internal  structure  which 
allowed efficient management of the Network’s activities, and a good level of awareness of 
internal distribution of roles and responsibilities. 

Question 5: How efficient is the EMN Service Provider? 

The EMN Service Provider in its contribution to the smooth operation of the EMN was found 
to be efficient, responsive and supportive. However, due to its higher workload, linked to an 
accumulation of  various  tasks, the Service Provider’s  delivery  was  sometimes delayed, e.g. 
drafting and circulating EMN NCP meeting minutes. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.1.3 Coherence 

Key findings: 

•  EMN  activities  were  coherent  with  EU  migration  and  asylum  policy  developments 

and complemented the work of relevant EU agencies. 

•  EMN  outputs  aligned  with  national  priorities  and  contributed  to  consistency  across 

Member States. 

•  No  significant  overlaps  with  other  EU-level  information  or  coordination  tools  were 

identified. 

The  evaluation  analysed  whether  the  EMN  activities  were  coherent  with  the  key  policy 
initiatives as well as how consistent the objectives and the activities of the EMN  were with 
those  of  the  relevant  EU  agencies.  International  frameworks  assessed  have  been  limited  by 
the  EMN’s  mandate,  as  to  migration-related  activities  within  EU  Member  States  and  EMN 
observer countries. 

Question  6:  To  what  extent  have  the  objectives  and  activities  determined  by  Council 
Decision  2008/381/EC  and  the  actions  carried  out  by  the  EMN  been  consistent  with 
relevant  EU  policy  migration  developments,  notably  those  set  out  in  the  New  Pact  on 
Migration and Asylum such as the Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint? 

Overall  coherence  between  the  EMN  objectives  and  those  of  the  Pact  of  Migration  and 
Asylum, the EU Blue Card Directive and the EU action plan against migrant smuggling was 
confirmed in the evaluation. 

The  EMN  deliverables  to  support  policy-making  and  to  inform  the  general  public  were 
consistent with the Pact’s objective to ensure fair and efficient asylum, return and integration 
policies,  as  well  as  better  management  of  EU  external  borders.  The  EMN’s  contribution  to 
facilitating practical cooperation and the exchange of good practice represented an important 
tool for a more coordinated application of the existing EU acquis. It served to promote efforts 
to  harmonise  implementation  of  the  common  standards  governing  asylum  procedures, 
reception conditions and the recognition of TCNs applying for international protection. The 
common understanding of migration-related issues, as promoted by the EMN, supported the 
introduction of a new solidarity mechanism in  addressing a situation of migratory pressure. 
The  collection  and  exchange  of  reliable  and  up-to-date  information  also  supported  the 
development of better crisis preparedness and responses, as well as the development of new 
legal pathways in the field of migration and asylum. The EMN 2021-2022 work programme 
focused on the use of new technologies and the establishment of new legal pathways (e.g. to 
meet labour market needs and support vulnerable groups such as children in migration). The 
EMN  facilitation  of  good  practice,  practical  cooperation,  and  knowledge-building  on 
migration  and  asylum  showed  synergies  with  the  EU  Migration  Preparedness  and  Crisis 
Management Mechanism Network (Blueprint). 

20 

 
 
 
 
The EMN collected and provided information relevant to the EU Blue Card Directive. ARMs 
and country factsheets  reported annually  –  and Bulletins on a quarterly basis  – the national 
measures implemented by the Member States to regulate entry and residence of TCNs. This 
was  fully  consistent  with  the  Directive,  which  aims  to  regulate  highly  qualified  TCNs 
intending  to  work  and  reside  in  a  Member  State.  Moreover,  the  EMN’s  support  to  the 
development of enhanced migration indicators, also in collaboration with relevant EU bodies, 
proved to be consistent with the Directive. 

The EMN objectives and activities were found to be consistent with those of the EU action 
plan against  migrant  smuggling. Both  initiatives envisaged the  collection of information  on 
migrant  smuggling,  assistance  to  vulnerable  migrants  as  well  as  stronger  cooperation  with 
third  countries  to  counter  irregular  migration.  In  this  regard,  between  2018  and  2021,  the 
EMN  ARMs  and  country  factsheets  included  an  overview  of  the  latest  national  policy 
developments on the fight against migrant smuggling and irregular stays. The EMN and the 
EU action plan supported cooperation with third countries and relevant EU agencies and the 
production of objective, up-to-date, reliable, relevant, and comparable information. 

At the national level, Member States adopted policy developments in all policy areas covered 
by the EMN between 2018 and 202138. They were overall consistent with the key priorities 
outlined in  subsequent  EMN  work programmes as  well as with  the main topics  covered by 
EMN  outputs.  The  only  three  exceptions  were:  age  assessment  and  procedures,  national 
referral  mechanisms,  and  diaspora  in  cooperation  activities.  These  policy  areas  were  not 
addressed by any  work  programme  or outputs  produced by the Network between 2018  and 
2021.  However,  all  Member  States  took  actions  related  to  such  policy  areas,  pointing  to 
policy priorities that go beyond the scope of action of the Network. 

Question  7:  To  what  extent  have  the  objectives  and  activities  determined  by  Council 
Decision  2008/381/EC  and  the  actions  carried  out  by  the  EMN  been  consistent  with 
other  objectives  and  activities  of  Member  States  and  EU  agencies,  including  notably 
EUAA, Frontex and FRA? 

The  EMN  objectives  and  scope  of  activities  reflected  the  EU  priorities  in  the  field  of 
migration and analysis, as outlined in the key policy areas covered by the EMN products and 
activities.  All  these  areas  corresponded  to  political  priorities  across  the  Member  States,  as 
demonstrated by related policy developments occurred between 2018 and 2021. 

The EMN remained active in all the policy areas and responded to the information needs of 
Member States. 

38 Legal migration, international protection, unaccompanied minors and other vulnerable groups, integration and 
inclusion, citizenship and statelessness, borders, visas and Schengen, irregular migration including migrant 
smuggling,  trafficking  in  adult  human  beings,  return  and  readmission,  and  migration  and  development 
cooperation. 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
A high degree of coherence and consistency  with the objectives and activities of the EMN, 
EUAA, FRA and Frontex was confirmed in the evaluation. 

The evaluation identified a number of mechanisms in place to avoid overlap or duplication of 
efforts: 

- 

- 

the legal basis of both the EMN and the Agencies includes specific provisions aimed 
at avoiding overlaps, while at the same time reinforcing mutual synergies; 
representatives from the Agencies were regularly invited to EMN meetings to foster 
collaboration and avoid duplication of activities; 

-  EUAA  and  Frontex  users  were  granted  access  to  the  EMN  Information  Exchange 

- 

System; 
the  EMN  also  took  specific  actions  to  contain  the  risk  of  duplications,  given  that 
EUAA also produced AHQs and studies. 

Moreover, the EMN 2017-2018 work programme emphasised the need to avoid duplication 
between ARMs and EUAA’s Annual Asylum Reports39. The evaluation confirmed that there 
was  no  duplication  of  activities  conducted  by  the  EMN  and  the  EUAA.  Similarly,  FRA’s 
products over time dealt with migration-related issues such as borders, Schengen and visas, 
integration, 
readmissions,  and 
unaccompanied  minors  and  vulnerable  groups,  though  their  focus  remain  always  on 
individuals’ rights. FRA addressed only a few of the indicators covered by the ARMs Finally, 
the  analysis  and  reports  developed  by  Frontex  covered  a  subset  of  indicators  related  to  the 
irregular  migration  policy  area,  while  bypassing  many  within  other  policy  areas  covered 
instead by the ARMs 

international  protection,  and  asylum, 

return  and 

39  EMN  2017-18  work  programme.  Available  at:https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/funding/asylum-migration-

and-integration-funds/european-migration-network-emn_en 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4.2 How did the EU intervention make a difference and to whom? 

4.2.1 EU added value 

Key findings: 

•  The EMN delivered added value by providing structured, comparable information that 

could not be generated as effectively by Member States acting alone. 

•  The  EMN  facilitated  regular  exchange,  peer  learning,  and  shared  analyses  that 

supported coordinated EU approaches. 

•  The thematic coverage and methodological consistency of EMN outputs strengthened 

cross-country comparability and policy dialogue. 

The evaluation analysed key aspects of the EU added value of the EMN: its unique position 
and mandate as well as the legal basis and EU funding. 

Question 8: What is the European added value of Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the 
actions carried out by the EMN? Could the main findings (results/outputs) presented in 
the evaluation have been achieved without EU intervention? 

The  evaluation  confirmed  that  many  EMN  achievements  could  not  have  been  produced 
without  the  support  of  the  Network,  particularly  the  exchange  of  good  practice  and 
strengthening  practical  cooperation  among  the  Member  States,  as  well  as  addressing  the 
information needs of national policymakers. 

The  EMN  brought  added  value,  including  direct  support  for  enhanced  cooperation  both 
within the EU and beyond. The permanent nature of the EMN and its unique position created 
an environment in which relationships were built and mutual trust among actors in the field 
of  migration  and  asylum  could  develop,  both  among  and  within  the  Member  States. 
Developing  stable  relationships  with  national  actors  was  key  to  getting  access  to  hard  data 
and ensuring the production of up-do-date and comprehensive information. 

The  EU  intervention  proved  indispensable  in  making  the  provision  of  information  a  stable 
and widely recognised mechanism. 

Question  9:  What  is  the  additional  value  resulting  from  EMN  products  and  activities 
compared to what could be achieved by Member States at national and/or local levels? 

It was confirmed in the evaluation that no other network nor organisation at the EU level, or 
at a local level, was capable of offering the same structured procedures and quality standards 
for information collection and sharing, as well as of ensuring communication and exchanges 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
of data among all the Member States. The unique value of the EMN that was identified was a 
‘one-stop-shop’  function  for  migration-related  information  at  the  EU  level  not  available 
elsewhere. 

It was also confirmed that the information produced by the EMN remained a unique source in 
terms of quality, comprehensiveness and relevance when compared to other sources available 
at  the  national  level,  thanks  also  to  support  from  EMN  WGs  focused  on  specific  EMN 
products. 

The  information  contained  in  the  EMN  products  was  a  source  of  inspiration  for  policy 
debates at the EU level. Due to their broad spectrum of thematic and geographical coverage, 
several EMN studies supported the introduction and/or revision of EU policy and legislative 
initiatives. One example is the proposal for a Directive on common standards and procedures 
in  Member  States  for  returning  illegally  staying  third-country  nationals40,  which  was 
informed by the 2018 EMN study on the effectiveness of return in EU Member States. 

However,  identifying  information  needs  that  were  relevant  to  all  Member  States  and 
producing  comparable  information  based  on  data  provided  by  all  of  them  entailed  multiple 
rounds of consultations and negotiations which required a substantial amount of time. 

Question 10: To what extent are the outcomes of Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the 
actions  carried  out  by  the  EMN  sustainable?  Are  the  effects  likely  to  last  after  the 
intervention ends? 

The  evaluation  revealed  that  if  the  EMN  were  to  be  discontinued,  it  would  be  difficult  to 
ensure a stable delivery of its activities and deliverables at a comparable level. In particular, 
key activities whose continued existence would be at risk were believed to be: the National 
Migration Networks, the exchange of information with third countries, and the production of 
national reports on migration and asylum in all the Member States. The regular collection of 
national migration data and the exchange of information across the Member States were seen 
as  potentially  being  less  impacted  if  the  EMN  were  discontinued.  The  two  functions,  if 
continued in a different EU mechanism, would be unlikely to ensure production of EU-level 
data at  the same comprehensive and  granular level  as was the case with  the EMN  over the 
evaluation period. 

40 COM/2018/634 final. 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Question 11: Is the Council Decision 2008/381/EC still an adequate basis of the actions 
of the EMN? 

It  was  reconfirmed  during  the  evaluation  that  Council  Decision  2008/381/EC  provided  a 
sufficient mandate towards achieving the EMN objectives, ensuring the provision of reliable, 
comparable, and up-to date information on migration and asylum in a neutral manner. 

It provides for a ‘matrix’ approach to data collection which makes the information produced 
by  the  EMN  one  of  a  kind.  The  EMN  structure  envisaged  by  the  Council  Decision  indeed 
provides for a two-fold dimension. 

•  Horizontal  dimension  –  According  to  Article 5  of  the  Council  Decision,  each  Member 
State should designate an NCP composed of at least three experts, one of which acting as 
coordinator.  In  turn,  each  NCP  should  establish  a  National  Migration  Network 
comprising a wide range of organisations and individuals active in the field of migration 
and  asylum.  This  networking  structure  allows  professionals  and  practitioners  from  a 
variety  of  organisations  to  come  together  to  identify,  collect  and  analyse  data  and 
information  that  is  often  scattered  across  multiple  national  stakeholders  dealing  with 
migration and asylum at the national level. At the same time, the ‘horizontal capillarity’ 
of  the  EMN  facilitates  the  sharing  of  its  products  and  results  beyond  the  Network’s 
stakeholders. 

•  Vertical  dimension  –  NCPs  are  part  of  an  integrated  structure  coordinated  by  the 
Commission supported by an external Service Provider. Moreover, according to Article 4 
of  the  Council  Decision,  each  Member  State  designates  a  national  representative  as 
member  of  the  EMN  Steering  Board,  which  also  includes  a  representative  of  the 
Commission  acting  as  chair.  The  vertical  dimension  facilitates  the  integration, 
comparability  and  exchange  of  information  collected  across  the  Member  States,  thus 
contributing  towards  practical  cooperation  and  mutual  understanding  in  the  field  of 
migration and asylum. 

This  two-fold  structure  is  a  key  feature  of  the  EMN  as  it  helps  the  EU  cope  with  the 
multidimensional migration phenomenon. 

The format of the EMN as an EU-level network was found to be tailored well to meeting the 
needs of stakeholders in the migration and asylum field for the production and exchange of 
knowledge, including statistics, as well as of enhanced cooperation among Member States. 

Question  12:  Could  the  results,  delivered  through  the  implementation  of  the  Council 
Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried out by the EMN have been achieved with 
less  European  funding?  Could  the  use  of  other  policy  instruments  or  mechanisms,  at 
European and/or national level, have provided better cost-effectiveness? 

The  EMN  funding  from  AMIF  proved  to  be  pivotal  in  ensuring  the  achievement  and 
sustainability of the results and benefits achieved by the Network. No other alternative in the 

25 

 
 
 
 
form  of  existing  policy  instruments  or  mechanisms  would  be  capable  of  providing  a 
comparable amount of information at the quality required by Member States. 

4.3 Is the intervention still relevant? 

The  relevance  of  the  EMN  has  been  analysed  in  the  evaluation  both  against  the  challenges 
facing the EU and stakeholders’ evolving needs. 

Question 13: To what extent have Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried 
out  by  the  EMN  been  relevant  in  view  of  the  EU’s  needs/challenges  and  are  they  still 
relevant in view of current needs and challenges? 

While  the  EMN’s  main  objective  remained  unchanged  during  the  evaluation  period,  the 
specific objectives listed in the work programmes evolved, with an increasing focus on new 
technologies and enhanced cooperation with third countries. 

This evolving focus reflected the emerging challenges and policy developments that shaped 
the  EU  migration  and  asylum  landscape  over  the  years.  The  newly  identified  needs  were 
related to two key factors affecting the EU migration and asylum system between 2018 and 
2021,  i.e.  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  the  sudden  increase  in  the  number  of  both  asylum 
applications and irregular border crossings. 

The relevance of the Network to key EU priorities was further confirmed by the high level of 
alignment between the scope of the EMN written deliverables, conferences and events on the 
one hand and the challenges and priorities in the field of migration and asylum in the EU on 
the other. 

Table 6 – Coverage of EU priorities in the EMN outputs 

EU priority 

AHQs 

Informs  Studies  Conferences  Other events 

COVID-19 
Border management 
Labour market 
Vulnerable groups 
Innovation in migration 
Migration management 
Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

5 
95 
37 
18 
10 
33 

7 
15 
1 
7 
4 
0 

1  
0 
0 
0 
3  
5  

0 
7 
3 
2 
1 
4 

5 
0 
1 
0 
0 
3 

Question 14: To what extent have Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried 
out  by  the  EMN  been  relevant  in  view  of  specific  needs  of  stakeholders,  in  particular 
Member States and civil society? 

26 

 
 
 
 
Alignment  between  the  focus  of  the  EMN  activities  and  products  and  the  priority  topics 
proposed  by  NCPs  was  ensured  throughout  the  evaluation  period.  The  EMN  mechanisms 
guaranteed  that  the  Network’s  activities  and  outputs  were  relevant  to  its  stakeholders.  The 
proposed topics of deliverables were always approved by the SB in a vote, which guaranteed 
alignment  with  the  information  needs  and  national  priorities  of  a  majority  of  the  Member 
States.  It  was  also  confirmed  in  the  evaluation  that  the  EMN  products  met  the  information 
needs of the NCPs, of policymakers at the national level in the field of migration and asylum, 
as well as of the National Migration Networks. 

Some  room  for  improvement  was  identified  within  the  time-consuming  EMN  publication 
procedures.  The  evaluation  confirmed  that  the  topic  selection  process  required  a  series  of 
negotiation  rounds,  reducing  the  EMN’s  timeliness  which,  in  turn,  affected  its  overall 
effectiveness  and  relevance.  On  the  other  hand,  in  terms  of  the  overall  integrity  of  the 
process, the proposal and ranking of study topics were handled in a well-structured manner, 
beginning with the proposal of study topics, merging or reformulating of proposals, ranking 
through a vote, and final submission to the SB. 

Another  area  where  relevance  could  be  further  improved  is  EU-wide  comparability  of 
migration statistics collected at  the national  level. Specific guidelines on national  migration 
statistics would be useful to address the deficiency. 

Although  the  Network  was  found  fit  for  purpose  as  regards  the  needs  of  national 
policymakers,  only  partial  alignment  with  the  needs  of  the  general  public  was  confirmed, 
similarly  to  the  findings  of  the  2015  evaluation.  In  order  to  address  that  shortcoming,  the 
EMN  2021-2025  communication  strategy  provided  for  mainstreamed  and  improved 
presentation  of  EMN  products,  including  the  production  of  flashes,  reader-friendly  outputs 
with  a  more  engaging  presentation  to  be  more  appealing  and  accessible  to  the  general 
public41. Adjusting EMN products to meet the needs of the general public was also facilitated 
by  enhancing  and  expanding  EMN  partnerships  and  networking  to  embrace  both  broader 
engagement  by  knowledge  centres  with  various  individuals  and  practitioners  beyond 
policymakers. 

41 EMN communication strategy (2021-2025). 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
5. WHAT ARE THE CONCLUSIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED? 

5.1 Conclusions 

Between 2018 and 2021, the EMN’s  performance was  found to  be  in  line with  its mandate 
and  its  objectives.  Compared  to  the  2015  evaluation,  the  EMN  improved  its  capacity  to 
support EU policy-making in the field of migration and asylum. Two main mechanisms made 
it  possible  for  the  EMN  to  support  the  Network.  First,  the  EMN  provided  up-to-date, 
objective,  reliable,  comparable,  easily  readable,  and  accessible  information,  which  was 
widely  used  to  identify  and  respond  to  EU  policy  priorities,  to  design  and  implement  new 
policy  initiatives  and  to  inform  national  policy  and  decision-making.  Second,  the  EMN 
contributed to mutual understanding and trust building among its various stakeholders. 

EMN’s  increasing  effectiveness  was  also  confirmed  in  focusing  on  activities  enhancing  its 
visibility (EMN’s online platform, central and national websites, the various EMN products, 
social  media  accounts  and  EMN  events).  Further  strengthening  of  that  role  was  found 
necessary at the Member State level in order to better mobilise national partners to promote 
EMN activities. 

Analysing efficiency of the EMN in the evaluation posed a methodological challenge due to 
the missing financial data. Despite the limitations regarding availability of financial data and 
basing  the  analysis  on  budgetary  allocations  (and  not  on  actually  incurred  costs,  as  these 
continue  not  to  be  available  for  the  EMN  as  a  whole  due  to  delayed  reporting  by  some 
Member States), the evaluation confirmed that the funding from AMIF was largely sufficient 
to cover the operation of the EMN and proportionate to the plethora of activities carried out 
by the EMN. It was also found that the architecture of the EMN governance was adequate for 
the purpose of implementing the various activities according to the Work Programmes in the 
period  under  evaluation.  Also,  the  EMN  Service  Provider  played  an  important  part  in 
ensuring smooth operation of the Network.  

At the EU level, a high level of coherence between EMN activities and key EU priorities in 
the  field  of  migration  and  asylum  was  confirmed  in  the  evaluation.  The  objectives  of  the 
EMN were found to be aligned with the selected relevant initiatives taken in the EU during 
the evaluation period, namely the Pact on Migration and Asylum, the revised EU Blue Card 
Directive,  the  EU  action  plan  against  migrant  smuggling.  The  EMN’s  comprehensive 
approach  to  the  migration  phenomenon  was  also  found  to  be  consistently  in  line  with  the 
specific scope of action of each of these initiatives. These initiatives were highlighted due to 
their  direct  relevance  to  the  EMN’s  analytical  and  information  exchange  activities,  while 
recognising that this not exhaustive for migration policy developments during the evaluation 
period.  Their  inclusion  reflects  the  specific  policy  areas  in  which  Member  States  most 
frequently sought  comparative information and  analytical  support.  The uniqueness  of  EMN 
products  lies  in  the  broad  spectrum  of  topics  covered  in  its  deliverables  as  well  as  in  the 
capacity to collect data and information directly by the Member States which translated into 
higher reliability and comparability. Finally, enhanced cooperation between the EMN and the 

28 

 
 
representatives at the EU level served to ensure that the common purposes did not cause any 
duplication of efforts. 

At the national level, a high level of consistency between topics covered by EMN outputs and 
Member States’ policy developments between 2018 and 2021 was  also identified. This was 
primarily the result of the EMN consultative selection process of topics to be prioritised in its 
products,  which  required  several  rounds  of  consultations  between  the  Commission  and  the 
Member States both in the SB and the NCPs which helped to respond to the needs of various 
stakeholders  at  the  national  level.  The  consultative  process,  a  distinctive  feature  of  the 
Network,  had,  however,  its  relative  weakness:  the  reiterated  rounds  of  consultation  were 
time-consuming. Yet, the perceived cost of consultation rounds was found to be overweighed 
by the benefits of the process and the consensus reached. 

The  evaluation  also  found  that  the  responsiveness  of  the  EMN  to  the  needs  of  the  general 
public  remained  an  area  requiring  further  improvement.  The  information  produced  by  the 
EMN was at times of a technical nature and therefore not adequately tailored to the needs of 
the  general  public.  Room  for  improvement  was  also  identified  in  how  EMN  results  are 
shared.  Despite  achieving  increased  visibility  for  the  EMN  at  the  EU  level,  information-
sharing activities at the national level, including communication with the media, proved to be 
somewhat  limited  both  in  numbers  and  outreach,  and  communication  of  EMN  activities 
remained mainly limited to the circle of policymakers.  In order to address this, in 2021 the 
EMN  took  several  actions  aimed  at  enhancing  the  communication  and  publication  of  its 
activities  and  results  among  the  wider  public.  The  effects  of  these  efforts  will  be  analysed 
during the next evaluation of the EMN. 

The evaluation confirmed that the EMN brought remarkable EU added value. Fostering the 
exchange and provision of high-quality and comparative information and good practice in the 
field of migration and asylum as well as enhancing practical cooperation in migration policy 
between  the  Member  States,  the  EU  and  international  organisations,  and  among  national 
actors  could  not  have  been  achieved  at  a  comparable  level  without  the  activities  of  the 
Network.  In  addition,  EMN  products  contributed  to  a  common  understanding  of  key 
migration-related features among policymakers in EU Member States. 

If the EMN had been discontinued, it would have been difficult to ensure the continuation of 
its  activities,  especially  the  existence  of  National  Migration  Networks,  the  exchange  of 
information  with  third  countries,  and  the  production  of  national  reports  on  migration  and 
asylum in all the Member States. In this context, the legal base of the EMN was found to be 
adequate, as it provided sufficient mandate which were matched by commensurate resources 
to attain the EMN’s objectives. 

29 

 
 
 
5.2 Lessons learned 

The evaluation of the activities of the EMN in the period 2018-2021 identified five areas as 
lessons  learned,  where  more  focus  and  monitoring  would  be  useful  to  further  enhance  the 
operation of the EMN in the future: 

•  maintaining full consistency between the evolving EU policy priorities and the EMN 

activities defined in the work programmes; 

•  ensuring  that  the  Joint  Research  Centre  is  regularly  involved  in  the  SB  and  NCP 

meetings; 
including a section on national good practices in the EMN products; 

• 
•  developing  guidelines  on 
collaboration with Eurostat; 

the  production  of  national  migration  statistics 

in 

•  drafting a strategy on how to establish and manage the National Migration Networks. 

30 

 
 
 
 
ANNEX I  PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 

1.  Lead DG and Decide reference 

The  evaluation  was  managed  by  the  European  Commission’s  Directorate-General  for 
Migration and Security, DG HOME Unit C5: Migration Management Preparedness. 

2.  Derogations granted 

A  derogation  was  granted  from  the  obligation  to  carry  out  a  public  consultation.  The 
derogation was justified by the fact that the evidence underpinning the analysis could only be 
collected  from  the  EMN  stakeholders.  The  general  public,  not  being  EMN  technical 
stakeholders, could not provide any relevant input. 

3.  Organisation and timing 

The evaluation was supported by a service contract, which was signed on 4 May 2023 and the 
final report was delivered on 8 May 2024. An Interservice Steering Group (ISG) was set up 
comprising the following EC services: Secretariat-General, DG Employment, Social Affairs 
and  Inclusion,  DG  International  Partnerships,  DG  Neighbourhood  and  Enlargement 
Negotiations, Joint Research Centre, DG Humanitarian Aid and Civil Protection. 3 meetings 
of the ISG were held. 

4.  Evidence and sources 

Evidence was gathered from several types of sources: a Call for evidence was published on 
16 January  2023  and  was  closed  on  16 March  2023;  an  online  survey  targeted  at  29  NCPs 
and  555  National  Migration  Network  members,  3  strategic  interviews,  33  targeted  and  10 
flash interviews, 6 case studies and a workshop  with  24 NCP coordinators, as well as desk 
research. The main body of evidence consisted of the replies to the survey. 

5.  External expertise 

The  evaluation  supporting  study  was  carried  out  by  a  consortium  composed  of  Ernst  and 
Young Consulting and RAND. 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX II  METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL MODELS USED 

In  order  to  gather  all  the  data  and  other  evidence  needed  to  meet  the  objectives  of  the 
evaluation,  the  data  collection  strategy  of  the  external  study  used  combined  both  desk 
research  and fieldwork activities. Desk resources provided mainly  relevant  data and  factual 
evidence  on  the  functioning  of  the  EMN  including  its  structure,  governance,  activities  (i.e. 
networking, dissemination and communication) and actual products. Field research activities 
allowed the team to gather in-depth qualitative insights on how and why specific results have 
been achieved and collect inputs on possible lessons learned for the future. 

Overall, data and information collected during the evaluation proved to be robust. Reliability 
and validity of results was ensured through systematic triangulation of data and information 
collected through both desk and field sources. 

In  general,  the  main  limitation  encountered  pertained  to  the timing  differences  between  the 
period in  which the study has been  conducted (2023-2024) and the scope of the evaluation 
(2018-2021). This affected the consultation process. Only few of the current NCP members 
and/or  SB  members  were  involved  in  EMN  activities  between  2018  and  2021.  Thus,  they 
were not able to provide relevant feedback and information for the period under evaluation. 
To mitigate this limitation, guidelines for targeted interviews with SB members were shared 
in  advance  to  allow  interviewees  that  were  not  in  place  between  2018  and  2021  to  be 
adequately briefed by former colleagues on the EMN activities performed during that period. 
Moreover, in some cases, the current SB members attended the interview together with their 
predecessors. 

Moreover, the study identified some issues affecting the functioning of the Network between 
2018  and  2021  for  which  actions  have  been  already  taken  by  the  EMN  at  the  end  of  the 
evaluation period. Though the assessment of the effects stemming from such actions fall out 
of  the  scope  of  this  evaluation,  consulted  stakeholders  pointed  out  that  some  of  the  issues 
identified  by  this  evaluation  have  been  addressed  or  at  least  mitigated  by  the  new  actions, 
thus  they  might  not  be  relevant  today.  This  is  a  point  to  be  considered  as  part  of  the  next 
EMN evaluation. 

Lastly, the lack of available data related to the type of costs entailed by NCPs to implement 
EMN activities prevented to have a full quantification of the costs of EMN activities. In this 
regard,  cost  quantification  was  limited  to  the  type  of  costs  (i.e.  staff,  travel,  drafting  of 
Ad hoc queries) for which financial data were available. 

32 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Desk Research 

The EMN is a complex network, including multiple and evolving priorities, a vast range of 
actors, and a lot of outputs. Therefore, also based on the experience gained through the 2015 
evaluation of the EMN, and as highlighted by the ToR (p. 6), the desk research constituted a 
primary data collection activity in the context of this study. 

Table 1 – Approach used for conducting in-depth desk research 

Type of document   Analytical approach  

EMN Work Programmes  

Work programmes  

EMN Products  

Ad Hoc Queries (AHQs)  

• 

3  Work  programmes  (2017-18,  2019-20,  2021-22)  were  analysed  to 
investigate  EMN objectives and priorities, as well as actions set  out over 
the years.  

• 

303 AHQs were analysed in terms of no. of AHQs launched/addressed per 
year, country, topic.  

Reports 
on 
and  Asylum 

•  The  synthesis  of  4  ARMs  (2018,  2019,  2020,  2021)  were  analysed  to 
investigate EU and national policy developments as well as challenges and 
needs in the field of migration and asylum.  

Annual 
Migration 
(ARMs)  

Bulletins  

Country Factsheets  

Flashes  

Informs  

Studies  

Status Report  

EMN back-office documents  

Financial statements  

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

27 bulletins1 were analysed in terms of number of bulletins issued per year 
and topic.  

6 country factsheets (2021) from the Member States selected countries for 
the  case  studies  were  analysed  and  reported  in  Annex  IV  to  outline  key 
national  strategies  and  policy  developments  in  the  field  of  migration  and 
asylum.  

18  flashes2  were  analysed  in  terms  of  number  of  flashes  issued  per  year 
and topic.  

28 informs were analysed in terms of number of informs issued per year 
and topic.  

13 studies were analysed.3  

4 status reports (2018, 2019, 2020, 2021) were analysed.  

•  The EMN budget foreseen from 2018 to 2021 was analysed in terms of (i) 
resources allocated to each NCP and (ii) resources allocated/spent by each 
NCP  to  different  types  of  activities  –  e.g.  outreaching  activities, 

33 

 
 
 
conferences and other events. 

•  Grant  agreements  for  Member  States  selected  for  the  case  studies  (2017-

2022). 

•  Periodic summary of financial statements for Member States selected for 

the case studies (2017-2022). 

•  Project assessment reports for Member States selected for the case studies 

(2017-2022).  

Minutes  of  key  EMN 
meetings and events  

•  Minutes  of  8  selected  EMN  Steering  Board  meetings  and  NCP  meetings 
respectively  were  analysed  in  terms  of  topics  covered,  discussions  held, 
actions undertaken, number and type of participants.  

reports 

Attendance 
for 
EMN  Working  Group 
meetings  

Documents related to EMN 
and 
dissemination 
communication activities  

•  List  of  participants  in  the  EMN  Working  Groups  meetings  (2018-2021) 

was analysed.  

• 

2  EMN  Communication  Strategies  (2016-2020,  2021-2025)  were 
analysed. 

•  EMN Communication and Dissemination Roadmap (2019) was analysed. 

•  EMN Communication Toolkit (2021) was analysed.  

Internal rules of procedure  

•  Product templates and guidelines  

EU legislative and policy initiatives  

legal,  strategic,  and 

EU 
operational documents  

•  Council Decision (2008/381/EC). 

•  The  Directive  (EU)  2021/1883  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 

Council of 20 October 2021. 

•  Regulation (EU) 2021/2303 of the European Parliament and of the Council 

of 15 December 2021. 

•  Council Regulation (EC) No 168/2007 of 15 February 2007 establishing a 

European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. 

•  Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council 

of 13 November 2019. 

•  The  following  documents  were  analysed  to  understand  key  recent  EU 

policy developments: 

o  Commission  Communication  on  action  plan  against  migrant  smuggling 

(2015-2020); 

o  EU strategy on voluntary return and reintegration; 

34 

 
 
o  Commission Communication on return and readmission; 

o  Commission Communication on New Pact on Migration and Asylum; 

o  EU  blueprint  for  preparedness  and  management  of  crises  related  to 

migration.  

• 

3 EU agencies (i.e. EUAA, Frontex, FRA) were analysed in terms of legal 
basis in order to outline objectives and tasks.  

EU agencies  

Others  

Relevant databases  

•  Eurostat statistical data on migration and asylum. 

•  KCMD Data+ Catalogue, Atlas of Migration, Dynamic Data Hub and EU 

Return Dashboard.  

Websites  

•  EMN Website. 

•  National Websites of the Member States.  

Field research 

The  operational  and  strategic  levels  of  the  Network  reflect  a  clear  distribution  of  tasks  and 
roles  played  by  the  different  EMN  stakeholders.  Acknowledging  differences  in  terms  of 
governance  and  structure  of  the  Network  allowed  the  proper  design  of  the  study’s 
consultation strategy, i.e. ask the relevant questions and use the appropriate tool. For instance, 
the  team  undertook  targeted  interviews  with  national  representatives  in  the  EMN  Steering 
Board. The advisory and strategic role played by this group makes the interview a preferable 
tool  for  capturing  nuances  and  information  that  might  not  be  disclosed  through  an  online 
survey. The survey was instead targeted at members of the NCPs and the National Migration 
Networks  in  order  to  collect  operational  information  that  was  then  integrated  into  a 
comparative  cross-cutting  analysis  of  the  EMN  functioning  and  results.  Besides  EMN 
members,  specific  attention  was  paid  to  gathering  practical  information  from  different 
stakeholders,  including  EU  institutions  and  bodies,  relevant  international  organisations, 
representatives from  academia and Civil Society Organisations. Table 2 provides a detailed 
overview of the stakeholder consultation strategy. 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 2 – Stakeholder consultation strategy 

Tool 

Stakeholders targeted 

Topics 

Stakeholders consulted 

Strategic 
interviews (4)  

•  EMN  chair  -  Head 
Sector, 

of 
Forecasting, 
preparedness 
policy monitoring 

and 

•  Any  changes  occurred  since  the 
last  evaluation,  as  regards  both 
the  EMN  working  mechanisms 
and its context of reference 

• 

Policy 
responsible 
EMN budget  

officer 
for 

•  The  current  state  of  play  of 
migration and asylum in the EU, 
including  known  problems  and 
main issues at stake 

•  New  insights  (e.g.  contacts  of 

relevant stakeholders) 

•  Level  of  engagement  of 
in 

target  groups 

EMN 
Network’s activities 

the 
the 

•  Level  of  responsiveness  of  the 
the 

Network  stakeholders 
EMN inputs/requests 

to 

• 

• 

of 
State 
relationships/partnerships  with 
other EU agencies/bodies 

State  of  implementation  of  the 
objectives  set  in  the  WPs,  along 
with  factors  that  might  have 
adversely/positively 
affected 
their achievement 

•  Categories 

of 

costs/benefits 
associated  with  participation  in 
the Network  

Flash 
interviews 
(10)  

•  National 
Contact 
Points 
(BE,  CY, 
DE,  FI,  FR,  IE,  LT, 
LU, NL, SE)  

•  Overview 

of 

NCP 
participation  in  and  contribution 
to the EMN activities 

the 

•  Main  strengths  and  weaknesses 

of the EMN activities  

•  Two 

additional 
interviews  with  DG 
been 
HOME 
the 
performed  during 
the 
final  phase  of 
evaluation.  

have 

•  These  interviews  have 
been  performed  in  the 
occasion  of  the  129th 
NCP  meeting  held  in 
Brussels  on  29 June 
2023, with NCPs which 
volunteered 
be 
interviewed.  

to 

Online  survey 
(2)  

•  National 

Contact 

Points (27) 

•  Effectiveness, 

efficiency, 
relevance,  coherence  and  EU 
added value of the EMN 

• 

•  National  Migration 
Networks (67)  

• 

Problems/gaps 
the 
functioning  and  effects  of  the 

affecting 

36 

total,  27 

For  the  online  survey 
for  NCP  coordinators, 
survey 
in 
responses 
25 
Member  States  and  2 
Observer  States  were 
received out of 29 NCPs 

from 

 
 
EMN 

• 

Future recommendations  

• 

from  26  Member  States 
and  3  Observer  States 
consulted. 

For  the  online  survey 
for  National  Migration 
Network  members, 
in 
total, 67 responses from 
19  Member  States  were 
received  out  of  555 
National 
Migration 
Network  members  from 
26  Member 
States 
consulted.  

Targeted 
interviews 
(33)  

•  Members 

of 
EMN SB (23) 

the 

• 

Interviews 
stakeholders: 

with 

EU-level 

•  As per target.  

•  EU bodies (4): 

o  EUAA 

o  FRA 

o  Frontex 

o 

• 

Joint 
Center (JRC) 

Research 

International 
organisations (2): 

o  CoE 

o  OECD 

•  Civil 

society 

organisations (3): 

o  European  Network 
on Statelessness 

o  Developments 

in 

the  EU 

migration and asylum landscape 

o  Relevant  EU 

initiatives  and 

regulatory frameworks 

o  Role 

EU 

Agencies 
of 
contributing 
to  migration  and 
asylum  policies,  and  challenges 
faced 
higher 
coordination 

achieving 

in 

o  Collaborations/partnerships 
developed with the Network 

o  Burdens/benefits  associated  with 

engaging with the EMN 

o  Recommendations  to  improving 
and 

functioning 

the  EMN 
mandate 

o  Good practices 

Children 

• 

Interviews 
stakeholders: 

with 

national 

o  Missing 
Europe 

o  PICUM 

•  Representatives 

from academia (1)  

o  Relevant  national  developments 
in  the  field  of  migration  and 
asylum 

o  Dissemination/outreach  of 

the 
Network at the national and local 
levels 

o  Progress  made  on  enlarging  the 
National Migration Networks 

o  Categories 

of 

costs/benefits 

37 

 
 
associated  with  participation  in 
the Network 

o  Member  States  non-financial 
the  Network 

to 

contribution 
activities 

o  Collaboration/partnership 
developed  with/through 
Network 

the 

o  Factors 

that  might 

have 
adversely/positively  affected  the 
objectives set in the WPs 

o  Good  practices  implemented  at 

the local/regional level 

o 

Interviews with international and 
civil society organisations: 

o  Opinion  on  relevance,  quality, 
availability  and  accessibility  of 
EMN  outputs,  as  well  as  any 
suggestions for improvement 

o  Experience in using EMN tools 

o 

Involvement in EMN networking 
activities 

o  Collaboration/partnership 

developed through the Network 

o  Categories 

of 

costs/benefits 
associated  with  participation  in 
the Network 

o  Competing 

channels/networks/organisations 
preferred to the EMN 

• 

Interviews  with  representatives 
from academia: 

o  Overall  quality  of 

the  EMN 

publications 

o  Relevance  of  the  topics  covered 

by the EMN activities 

o  Added value of the EMN  

Direct 
observations 
(2)  

• 

Steering 
meeting (1) 

Board 

• 

the  EMN, 
of 
Functioning 
including  structure  governance 
and working practices  

•  As per target.  

•  NCP meeting (1)  

38 

 
 
study 

Case 
consultations 
(11)  

•  Each 

study 
case 
entailed  two  types 
of consultations: 

•  Efficiency  of  the  EMN  at  the 

• 

national level 

o 

o 

interview 
1  group 
with  NCP  members 
of 
the 
each  of 
selected  Member 
States (6) 

of 

1  focus  group  with 
members 
the 
National  Migration 
Network  from  each 
of 
selected 
Member States (5)  

the 

•  Coherence  of  EMN  objectives 
those 
activities  with 
and 
enshrined  in  relevant  national 
policies and strategies 

•  Relevance  of  EMN  objectives 
and  activities 
to 
current  needs  and  challenges 
faced by national stakeholders 

relation 

in 

•  Added value of the EMN  

in 

the 

Instead of 6 focus group 
total 
interviews 
considering 
one 
consultation  from  each 
selected 
6 
of 
Member  States,  only  5 
were  conducted  due  to 
unavailability 
of 
stakeholders 
relevant 
from 
one  Member 
State.  

Workshop 
with 
coordinators 
(1)  

NCP 

•  One  workshop  with 

• 

NCP coordinators  

to 
Insights  and  experiences 
inform  the  design  of  operational 
conclusions 
factual 
recommendations  

and 

•  As per target.  

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  III   EVALUATION  MATRIX  AND,  WHERE  RELEVANT,  DETAILS  ON 
ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS 

1.1 EFFECTIVENESS 

Table 1 – Evaluation Matrix 

Judgment criteria  

Indicators and descriptors  

Sources  

EQ1  To  what  extent  have  the  EMN  activities  contributed  to  achieving  the  specific  and  general  objectives  laid  down  in 
Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried out by the EMN?  

EQ1.1  To  what  extent  did  EMN activities  contribute  to  achieving  the objectives  set  out in the  Work  Programmes  and  the 
Council Decision?  

General objectives: 

•  The 

information 
and 
knowledge  produced  by  the 
EMN 
EU 
support 
policymaking  in  the  field  of 
migration and asylum 

•  The EMN provides up-to-date, 
objective, 
and 
comparable  information  to  the 
general public 

reliable 

Specific objectives: 

•  The 

information 
and 
knowledge  produced  by  the 
the 
EMN 
of 
information 
policymakers 

to 
needs 

responds 

•  The 

information 
and 
knowledge  produced  by  the 
EMN 
the 
information  needs  of  various 
target groups 

responds 

to 

•  The 

and 
information 
knowledge  produced  by  the 
EMN  complements 
that  of 
other  EU  and  Member  States 
initiatives 

•  The 

information 
and 
knowledge  produced  by  the 
EMN  contribute  to  enhancing 
the  EU  capacity  to  respond  to 
migration and asylum crises 

•  The 

information 

and 

•  Level of correspondence between 
topics  covered  by  EMN 
the 
outputs  and  key 
information 
needs  of  EU  and  national 
stakeholders 

•  Extent to which EU and national 
policymakers perceive that EMN 
outputs increase their knowledge 
and  understanding  of  migration 
and asylum issues 

Desk sources 

•  Council Decision 2008/381 

•  EMN Work Programmes 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN back-office documents 

Field sources 

•  Online survey targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

• 

Strategic interviews with the 
Commission 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

•  EMN SB national members 

• 

International 
and 
society organisations 

civil 

•  Case studies  

•  Extent  to  which  members  of  the 
National  Migration  Networks 
that  EMN  outputs 
perceive 
increase 
their  knowledge  and 
understanding  of  migration  and 
asylum issues 

•  Extent to which EU and national 
policymakers perceive that EMN 
as 
in  preventing 
supportive 
migration crises 

•  Number  and  type  of  national 
policy  and  legislative  initiatives 
informed by the EMN 

•  Number  and 
type  of  good 
practices 
among 
exchanged 
Member States on migration and 
asylum 

•  Number  and 

type  of  EMN 
outputs  targeted  at  the  general 
public 

•  Number  and  type  of  cooperation 
mechanisms  established  through 

40 

 
 
the EMN support 

•  Number 

and 

type  of  new 

technologies 
identified/developed by the EMN 

•  Number  and  type  of  new  legal 
pathways  covered  by  EMN 
outputs 

•  Number  and  type  of  national 
on  EMN 

initiatives 
products and activities 

based 

•  Level  of  convergence  between 
national  migration  strategies  and 
the EMN products 

knowledge  produced  by  the 
EMN  are  useful  in  view  of 
reforming  the  EU  asylum  and 
migration system 

•  The 

information 
and 
knowledge  produced  by  the 
EMN  allow  to  meet  both  EU 
short and longer-term strategic 
field  of 
objectives 
migration and asylum 

the 

in 

contributes 

•  The  EMN 
to 
practical 
developing 
cooperation  among  Member 
States  and  between  them  and 
EU-level  stakeholders  in  the 
field  of  on  migration  and 
asylum 

•  The  EMN 

contributes 

to 
finding  new  technologies  (e.g. 
artificial 
to 
support  migration  and  asylum 
management 

intelligence) 

•  The  EMN 

contributes 

to 
finding  new  legal  pathways 
(e.g. 
to 
support  migration  and  asylum 
management 

talent  partnerships) 

•  Migration 

and 

asylum 
strategies in the Member States 
have been developed or refined 
based on the work of the EMN 

•  The  EMN  supports  the  design 
and implementation of new EU 
initiatives 
field  of 
migration and asylum  

the 

in 

EQ1.2 Is the EMN effectively carrying out the tasks set out in the Council Decision?  

•  The  EMN 
exchanges 
reliable data and information 

collects 
up-to-date 

and 
and 

•  Data 

and 

information 
exchanged  by  the  EMN  are 
collected from a wide range of 
sources 

•  Data  and 

information  are 
exchanged  by  the  EMN  in  a 

•  Type  of  data  and  information 

Desk sources 

collected 

•  Number and type of data sources 

used for EMN products 

•  EMN products 

•  Council Decision 2008/381 

•  EMN back-office documents 

•  EU 

statistical 

databases 
relevant  to  migration  and 
asylum 

•  Number  and 

type  of  NCP 

contributions to EMN products 

•  Extent  to  which  EMN  data  are 
up-to-date, 
and 

perceived 
objective, 

as 
reliable 

41 

 
 
  
readily accessible format 

comparable 

Field sources 

•  The  EMN 

produces 

and 
publishes  periodic  reports  on 
migration and asylum situation 
in  the  EU  and  the  Member 
States 

•  The  EMN  contributes  to  the 
of  migratory 

development 
indicators and statistics 

•  The  EMN 

contributes 

to 
improving  comparability  of 
EU  statistics  and  information 
on migration and asylum  

•  Number 

and 

type  of  new 

• 

indicators and criteria produced 

Strategic interviews with the 
Commission 

•  Types  of  indicators  used  and 
information exchanged at the EU 
level in the field of migration and 
asylum 

•  Level  of  comparability  of  EU 
information  on 

statistics  and 
migration and asylum  

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

•  EMN Service Provider 

•  EMN SB national members 

•  Case studies 

EQ1.3 What factors influenced the EMN outcomes in a positive and negative way?  

•  External 

factors 
the  EMN 
achieve 
the 
the  Council 

influence/enable 
ability 
objectives  of 
Decision 

to 

•  External 

factors 
the  EMN 
the 
the  Work 

implement 

influence/enable 
ability 
actions 
Programmes  

to 
listed 

in 

•  List 

of 

external 

factors 
influencing  the  ability  of  the 
Network to achieve its objectives 

Desk sources 

•  List 

of 

external 

factors 
influencing  the  ability  of  the 
Network implement its actions  

Field sources 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN back-office documents 

• 

Strategic interviews with the 
Commission 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

•  EMN Service Provider 

•  EMN SB national members 

•  Direct observation of EMN’s 

meetings 

•  Case studies  

EQ2 What steps have been taken to increase the visibility of the EMN and its activities and have they been effective?  

42 

 
 
 
 
  
 
EQ2.1 To what extent were the EMN outputs disseminated within and outside the Network?  

•  The  EMN 

products 

are 
regularly  uploaded  on  and 
exchanged through the IES 

•  The  EMN 

products 
regularly  published  on 
EMN website 

are 
the 

•  The  EMN  relies  on  innovative 
and 
its 

tools 
increase 

communication 
initiatives 
to 
outreach 

•  The  EMN 

products 

are 
available  in  different  national 
languages 

•  The 

EMN 

awareness-raising 
disseminates 
and 
information it produces 

undertakes 
activities 
the 

•  The  EMN  regularly  rganises 
networking  events  at  the  EU 
and national levels  

• 

Frequency  of  the  updates  to  the 
IES 

Desk sources 

•  Number  and 

type  of  NCPs’ 

contributions to the IES 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN Work Programmes 

•  Number 

and 

of 
communication  tools  developed 
by the EMN 

type 

Field sources 

•  EMN back-office documents 

•  Number  and 
outputs 
languages 

type  of  EMN 
in  different 

translated 

•  Number  and  type  of  awareness-
raising activities undertaken 

•  Number 

and 

dissemination 
undertaken 

type 

of 
activities 

•  Number  and  type  of  networking 
activities  organised  by  the  EMN 
at the EU and national levels  

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

• 

Strategic interviews with the 
Commission 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EMN Service Provider 

•  EMN SB national members  

EQ2.2 To what extent have the EMN networking and dissemination activities contributed to increasing its visibility?  

Level of uptake of EMN products 

Desk sources: 

Number and type of EMN members invited 
to  participate  in  activities/events  in  the 
field of migration and asylum 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN back-office documents 

Extent to which the consulted stakeholders 
reported 
to  use  EMN  as  knowledge 
building/sharing platform 

Field sources 

•  The  EMN  is  widely  used  as  a 
platform  for  raising  awareness 
and  exchanging  knowledge  in 
the  field  of  migration  and 
asylum 

•  EMN 

networking 

and 
activities 
dissemination 
to 
contributed 
directly 
spreading 
the  Network’s 
visibility  both  within  the  EU 
and 
third 
countries 

relevant 

across 

•  The  EMN  has  worked 

to 
establish 
relationships  with 
other  EU  actors  in the  field of 
migration and asylum 

Number  and 
available in different national languages 

type  of  EMN  products 

Number and type of external participants in 
the EMN networking events 

Number and frequency of visitors of EMN 
website 

Level  of  perception  of  the  EMN  visibility 
by different stakeholder constituencies  

•  The 

EMN 

coordinates 
information and cooperate with 
and 
other 
international bodies 

relevant 

EU 

•  The  EMN  has  created  and 
online 

maintains 

an 

43 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

•  EMN Service Provider 

•  EMN SB national members 

• 

International 
and 
society organisations  

civil 

 
 
Information  Exchange  System 
(IES)  

1.2 EFFICIENCY 

Table 2 – Evaluation Matrix 

Judgment criteria  

Indicators and descriptors  

Sources  

EQ3 What are the benefits of the Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried out by the EMN?1  

EQ3.1 What are the unexpected benefits brough by the EMN activities?  

•  The  EMN  activities  brought 
the benefits as illustrated in the 
intervention logic 

• 

(see  indicators  included  under  EQ1 
and EQ2) 

Field sources 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

•  The  EMN  activities 

led 

to 
unexpected  benefits  that  are 
not  foreseen  in  the  Council 
Decision  2008/381  or  in  the 
Work Programmes  

•  Number  and 

type  of  unexpected 

at: 

benefits brought by the EMN  

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

•  Targeted 
with: 

•  EU bodies 

Migration 

Interviews 

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

members 

•  Case studies  

EQ4 To what extent have the resources allocated to the EMN through the AMIF been sufficient for reaching the objectives 
of Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried out by the EMN?  

EQ4.1 Does the current EMN grant allocation mechanisms support the efficient achievement of EMN objectives?  

•  The  current  grant  allocation 
system  promotes  the  efficient 
use of AMIF resources 

•  The  allocation of  AMIF  grants 
is aligned with the needs of the 
EMN  NCPs  (i.e.  the  annual 
workload of each EMN NCP)  

•  Amount of AMIF resources allocated 

Desk sources 

to each NCP per year 

• 

Percentage  of  resources  used  out  of 
the resources allocated 

Field sources 

•  EMN 

back-office 

documents 

•  Level of alignment of the EMN grant 
allocation  timeline  with  the  timeline 
implementation  of 
related 
activities 

the 

to 

• 

Strategic 
with the Commission 

interviews 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

•  Number of NCPs applicants per year 

at: 

44 

 
 
 
 
•  Number and type of actions financed 

•  EMN NCPs 

through grants 

•  Extent  to  which  grant  EMN  NCPs 
agree  that  the  EMN  allocation  meets 
their needs  

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

•  Case studies  

EQ4.2 To what extent the development of EMN activities is cost effective?  

•  The EMN reaches the foreseen 
results by deploying reasonable 
financial and human resources 

•  The 

allocation 

of  AMIF 
resources  is  proportionate  to 
the  achievement  of  EMN 
objectives 

•  Amount  of 

resources 
allocated to carry out EMN activities 

financial 

Desk sources 

•  EMN 

back-office 

•  Number  of  FTEs  involved  in  the 

documents 

NCP management 

Field sources 

•  Number  and  type  of  costs  stemmed 
from  the  implementation  of  EMN 
activities 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

at: 

•  The  development  of  EMN 
activities  implies  a  series  of 
unexpected costs  

•  Number and type of unexpected costs 
stemming  from  the  implementation 
of the EMN activities 

•  Extent 

to 

which 

consulted 
stakeholders agree that costs entailed 
by the EMN are reasonable 

•  Extent 

to 

which 

consulted 
stakeholders  agree  the  EMN  AMIF 
allocation  is  proportionate  to  the 
achievement of EMN objectives  

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

•  Targeted 
with: 

Migration 

interviews 

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

members 

•  Case studies  

EQ5 Is the EMN sufficiently equipped to support its stakeholders in an appropriate manner?  

EQ5.1 Does the Commission have the sufficient capacity to support and coordinate the EMN work?  

•  The Commission has sufficient 
its 
the 

resources 
to  carry  out 
responsibilities  vis-à-vis 
EMN  

•  Extent  to  which  the  capacity  of  the 
and 
to 
is 

Commission 
coordinate 
perceived as sufficient  

the  EMN  work 

support 

Field sources 

• 

Strategic 
with the Commission 

interviews 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Targeted 
with: 

interviews 

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

members  

EQ5.2 Do the EMN structure and governance allow to support stakeholders in an efficient way?  

•  The  current  EMN  structure 
efficient 

supports 

the 

•  Extent to which the EMN structure is 
the 

supporting 

perceived 

as 

Desk sources 

45 

 
 
functioning of the Network 

functioning of the network 

•  EMN 

back-office 

documents 

•  Role  and  responsibilities  are 
clear  to  and  well  distributed 
among EMN stakeholders 

•  The  Steering  Board  provides 
adequate strategic and political 
guidance of the EMN 

•  The  Steering  Board  identifies 
appropriate 
strategic 
cooperative  relationships  with 
EU  bodies  and  international 
organisations  in  the  field  of 
migration and asylum 

•  The  NCPs  adequately  support 

national stakeholders 

•  Extent to which the Steering Board is 
perceived  as  supporting  preparation 
of  Work 
and 
Programmes 

approvement 

Field sources 

•  Number  and 

type  of 

strategic 
cooperative  relationships  identified 
by the Steering Board 

• 

Strategic 
with the Commission 

interviews 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

at: 

•  Level and type of advice provided by 

•  EMN NCPs 

Steering Board to the NCPs 

•  Level  of 

stakeholders 
distribution 
responsibilities 

awareness  of  EMN 
internal 
and 

about 

roles 

of 

•  National 
Networks 

•  Targeted 
with: 

Migration 

interviews 

•  Type  and  level  of  NCPs’  support  to 

•  EMN Service Provider 

•  The  NCPs  provide 

regular 

national stakeholders 

contributions to EMN outputs 

•  The 

National  Migration 
Networks 
relevant 
include 
actors  in  the  field  of  migration 
and asylum 

•  A  representative  of  the  EU 
Parliament 
regularly 
participates  as  observer  at  the 
meetings of the Steering Board  

•  Level  of  representation  of  relevant 
national  stakeholders  in  the  National 
Migration Networks 

•  Level  of  participation  of  the  EU 
Parliament  in  the  meetings  of  the 
Steering Board  

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

members 

•  Case studies  

EQ5.3 Do EMN internal working practices enable the EMN to efficiently carry out its products and activities?  

•  EMN  relies  upon  formalised 
internal  working 
practices 
which  are  known  to  all  key 
stakeholders 

•  The  timing  of  EMN  outputs 
allow  to  produce  high-quality 
products  while  ensuring  that 
needed information is promptly 
exchanged 
relevant 
external stakeholders 

with 

• 

EMN 
that 

procedures 
Internal 
ensure 
stakeholders 
receive  information  on  EMN 
products  and  activities  in  a 
timely manner 

•  The  working  groups  support 
NCPs  in  the  development  of 

•  Map of internal processes 

Desk sources 

•  Level  of  coverage  of 

internal 
formal/informal 

•  EMN 

back-office 

documents 

processes 
procedural documents 

by 

Field sources 

•  Level  of  awareness  of 

internal 

procedures by key stakeholders 

•  Number  of  EMN  products  that  are 
internal 

delivered 
procedures and planned deadlines 

line  with 

in 

•  Number  of  NCPs  involved  in  the 

working groups 

•  Extent  to  which  the  NCPs  perceive 
that  working  groups  are  efficiently 
supporting  the  realisation  of  EMN 
products and activities  

46 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

•  Targeted 
with: 

Migration 

interviews 

•  EMN Service Provider 

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

 
 
EMN products and activities  

EQ6 How efficient is the EMN Service Provider?  

members 

•  Case studies  

EQ6.1 Is the current grant sufficient to allow the Service Provider to effectively support the EMN in line with the objectives 
of Council Decision 2008/381/EC and to provide the necessary support to implement the activities included in the annual 
programmes?  

•  The 

financial 

and  human 
resources  allocated  allow  the 
EMN Service Provider to fully 
support the EMN 

•  The 

to 

tasks  allocated 

the 
Service  Provider  allow  it  to be 
adequately  integrated  into  the 
network  mechanisms, 
thus 
supporting 
the  network  at 
various  steps  and  levels  of 
intervention  

•  Role  and  responsibilities  formally 
allocated  to  the  Service  Provider 
(including  mapping  of  potential 
KPIs) 

Desk sources 

•  EMN 

back-office 

documents 

•  Types 

of 

activities 

actually 
implemented by the Service Provider 
and evolution of the years 

Field sources 

•  Amount  of 

financial 

resources 

allocated to EMN Service provider 

• 

Strategic  interview  with 
the Commission 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

at: 

•  Amount  of  financial  resources  used 

by the EMN Service Provider 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Number  of  FTEs  within  the  EMN 

Service Provider 

•  Targeted 
with: 

interviews 

•  Extent  to  which  EMN  stakeholders 
the  Service  Provider  as 

perceive 
efficient and supportive 

•  Extent 

to 

which 

consulted 
resources 
the  EMN  Service 
its 

stakeholder  agree 
available 
Provider  are  proportionate 
tasks  

that 

to 

to 

•  EMN Service Provider 

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

members 

•  Case studies  

EQ6.2 Is the quality of the Service Provider’s contributions satisfactory?  

•  The  EMN  Service  Provider 
ensures  that  the  information 
included  in  the  IES  is  of  high 
quality 

•  The  EMN  Service  Provider 
promptly  updates  the  IES  with 
relevant material 

•  The  EMN  Service  Provider 
ensures  that  the  agenda  of  the 
EMN meetings are in line with 
EMN  objectives  and  activities 
set 
the  Work 
Programmes 

out 

in 

•  Extent 

to  which 

the  day-to-day 
operations  and  coordination  of  the 
Service  Provider  are  perceived  as 
efficient and of high quality 

Desk sources 

•  EMN 

back-office 

documents 

•  Extent  to  which  the  coordination  of 
and  NCP 
the  Steering  Board 
meetings is perceived as efficient and 
of high quality 

•  Extent to which the IES managed by 
the  Service  Provider  is  perceived  of 
high quality 

Field sources 

• 

Strategic  interview  with 
the Commission 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Level  of  quality  and  clarity  of  the 
Service  Provider’s  compilation  and 

•  National 

Migration 

47 

 
 
•  The  EMN  Service  Provider 
delivers 
high-quality 
a 
compilation  and  synthesis  of 
the EMN reports and studies 

•  The Commission and the EMN 
Provider 
regularly  on 
the 

Service 
communicates 
related 
issues 
organisational work of EMN 

to 

synthesis of the EMN products 

Networks 

•  Number and types of communication 
exchanges  between  the  Commission 
and the EMN Service Provider on the 
organisational work of EMN 

•  Targeted 
with: 

interviews 

•  EMN Service Provider 

• 

Frequency  of 
the  EMN  Service 
Provider  uploads  of  new  documents 
on the IES  

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

members 

shares  with 

•  The  EMN  Service  Provider 
promptly 
the 
Steering  Board  and  the  NCPs 
all 
information 
(including the agenda) on their 
meetings 

the  relevant 

•  The  EMN  Service  Provider 
the 

adequately 

coordinates 
inputs from the NCPs 

•  The  Commission,  the  NCPs 
and  the  Steering  Board  are 
satisfied  by  the  quality  of  the 
contributions  provided  by  the 
Service Provider  

EQ6.3 Is the information flow between the Commission, the Service Provider, the Steering Board and EMN NCPs working 
well?  

•  All 

concerned 

stakeholders 

•  Type  of  information  exchanged  and 

Field sources 

provide feedback to the EMN 

frequency of exchanges 

•  All  concerned  stakeholders  are 
flow  of 

the 

satisfied  with 
information 

•  Level  of  timeliness  of  procedural 
information  exchanged  among  EMN 
stakeholders 

•  Each  stakeholder  is  open  and 
responsive 
input  coming 
to 
from the others  

•  Level  of  clearness  of  procedural 
information  exchanged  among  EMN 
stakeholders 

•  Extent 

to 

which 

concerned 
stakeholders  are  satisfied  with  the 
EMN information flow 

•  Extent to which the information flow 
between the Commission, the Service 
Provider,  the  Steering  Board  and  the 
NCPs is perceived of high quality  

48 

• 

Strategic  interview  with 
the Commission 

•  Online  surveys  targeted 

at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

•  Targeted 
with: 

Migration 

interviews 

•  EMN Service Provider 

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

members 

•  Case studies  

 
 
  
 
1.3 COHERENCE 

Table 3 – Evaluation Matrix 

Judgment criteria  

Indicators and descriptors  

Sources  

EQ7 To what extent have the objectives and activities determined by Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried 
out by the EMN been coherent with relevant EU policy migration developments, notably those set out in the New Pact on 
Migration and Asylum such as the Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint?  

EQ7.1 To what extent are objectives and tasks set out in the Council Decision and objectives and specific priorities set out in 
the Work Programmes coherent with relevant policy developments set out in the New Pact on Migration and Asylum (e.g. 
Migration Preparedness and Crisis Blueprint)?  

•  The EMN objectives and tasks set out in 
the Council Decision are consistent with 
the policy developments included in the 
New  Pact  on  Migration  and  Asylum 
(e.g.  Migration  Preparedness  and  Crisis 
Blueprint)  

in 

•  The  EMN  objectives  and  specific 
priorities 
the  Work 
set  out 
the 
Programmes  are  coherent  with 
policy  developments  included  in  the 
New  Pact  on  Migration  and  Asylum 
(e.g.  Migration  Preparedness  and  Crisis 
Blueprint)   

•  Level of complementarity 
between 
the  Council 
Decision  and  the  New 
pact  on  Migration  and 
terms  of 
Asylum 
activities, 
objectives, 
stakeholders involved 

in 

•  Number  and 

type  of 

complementarities 
between 
the  Network’s 
objectives  and  tasks  and 
the  New 
on 
Migration  and  Asylum  as 
included 
the  EMN 
in 
outputs  and  back-office 
documents 

pact 

Desk sources 

•  Council 

Decision 

2008/381/EC 

•  EU  policy  and  legislative 
document  (i.e.  New  Pact 
on Migration and Asylum) 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN 

back-office 

documents 

•  EMN Work Programmes 

Field sources 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

• 

International 
society organisations  

and 

civil 

•  Level of complementarity 
between  the  EMN  Work 
Programmes and the New 
pact  on  Migration  and 
terms  of 
Asylum 
objectives, 
activities, 
stakeholders involved 

in 

•  Number  and 

type  of 

complementarities 
between 
the  Work 
Programmes and the New 
pact  on  Migration  and 
Asylum as included in the 
EMN  outputs  and  back-
office documents  

EQ7.2 To what extent are objectives and tasks set out in the Council Decision and objectives and specific priorities set out in 
the  Work  Programmes  coherent  with  other  EU  policy  developments  in  the  field  of  migration  and  asylum  (EU  Blue  Card 
Directive and EU Action Plan on Migrant Smuggling)?  

49 

 
 
 
•  The EMN objectives and tasks set out in 
the Council Decision are consistent with 
the EU Blue Card Directive and the EU 
Action Plan on Migrant Smuggling 

•  The  EMN  objectives  and  specific 
priorities 
the  Work 
set  out 
Programmes  are  coherent  with  the  EU 
Blue Card Directive and the EU Action 
Plan on Migrant Smuggling  

in 

•  Level of complementarity 
between 
the  Council 
Decision  and  key  EU 
policy  developments 
in 
the field of migration and 
terms 
asylum 
of 
objectives, 
activities, 
stakeholders involved 

in 

•  Level of complementarity 
between  the  EMN  Work 
Programmes  and  other 
relevant 
policy 
EU 
developments  in  terms  of 
objectives, 
activities, 
stakeholders involved  

Desk sources 

•  Council 

Decision 

2008/381/EC 

•  Relevant  EU  policy  and 
legislative  initiatives  (i.e. 
EU  Blue  Card  Directive, 
EU  Action 
on 
Plan 
Migrant Smuggling) 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN 

back-office 

documents 

•  EMN Work Programme 

Field sources 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies  

EQ7.3 What are the overlaps and potential synergies between the  objectives and the actions carried out by the EMN and 
those of the Commission?  

•  There  are 

synergies  between 

the 
objectives  and  tasks  of  the  Council 
Decision  and  those  of  the  Commission 
(EU  strategy  on  voluntary  return  and 
reintegration 

•  Commission  Communication  on  return 

and readmission) 

•  There 

are  overlaps  between 

the 
objectives  and  tasks  of  the  Council 
Decision  and  those  of  the  Commission 
(EU  strategy  on  voluntary  return  and 
reintegration 

•  Number  and 
type  of 
the 
between 
overlaps 
EMN 
and 
objectives 
actions  and  those  of  the 
Commission  in  the  field 
of migration and asylum 

•  Number  and 

type  of 
the 
synergies  between 
EMN 
and 
objectives 
actions  and  those  of  the 
Commission  in  the  field 
of migration and asylum 

•  Commission  Communication  on  return 

and readmission) 

•  Number  and 

type  of 

complementarity 
procedures in place 

• 

Procedures  are  in  place  to  identify 
potential  complementarities  with 
the 
Commission 

•  Number  and 
type  of 
cooperation 
and 
coordination  mechanisms 

50 

Desk sources 

•  EMN Work Programmes 

•  EMN products 

•  EU  policy  and  legislative 

documents 

Field sources 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies  

 
 
•  Cooperation 

and 

coordination 

are 

in place  

pursued with the Commission  

EQ8 To what extent have the objectives and activities determined by Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried 
out by the EMN been coherent with other objectives and activities of Member States and EU agencies, including notably 
EUAA, FRONTEX, EUROPOL and FRA?  

EQ8.1 To what extent are objectives and tasks set out in the Council Decision coherent with other objectives and activities of 
the Member States? Are there any overlaps and potential synergies between the objectives and the actions carried out by the 
EMN and those of the Member States?  

•  EMN  objectives  and  actions  are  in  line 

•  Level 

Desk sources 

of 

with those of the Member States 

•  There 

are  overlaps  between 

the 
objectives  and  tasks  of  the  Council 
Decision and those of Member States 

•  There 

are 

synergies  between 

the 
objectives  and  tasks  of  the  Council 
Decision and those of the Member States 

•  There 

are  overlaps  between 

the 
objectives  and  tasks  of  the  Council 
Decision and those of the Member States 

• 

Procedures  are  in  place  to  identify 
potential  complementarities  with 
the 
Member States 

•  Cooperation 

and 
pursued with the Member States  

coordination 

are 

and 

complementarity 
the  Council 
between 
other 
Decision 
national 
relevant 
migration 
policy 
developments in terms of 
objectives, 
activities, 
stakeholders involved 

•  Number  and 

type  of 
the 
overlaps  between 
EMN 
and 
objectives 
actions  and  those  of  the 
Member States 

•  EMN Work Programmes 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN  outputs, 

minutes  and 
documents 
meetings 

of 

including 
supporting 
relevant 

•  National  strategies  in  the 
field  of  migration  and 
asylum 

Field sources 

•  Number  and 

type  of 
the 
synergies  between 
and 
objectives 
EMN 
actions  and  those  of  the 
Member States 

•  Number  and 

type  of 

complementarity 
procedures in place 

•  Number  and 
type  of 
and 
cooperation 
coordination  mechanisms 
in place  

•  Online survey targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EMN 

SB 

national 

members 

•  Case studies  

EQ8.2  To  what  extent  are  the  objectives  and  tasks  set  out  in  the  Council  Decisions  coherent  with  other  objectives  and 
activities of relevant EU agencies? Are there any overlaps and potential synergies between the objectives and the actions 
carried out by the EMN and those of relevant EU agencies?  

•  EMN  objectives 

are 
consistent  with  those  of  relevant  EU 
agencies 

actions 

and 

•  There  are  contradictions  between  the 
objectives  and  tasks  of  the  Council 
Decision  and  those  of  relevant  EU 
agencies 

•  Level 

Desk sources 

of 

and 

complementarity 
the  Council 
between 
Decision 
other 
relevant  EU  agencies  in 
objectives, 
terms 
activities, 
stakeholders 
involved 

of 

•  EMN Work Programmes 

•  EMN products 

•  Legal  basis  of  four  EU 
agencies 
EUAA, 
(i.e. 
EUROPOL, Frontex, FRA) 

51 

 
 
•  Number  and 

type  of 
the 
and 
those  of 

overlaps  between 
EMN 
objectives 
actions  and 
relevant EU agencies 

•  Work  programmes  of  four 
EU  agencies  (i.e.  EUAA, 
EUROPOL, Frontex, FRA) 

•  EMN 

back-office 

documents 

•  Number  and 

type  of 
the 
and 
those  of 

objectives 

synergies  between 
EMN 
actions  and 
relevant EU agencies 

•  Number  and 

type  of 

complementarity 
procedures in place 

•  Number  and 
type  of 
and 
cooperation 
coordination  mechanisms 
in place  

Field sources 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National 
Networks 

Migration 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies  

•  There 

are 

synergies  between 

the 
objectives  and  tasks  of  the  Council 
Decision  and  those  of  relevant  EU 
agencies 

•  There 

are  overlaps  between 

the 
objectives  and  tasks  of  the  Council 
Decision  and  those  of  relevant  EU 
agencies 

• 

Procedures  are  in  place  to  identify 
potential 
with 
relevant EU agencies 

complementarities 

•  Cooperation 

coordination 
and 
pursued with relevant EU agencies  

are 

1.4 EU ADDED VALUE 

Table 4 – Evaluation Matrix 

Judgment criteria  

Indicators and descriptors  

Sources  

EQ9 What is the European added value of Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions  carried out by the EMN? Could 
the main findings (results/outputs) presented in the evaluation have been achieved without EU intervention?  

EQ9.1 In the absence of the EMN, to what extent could the information needs of  EU and national authorities have been 
met?  

•  Relevant  EU  and  national 
information 
are 
identified  and  met  through 
alternative  mechanisms  than 
those provided by the EMN 

needs 

•  There  are  various  learning 
capacity-building 
and 
mechanisms alternative to the 
EMN  that  support  EU  and 
national 
in 
addressing  current,  new  and 
emerging  needs  in  the  field 
of migration and asylum 

policymakers 

•  EU 

and 

national 

•  Type  of  alternative  mechanisms 
used to identify information needs 
in  the  field  of  migration  and 
databases, 
(surveys, 
asylum 
exchanges of information, etc.) 

•  Level 

of 
overlapping/complementarity  of 
these  mechanisms  with  EMN 
activities 
same 
information  needs,  produce  same 
information, etc.) 

capture 

(e.g. 

Desk sources 

•  Relevant 

initiatives/products 
developed  outside  the  EMN 
providing  information  in  the 
field of migration and asylum 
targeted  at  EU  and  national 
policymakers  (as  mentioned 
during 
stakeholder 
consultations) 

Field sources 

•  Type  of  alternative  sources  of 
information  on  migration  and 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
policymakers  in  the  field  of 
migration  and  asylum  are 
adequately supported without 
EMN outputs  

asylum 

•  National Migration Networks 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

•  EMN SB national members 

•  Case studies  

•  Extent 

to  which 

alternative 
sources  of  information  are  used 
by EU and national policymakers 

•  Extent  to  which  relevant  EU  and 
national 
rely  on 
stakeholders 
other sources than those provided 
by the EMN 

•  Areas  where  relevant  EU  and 
national  stakeholders  see  the  EU 
added value of the EMN  

EQ9.2 In the absence of the EMN, to what extent could the information needs of the general public have been meet?  

•  There 

are 

alternative 
channels different from EMN 
that  provide 
the  general 
public  with  reliable  and  up-
the 
information 
to-date 
field of migration and asylum 

in 

•  There  are  various 

I  and 
mechanisms alternative to the 
EMN that contribute towards 
the  development  of  mutual 
understanding  on  migration 
and  asylum  issues  within  the 
EU 

•  The  EMN  provides 

the 
general  public  with  more 
comprehensive  and  higher 
quality information compared 
already 
to 
available 
other 
sources  

information 

through 

•  Number  and  type  of  EU  level 
initiatives/events  targeted  at  the 
general  public  in  the  field  of 
migration and asylum 

Desk sources: 

•  Type  and  quality  of  information 
disseminated by these channels 

Field sources 

Relevant  initiatives/products developed 
outside the EMN providing the general 
public  with  information  on  migration 
and asylum 

•  Level  of  overlapping  between 
EMN  disseminated  content  and 
content  already  available  through 
other channels 

•  Outreach of these channels 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  National Migration Networks 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  Outreach  of  EMN  dissemination 

•  EU bodies 

activities 

•  Extent to which representatives of 
the  general  public  see  the  added 
value of EMN activities  

• 

International and civil society 
organisations 

EQ9.3 What are other likely consequences of not having an EMN, if any?  

•  The  capacity  to  identify  and 
meet  EU 
national 
information needs is likely to 
be undermined without EMN 

and 

a 

•  The  absence  of  EMN  will 
undermine 
mutual 
understanding  on  migration 
and  asylum  issues  within  the 
EU  and  with  relevant  third 
countries 

The absence of EMN will decrease the 
national 
capacity 

of  EU 

and 

•  Extent 

to  which  stakeholders 
consider  that  the  absence  of  the 
EMN would affect: 

Field sources 

• 

• 

the  capacity  to  identify  and  meet 
EU  and  national 
information 
needs 

understanding 

a  mutual 
on 
issues 
migration  and  asylum 
within  the  EU  and  with  relevant 
third countries 

• 

the  capacity  of  EU  and  national 

53 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National Migration Networks 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

•  EMN SB national members  

 
 
  
stakeholders  to  respond  to  the  current, 
new 
emerging  migration 
and 
challenges  

stakeholders to respond to current, 
new  and  emerging  migration 
challenges  

EQ10  What  is  the  additional  value  resulting  from  EMN  products  and  activities  compared  to  what  could  be  achieved  by 
Member States at national and/or local levels?  

EQ10.1  What  is  the  additional  value  of  the  EMN  products  compared  to  what  could  be  achieved  by  Member  States  at 
national and/or local levels?  

•  The  EMN  products  include 
comprehensive 
and 
comparative  information  on 
migration  and  asylum  issues 
that  cannot  be  produced  by 
Member States alone  

•  List  of  products  available  at  the 
on 
level 

focusing 

national 
migration and asylum 

Desk sources: 

•  EMN products 

• 

Similarities 
differences 
and 
between  EMN  products  and  any 
similar national products 

Field sources 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National Migration Networks 

•  Case studies  

•  Extent  to  which  EMN  products 
are  perceived  as  having  a  higher 
timeliness, 
level  of  quality, 
and 
relevance, 
comparability 
alternative 
sources  of  information  available 
at the national level  

reliability 
than 

EQ10.2 What is the additional value of the EMN networking events compared to what could be achieved by Member States 
at national and/or local levels?  

•  The  EMN  prompts 

the 
new 
establishment 
National Migration Networks 

of 

•  The  EMN  boosts  networking 
events  that  could  have  not 
been  realised  by  Member 
States alone  

•  Number  and  type  of  National 
that  were 

Migration  Networks 
present before the EMN set-up 

Desk sources 

•  Number  and  type  of  National 
that  were 

Migration  Networks 
created after the EMN set-up 

Field sources 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN back-office documents 

•  Number  and 

type  of  national 
events  on  migration  and  asylum 
ealised 
EMN 
framework 

outside 

the 

•  Extent to which EMN networking 
events  are  perceived  as  having 
added  value  compared  to  events 
organised at the national level  

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National Migration Networks 

•  Case studies  

EQ11  To  what  extent  are  the  outcomes  of  Council  Decision  2008/381/EC  and  the  actions  carried  out  by  the  EMN 
sustainable? Are the effects likely to last after the intervention ends?  

EQ11.1 What measures were adopted to ensure that the identified outcomes and impacts will continue after the intervention 
ends?  

•  Mechanisms  and  procedures 
at the EU level are in place to 
ensure  that  EU  and  national 

•  Types 

of  mechanisms 

and 
procedures  in  place  (besides  the 
EMN  legal  basis)  to  ensure:  (i) 

Desk sources 

54 

 
 
information  needs  are  met 
even  after  the  intervention 
ends 

•  Mechanisms  and  procedures 
at the EU level are in place to 
ensure cooperation within the 
EU  and  with  third  countries 
on  migration  and  asylum 
issues 

•  Member 

States 
to  ensure 
of 

procedures 
sustainability 
activities  even  after 
intervention ends 

adopted 
the 
EMN 
the 

•  Member  States  support  with 
national  funding  the  actions 
currently  carried  out  by  the 
NCPs 
the  National 
and 
Migration Networks  

that  EU  and  national  information 
needs  are  collected  and  met  and 
(ii) cooperation within the EU and 
with  third  countries  on  migration 
and asylum issues 

•  EMN products 

•  EU 

legislative  and  policy 

initiatives 

•  EMN back-office documents 

Field sources 

• 

Strategic  interviews  with  the 
Commission 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EMN SB national members 

•  Case studies  

•  Extent 

to  which 
existing 
mechanisms  and  procedures  in 
place ensure that EU and national 
information  needs  are  collected 
and  met  after  the  intervention 
ends 

place 

•  Extent  to  which  mechanisms  and 
procedures 
ensure 
in 
cooperation  within  the  EU  and 
with  third  countries  on  migration 
the 
and  asylum 
intervention ends 

issues  after 

•  Types  of  procedures  adopted  at 
the  national  level  to  ensure  the 
sustainability  of  EMN  activities 
after the intervention ends 

•  Types  of  organisational  settings 
adopted at the national level in the 
field  of  migration  and  asylum 
(roles and responsibilities) 

•  Extent  to  which  Member  States 
support  with  national  funding  the 
actions carried out by the National 
Migration Networks  

EQ12 Is the Council Decision 2008/381/EC still an adequate basis of the actions of the EMN?  

EQ12.1  Does  the  Council  Decision  2008/381/EC  provide  the  sufficient  mandate  for  the  EMN  to  fully  achieve  its  current 
objectives?  

•  The  Council  Decision  is  the 
most  appropriate  legal  basis 
to  achieve  the  current  EMN 
objectives  

•  Key results achieved by the EMN 
the 

from 

activities 
effectiveness criterion) 

(resulting 

Desk sources: 

•  Council 

Decision 

2008/381/EC 

•  Level  of  clarity  of  the  Council 

Decision’s provisions 

•  EMN products 

•  Level of coherence, adequacy and 
burdens  of 
twofold 
mechanism  (Council  Decision  e 
Work Programmes) 

the  EMN 

Field sources 

•  EMN back-office documents 

• 

Strategic  interview  with  the 
Commission 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  Level  of 

adequacy  of 

the 
financing mechanism to the types 
of  activities  implemented  by  the 

55 

 
 
EMN and their key features 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Type of limitations of the Council 
Decision  as  reported  in  EMN 
products/back-office  documents 
and by stakeholders  

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EMN SB national members  

EQ12.2  Does  Council  Decision 2008/381/EC  provide  the  sufficient  flexibility  for  the  EMN  to address  new  objectives  and 
emerging priorities?  

•  The  Council  Decision  is  the 
most  appropriate  legal  basis 
to  fully  meet  new  objectives 
priorities 
and 
included 
the  Work 
Programmes 

emerging 
in 

•  Other  legal  instruments  (e.g. 
Directive, 
Regulation) 
provide  a  more  appropriate 
legal  basis  to  EMN  to  fully 
meet  new  objectives  and 
emerging  priorities  included 
in the Work Programmes  

•  List  of  objectives  and  priorities 
included in the Work Programmes 
since 2018 

Desk sources 

•  Level  of  correspondence  between 
the  objectives  and  task  set  out  in 
the  Council  Decision  and  the 
objectives  and  priorities  of  the 
Work Programmes 

•  Alignment of changes in the EMN 
mandate  and  activities  with  key 
changes in the policy field 

•  Level 

of 

flexibility 

and 
adaptability  of  EMN  as  reported 
in  EMN  back-office  documents 
and by stakeholders  

•  Council 

Decision 

2008/381/EC 

•  EMN Work Programmes 

•  Legal  basis  of 

selected 

similar Networks 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN back-office documents 

• 

Strategic  interview  with  the 
Commission 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EMN SB national members  

Field sources 

EQ13 Could the results, delivered through the implementation of the Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried 
out by the EMN have been achieved with less European funding? Could the use of other policy instruments or mechanisms, 
at European and/or national level, have provided better cost-effectiveness?  

EQ13.1  To  what  extent  does  the  achievement  of  the  identified  outcomes  and  impacts  depend  on  AMIF  resources?  Could 
other sources have been used to achieve the same or better results?  

• 

• 

• 

Identified results and impacts 
can  be  achieved  with  less 
AMIF resources 

Identified results and impacts 
are  better  achieved  through 
other EU funding streams 

Identified results and impacts 
can  be  achieved 
through 
national funding  

•  Amount  of  resources  allocated  to 
the different EMN activities 

Desk sources 

•  Burdens  and  procedural  features 
the  use  of  AMIF 

linked 
to 
resources 

•  Results  of  EMN  activities  (as 
resulting  from  the  effectiveness 
analysis) 

Field sources 

•  EMN  back-office  documents 
(i.e.  documents  on  financial 
management) 

•  Legal  basis  of  selected  EU 

networks 

•  List  of  alternative  EU  funding 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

56 

 
 
•  EMN NCPs 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EMN SB national members 

•  Case studies  

in 

the 

field  of 
mechanisms 
migration  and  asylum 
(scope, 
amount,  administrative  burden 
and key features) 

•  Level  of  coverage  of  EMN 
actions by alternative EU funding 
mechanisms 

•  National funding mechanisms that 
cover  the  activities  implemented 
by  MS  in  the  framework  of  the 
EMN 

•  Extent 

to  which 

alternative 
funding  mechanisms  (EU  and 
national)  allow  the  achievement 
of similar/better results 

•  Types  of  funding  mechanisms 
used  by  other 
selected  EU 
networks  and  results  achieved  by 
these networks  

1.5 RELEVANCE 

Table 5 – Evaluation Matrix 

Judgment criteria  

Indicators and descriptors  

Sources  

EQ14 To what extent have Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried out by the EMN been relevant in view of 
the EU’s needs/challenges and are they still relevant in view of current needs and challenges?  

EQ14.1 To what extent have the Council Decision and the actions carried out by the EMN been relevant to evolving EU’s 
needs/challenges?  

•  Objectives and tasks set out in 
the  Council  Decision  have 
been  relevant  to  migration 
and 
and 
challenges  as  they  evolved 
over the years 

asylum 

needs 

•  Objectives and tasks set out in 
the  Council  Decision  are  still 
relevant  to  current  needs  in 
the  field  of  migration  and 
asylum  

•  Type  of  changes  occurred 
between 2018 and 2021 

Desk sources 

•  Level  of  correspondence 
identified 
the  EMN 

between 
changes  and 
objectives and tasks 

•  Extent  to  which  consulted 
stakeholders agree that the 
actions  carried  out  by  the 
EMN 
key 
matched 
information  needs  related 

•  Council Decision 2008/381/EC 

•  EMN products 

• 

Scientific 
relevant 
focusing on migration and asylum 

literature,  as  well  as 
reports, 
and 
studies 

Field sources 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
to  migration  and  asylum 
in the EU  

•  EMN NCPs 

•  National Migration Networks 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

• 

International  and  civil 
organisations 

society 

•  Case studies  

EQ14.2  To  what  extent  have  the  actions  carried  out  by  the  EMN  been  relevant  and  are  still  relevant  to  current  and 
emerging EU’s needs/challenges ?  

•  The  objectives  and  priorities 
included  in  the  EMN  Work 
Programmes  matched  main 
needs in the field of migration 
and  asylum  as  they  evolved 
over the years 

•  The  objectives  and  priorities 
included  in  the  EMN  Work 
programmers  are  relevant  to 
new  and  emerging  needs  and 
challenges 
the  field  of 
migration and asylum  

in 

•  Type  of  new  needs  and 
challenges  in  the  field  of 
migration and asylum 

Desk sources 

•  Number  and  type  of  new 
objectives  and  priorities 
set  out  in  the  EMN  Work 
Programmes 

•  Extent 

which 
to 
stakeholders  consider  the 
objectives and task set out 
in  the  Council  Decision 
to  evolving 
correspond 
asylum 
and 
migration 
related 
and 
needs 
challenges  

Field sources 

•  Council Decision 2008/381/EC 

•  EMN Work Programmes 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN back-office documents 

• 

Scientific 
relevant 
focusing on migration and asylum 

literature,  as  well  as 
reports, 
and 
studies 

• 

Strategic 
Commission 

interview  with 

the 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EU bodies 

•  Direct 

observation 

of  EMN 

meetings 

•  Case studies 

58 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
EQ15 To what extent have Council Decision 2008/381/EC and the actions carried out by the EMN been relevant in view of 
specific needs of stakeholders, in particular MS and civil society?  

EQ15.1  To  what  extent  has  the  Council  Decision  been  relevant  in  view  of  specific  needs  of  stakeholders,  in  particular 
national authorities and civil society organisations?  

•  Objectives and tasks set out in 
the  Council  Decision  have 
been  relevant  to  the  needs  of 
national stakeholders 

•  Objectives and tasks set out in 
the  Council  Decision  have 
been  relevant  to  the  needs  of 
relevant 
Society 
Civil 
Organisations (CSOs)  

•  Level  of  adequacy  of  the 
objectives  and  tasks  set 
the  Council 
out 
in 
specific 
Decision  with 
stakeholders’ needs 

and 

•  Extent  to  which  consulted 
stakeholders  (i.e.  national 
civil 
stakeholders 
society 
organisations) 
consider 
the  objectives 
and  tasks  set  out  in  the 
Council  Decision 
as 
adequate  their  respective 
needs  

Desk sources 

•  Council Decision 2008/381/EC) 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN back-office documents 

Field sources 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EMN SB national members 

• 

International  and  civil 
organisations 

society 

•  Direct 

observation 

of  EMN 

meetings 

•  Case studies  

EQ15.2 To what extent have the actions carried out by the EMN been relevant in view of specific needs of stakeholders, in 
particular national authorities and civil society organisations?  

•  Objectives and tasks set out in 
the  EMN  Work  Programmes 
have  been  relevant  to  the 
needs of national stakeholders 

•  Objectives and tasks set out in 
the  EMN  Work  Programmes 
have  been  relevant  to  the 
needs of relevant CSOs 

•  The  analyses  and  information 
included in the EMN products 
are 
(e.g.  ARM, 
relevant 
current 
stakeholders’ needs 

studies) 

to 

•  The  topics  covered  by  EMN 
activities  and  events  are 
relevant  to  current  needs  and 
challenges  faced  by  different 

Desk sources 

•  Council Decision 2008/381/EC) 

•  EMN products 

•  EMN back-office documents 

Field sources 

•  Online surveys targeted at: 

•  EMN NCPs 

•  Targeted interviews with: 

•  EMN SB national members 

• 

International  and  civil 
organisations 

society 

•  Level  of  adequacy  of  the 
analysis  and  information 
the  EMN 
included 
in 
specific 
products  with 
stakeholders’ needs 

•  Extent 

and 

which 
to 
stakeholders  (e.g.  national 
civil 
stakeholders 
society 
organisations) 
consider 
the  objectives 
and  tasks  set  out  in  the 
EMN  Work  Programmes 
relevant  to  their  current 
needs 

•  Extent 

which 
to 
stakeholders  (e.g.  national 
civil 
stakeholders 
society 
organisations) 
consider  the  analysis  and 

and 

59 

 
 
stakeholders.  

EMN 

included 

in 
information 
the 
products 
relevant  to  their  current 
needs  

•  Case studies  

ANNEX IV  OVERVIEW OF BENEFITS AND COSTS 

A  fully-fledged  quantification  of  costs  (e.g.  cost-benefit  analysis  and  standard  cost  model) 
was not possible in the context of the evaluation, as, e.g. the  ex post financial reporting has 
not  been  completed,  and  the  actual  level  of  budget  implementation  is  not  yet  known. 
Similarly,  the  one-in  one-out  approach  was  not  relevant,  as  the  Network  is  not  directly 
involved in legislating. 

The  focus  of  the  evaluation  was  on  the  benefits  to  properly  assess  the  added  value  for  the 
Member States of being part of the EMN and more emphasis was put on the analysis of the 
NCPs as part of the case studies and most notably on:  how they were structured, how they 
engaged national  constituencies and, eventually,  what  was the added value perceived at  the 
national level from being part of the EMN. 

The perception of consulted stakeholders of the costs and benefits of various EMN activities 
was analysed and is presented in Figures 1 and 2 and in Table 1 below. 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure  1  –  Perception  of  consulted  stakeholders  on  the  cost  burden  at  the  NCP  level 
entailed by EMN activities1 

Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

Figure 1 presents the analysis results of the perception of consulted stakeholders2 of the cost 
burden generated by the various categories of EMN activities for the NCPs, on a 6-level scale 
of: very high (dark green), high (light green), medium (yellow), low (orange), very low (red) 
and no opinion (gray). 

61 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 2 – Perception of consulted stakeholders on the benefit-cost ratio of the various 
EMN activities3 

Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

Figure  2  presents  the  analysis  results  of  the  perception  of  consulted  stakeholders4  of  the 
benefit-cost ratio generated by the various categories of EMN activities for the NCPs, on a 6-
level scale of: very high (dark green), high (light green), medium (yellow), low (orange), very 
low (red) and no opinion (gray). 

Table 1 presents the perceptions of consulted stakeholders5 on the cost burden (on the scale 
from 0 to 4 where 0 stands for no cost, 1 for low cost, 2 for medium cost, 3 for high cost and 
4 for extreme cost) and on and cost-effectiveness (on the scale from 0 to 4 where 1 stands for 
extremely low, 1 for low, 2 for medium, 3 for high and 4 extremely high cost-effectiveness) 
of the various EMN activities. 

According to  the results,  organisation of national events  and participation  in  NCP meetings 
were  perceived  as  the  most  cost-generating  activities  (medium  cost),  while  the  perception 
regarding  the  remaining  activity  categories  was  between  the  low  and  medium  cost  levels. 
Cost-effectiveness of all the analysed activities was perceived to be situated in the middle of 
the scale (between medium and high cost effectiveness). 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
Table  1  –  Perception  by  consulted  stakeholders  of  the  cost-benefits  ratio  of  EMN 
activities 

Activity  

Costs6  

Benefits  

Cost-effectiveness7  

• 

Provision of comparable information 

Monitoring  

1.6  

•  Contribution  to  the  development  of  indicators  and 

2.6  

statistics  

Launching/addressing 
AHQs  

1.6  

• 

• 

Provision of quick responses to urgent needs 

Provision of information to design national legislation 

2.6  

Organising  national 
events  

2.0  

Contributing  to  EMN 
products  

1.8  

Participating  in  EMN 
meetings  

2.0  

Disseminating  EMN 
the 
at 
products 
national level  

1.6  

•  Approximation of national policymaking  

•  Exchange of knowledge and practices 

• 

Increased awareness of the EMN activities 

2.7  

•  Networking opportunities 

• 

Fostering open debate  

•  Eased access information 

• 

• 

Spread knowledge and raise awareness 

2.6  

Shaping policy and legislative initiatives  

•  Networking opportunities 

• 

Identification of synergies among organisations 

2.6  

•  Establishment of cooperative working practices  

• 

• 

Increased  awareness  of  the  information  produced  by 
the EMN beyond the Network’s members 

2.5  

Provision of updated information  

Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
Table 2 – Overview of costs and benefits identified in the evaluation 

Overview of costs and benefits identified in the evaluation  

EMN functioning  

Direct 
compliance 
costs one-off  

Direct 
compliance 
costs 
recurrent  

Costs 
identified  

Citizens  

Administrations of EU Member 
States  

European Commission  

Quantitative   Comment  

Quantitative   Comment  

Quantitative   Comment  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

Implementation 
of the WPs by the 
(co-
NCPs 
from 
financing 
the 
national 
budgets) 

Grants  for  the 
of 
operation 
NCPs 
to 
95%) 

(up 

Service 

EMN 
Provider-
related 
(procurement) 

costs 

EMN  IT  (EMN 
IES)  -  related 
costs 
(procurement) 

Enforcement 
costs one-off  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

Enforcement 
costs 
recurrent  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

Indirect  costs 
(indirect 
compliance 
or 
transaction 
costs)  

Direct 
benefits:  one-
off  

Benefits 
identified  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

Direct 

Provision  of  

Provision 

of 

Provision 

of 

64 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
benefits: 
recurrent  

comparable 
information 
on migration 

Knowledge 
spreading and 
awareness 
raising 

Fostering 
open debates 

comparable 
information  and 
contribution 
to 
the  development 
migration-
of 
specific 
indicators 
statistics 

and 

of 
reliable 
to 
requests 

Provision 
quick 
responses 
urgent 
for information 

Safe  exchange  of 
information 
through the EMN 
IES  

comparable 
information  and 
contribution 
to 
the development 
of  migration-
specific 
indicators  and 
statistics 

of 
Provision 
reliable 
quick 
to 
responses 
urgent  requests 
for information 

Safe  exchange 
information 
of 
through 
the 
EMN IES  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A  

N/A 

Indirect 
benefits:  one-
off  

Indirect 
benefits: 
recurrent  

65 

 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 3 – EMN grants allocated to Member States (2017-2022)42   

1.400.000 €

1.200.000 €

1.000.000 €

800.000 €

600.000 €

400.000 €

200.000 €

0 €

AT BE BG CY CZ DE EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK

2017-18

2019-2020

2021-2022

Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

Figure 4 – Percentage of EMN grants awarded per Member State (2017-2022)43 

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

AT BE BG CY CZ DE EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT SE SI SK

2017-2018

2019-2020

2021-22

Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

42 Data concerning grant allocation to Ireland were not available for 2021-2022. 
43 Grant allocation data  were not available for Romania. In addition, grant data for Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, 
Germany,  Estonia,  Spain,  Italy,  Lithuania,  Malta,  Poland,  Portugal,  Sweden  and  Slovakia  were  not 
available for the 2021–2022 work programme period. 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 5 – Percentage of EMN grant spent per Member State (2017-2022)44 

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0%

BE BG CY CZ DE EE EL ES FI FR HR HU IE IT LU LV MT NL PL PT SE SI

2017-2018

2019-2020

2021-2022

Source: Independent external evaluation of the European Migration Network 2018-2021. Final report. 

44 Grant allocation data were not available for Austria, Lithuania, Romania and Slovakia. Data for Croatia were 
not  available  for  the  2017-2018  Work  Programme  period.  Data  for  Belgium,  Cyprus,  Germany,  Estonia, 
Spain, Italy, Malta, Poland, Portugal and Sweden were not available for the 2021-2022 period. 

67 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX V  STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTATION. SYNOPSIS REPORT. 

1.  Feedback received on the Call for Evidence 

Twenty-five  stakeholders  submitted  feedback  on  the  evaluation  call  for  evidence  (feedback 
period 16 January 2023 - 13 March 2023). Twenty-four stakeholders providing their feedback 
were EU citizens while one was under ‘Other’ category. None of the feedback was directly 
related  to  the  EMN  while  most  of  the  submissions  were  general  statements  in  favour  of 
tightening the EU migration policy. 

2.  Consultation strategy 

The  objective  of  the  consultations  was  to  collect  relevant  information  and  insights  on  the 
effectiveness, efficiency, coherence, EU added value and relevance of the EMN as well as to 
collect  inputs  on  lessons  learned.  To  do  so,  a  wide  range  of  EU,  international  and  national 
level stakeholders were consulted. 

The consultations that took place during the implementation of the supporting study included 
the following: 

•  online survey, 

• 

• 

• 

strategic interviews, 

targeted and flash interviews, 

case studies and workshop with NCP coordinators. 

Table 1 – Overview of the stakeholders reached through each consultation tool/method 

Type of stakeholder 

Online 
survey 

Strategic 
interviews 

Targeted 
interviews 

Flash 
interviews 

Case 
studies 

Workshop with 
NCP 
coordinators 

Commission  

X  

NCPs  

X  

SB members  

National 
Networks  

Migration 

X  

EU bodies  

X  

X  

X  

X  

X  

X  

X  

68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
International 
Organisations  

Civil 
Organisations  

Society 

Researchers/academics   

X  

X  

X  

2.1 Online survey 

An  online  survey  was  launched  to  (i)  collect  information  on  the  effectiveness,  efficiency, 
coherence,  EU  added  value  and  relevance  of  the  EMN,  (ii)  understand  the  problems/gaps 
affecting  the  functioning  and  effects  of  the  EMN,  as  well  as  (iii)  gather  suggestions  for 
future-looking recommendations. 

Two different survey questionnaires were used, targeted respectively at 29 National Contact 
Points (NCPs), and 555 National Migration Network members. 

The  survey  ran  from  5 September  2023  to  29 October  2023.  The  survey  has  been 
administered and centrally managed by using the Qualtrics tool. 

2.2 Strategic interviews 

A strategic interview was conducted at the beginning of the evaluation with the EMN chair - 
Head of Sector, Task Force Irregular Migration and the Policy officer responsible for EMN 
budget. The strategic interview explored the following points: 

•  Changes  occurred  since  the  last  evaluation,  as  regards  both  the  EMN  working 

mechanisms and its context of reference 

•  Current state of play of migration and asylum in the EU, including known problems 

and main issues at stake. 

•  Level of engagement of various stakeholders in the EMN activities 

•  Relationships/partnerships with other EU agencies/bodies 

•  State of implementation of the objectives set in the WPs, along with factors that might 

have adversely/positively affected their achievement. 

•  Categories of costs/benefits associated with participation in the Network. 

2.3 Flash interviews 

10  flash  interviews  were  performed  with  NCPs  which  volunteered  to  be  interviewed  in  the 
occasion of the 129 NCP meeting held in Brussels on 29 June 2023. These interviews focused 
on the following points: 

69 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  Overview of the NCP participation in and contribution to the EMN activities 

•  Main strengths and weaknesses of the EMN activities 

2.4 Targeted interviews 

A total of 33 targeted interviews were conducted online via Teams, with 23 members of the 
EMN SB, 4 EU bodies, 2 international organisations, 3 CSOs and 1 academic. 

Interviews with EU-level stakeholders focused on: 

•  Developments in the EU migration and asylum landscape 

•  Role  of  EU  Agencies  contributing  to  migration  and  asylum  policies,  and challenges 

faced in achieving higher coordination. 

•  Collaborations/partnerships developed with the Network. 

•  Burdens/benefits associated with engaging with the EMN. 

•  Recommendations to improving the EMN functioning and mandate. 

•  Good practices to be considered. 

Interviews with national stakeholders focused on: 

•  Relevant national developments in the field of migration and asylum 

•  Dissemination/outreach of the Network at the national and local levels 

•  Categories of costs/benefits associated with participation in the Network. 

•  Collaboration/partnership developed with/through the Network. 

•  Factors  that  might  have  adversely/positively  affected  the  achievement  of  the  EMN 

objectives. 

•  Good practices implemented at the local/regional level. 

Interviews with international and civil society organisations focused on: 

•  Opinion on relevance, quality, availability and accessibility of EMN outputs, as well 

as any suggestions for improvement 

•  Experience in using EMN tools. 

• 

Involvement in EMN networking activities 

•  Channels/networks/organisations preferred to the EMN. 

70 

 
 
Targeted interviews with representatives from academia focused on: 

•  Overall quality of the EMN publications 

•  Relevance of the topics covered by the EMN activities. 

•  Added value of the EMN 

2.5 Case studies 

Six  case  studies  were  performed  on  Bulgaria,  Cyprus,  Finland,  Germany,  Italy,  and  the 
Netherlands  in  order  to  better  demonstrate  some  aspects  of  the  evaluation,  gain  further 
insights and draw recommendations to improve the functioning of the EMN. 

Case study consultations were conducted via Microsoft Teams and included: 

•  Six group interviews with the NCP. 

•  Five focus groups with members of the National Migration Networks.1 

2.6 Workshop with NCP coordinators 

A workshop with NCP coordinators was organised at the end of the evaluation process with 
NCP coordinators (24 participants) to present the evaluation findings and related conclusions, 
and to discuss the feasibility of the preliminary recommendations under assessment. 

The  workshop  consisted  of  a  (1)  plenary  session,  where  the  evaluation  team  presented  the 
objectives  of  the  study  and  the  key  evaluation  findings,  followed  by  a  Q&A  section  with 
participants;  (2)  two  break-out  sessions  during  which  preliminary  recommendations  and 
lessons  learnt  were  addressed  and  discussed  with  smaller  groups  of  participants;  and  (3)  a 
second plenary session in which the outcomes of the break-out sessions were presented. 

3.  Results of the consultation activities 

3.1 Online survey 

3.1.1  Effectiveness 

The  majority  of  NCPs  agreed  that  the  EMN  supported  EU  policymaking  in  the  field  of 
migration and asylum. In particular: 

•  89%  believed  that  the  information  produced  by  the  EMN  has  been  used  to  identify 
and respond to EU policy priorities and has supported the design and implementation 
of new EU policy initiatives. 

•  59%  agreed  that  the  EMN  highly  contributed  to  informing  national  policymaking. 

Moreover, 

71 

 
 
 
 
•  56% agreed that the EMN supported cooperation between Member States. 

•  86%  agreed  that  that  participation  in  EMN  Working  Groups  enhanced  operational 
cooperation  93%  agreed  that  that  participation  in  EMN  Working  Groups  enhanced 
knowledge sharing among the Member States. 

Moreover, most NCPs and National Migration Network members agreed, from a medium to a 
complete  extent,  that  the  information  produced  by  the  EMN  was  accessible  (99%;  91%), 
comparable  (97%;  93%),  easily  readable  (89%;  89%),  objective  (100%;  100%),  reliable 
(100%; 95%) and up to date (92%; 90%). Finally, while 89% of NCPs highlighted that the 
EMN was increasingly used as a platform for knowledge exchange in the field of migration 
and  asylum  in  their  respective  countries,  only  58%  of  members  of  the  National  Migration 
Networks agreed with this statement. 

Concerning  the  provision  of  information  to  the  general  public,  some  divergencies  emerged 
between  the  opinions  provided  by  NCPs  and  those  provided  by  the  National  Migration 
Network members. In particular: 

•  44%  of  NCPs  believed  that  the  EMN  contributed  to  providing  information  on 
migration  and  asylum  to  the  general  public,  against  13%  of  the  national  network 
members. 

•  70% of NCPs agreed that the EMN dissemination activities contributed to increasing 
the Network’s visibility within the EU, against 22% of the national network members 
who  believed  that  the  EMN  dissemination  activities  contributed  to  increasing  the 
EMN visibility in their respective countries. 

Finally, both NCPs and National Migration Network members agreed that the EMN played a 
limited  role  in  countering  false  narratives  on  migration,  as  well  as  in  enhancing 
communication with the media on migration and asylum policies. 

3.1.2  Efficiency 

Most  consulted  NCPs  (75%)  believed  that  AMIF  resources  were  sufficient  to  implement 
EMN activities. Moreover, NCPs highlighted that the costs were proportionate to the benefits 
obtained from such activities. 

With  regards  to  the  EMN’s  governance,  NCPs  largely  agreed  that  the  EMN’s  internal 
structure  was  appropriate,  as  it  allowed  for  the  efficient  management  of  the  Network’s 
activities (52%) which is facilitated by a substantial level of awareness of internal roles and 
responsibilities (48%). 

The majority of NCPs were satisfied with the support both provided by the SB (51%) and the 
Service Provider (63%). 

72 

 
 
 
3.1.3  Coherence 

NCPs  believed  that  the  EMN  was  overall  consistent  with  the  New  Pact  on  migration  and 
asylum  (66%),  the  EU  Blue  Card  Directive  (40%)  and  the  EU  Action  plan  against  migrant 
smuggling  (48%).  National  Migration  Network  members  however,  proved  to  be  more 
hesitant  in  this  regard,  as  37%  believed  there  was  consistency  with  the  New  Pact  on 
migration and asylum, 21% with EU Blue Card Directive and 21% with the EU Action plan 
against migrant smuggling. 

Concerning  the  consistency  of  the  EMN  with  other  relevant  EU  Agencies,  7  NCPs 
highlighted a degree of overlap between the EMN activities and those of EUAA, which leads 
to a duplication of work for those who are involved with both agencies. 

3.1.4  EU added value 

Most  of  the  NCPs  agreed  that  many  advantages  brought  by  the  EMN  could  not  have  been 
achieved  without  the  support  of  the  Network.  Such  advantages  include  the  capacity  to 
respond to the information needs of national policymakers (71% NCPs) and to facilitate the 
exchange of good practices among  the Member States in  the field of migration and asylum 
(86%  NCPs).  Moreover,  many  NCPs  and  national  network  members  agreed  that  the 
terms  of  quality  (67%;  49%), 
is  better 
information  produced  by 
comprehensiveness  (85%;  60%)  and  relevance  (56%;  42%)  compared  to  the  alternative 
sources available in their respective countries. Finally, it was found that it would be difficult 
to  ensure  continuation  of  EMN  activities  such  as  ensuring  existence  of  national  networks, 
exchanging  information  with  third  countries  and  drafting  annual  policy  reports  on  the 
national situation in the field of migration and asylum, if EMN was discontinued. 

the  EMN 

in 

However, 82% NCPs and 66% national network members believed that regular collection of 
national  data  relevant  to  migration  and  asylum  would  continue  in  the  absence  of  EMN. 
Similarly,  78%  NCPs  and  52%  national  network  members  believed  that  the  exchange  of 
information with other Member States would not be affected. 

To  conclude,  around  40%  NCPs  agreed  that  Council  Decision  2008/381/EC  provides 
sufficient mandate towards the achievement of the EMN objectives. 

3.1.5  Relevance 

Most of the NCPs  and the national  network members consulted during the study think that 
the  EMN  products  have  met  their  information  needs  in  the  field  of  migration  and  asylum. 
Yet, while 46% of NCPs and 33%of national network members agreed that the information 
and  knowledge  produced  by  the  EMN  responded  to  the  information  needs  of  the  national 
policymakers  in  their  respective  countries,  most  national  network  members  (52%)  believe 
that the EMN is only partially aligned with the information needs of the general public. 

73 

 
 
All the NCPs and majority of the national network members (77%) think that the existence of 
a  European  Network  is  still  needed  to  meet  the  information  needs  related  to  migration  and 
asylum in their countries. 

3.2 Strategic interviews 

The following points were discussed: 

The functioning and scope of the EMN. The EMN has a strategic and operational nature. It is 
a complex entity  regulated by formal rules (e.g. Council Decision 2008/381/EC, WPs, etc.) 
and  works  on  a  dynamic  basis,  based  on  discussions  and  negotiations  between  the 
Commission and the Member States towards maximising the Network’s results and influence. 
Its  scope  of  activities  recently  broadened  to  include  new  relevant  topics  in  the  field  of 
migration and asylum, such as children in migration, unaccompanied migrants, and displaced 
persons caused by the war in Ukraine. 

The added value of the EMN. The EMN allows for regular and practical  interaction among 
the  Member  States  towards  tackling  challenges  related  to  migration  and  asylum  in  the  EU. 
EMN  outputs  support  national  policymaking  in  the  Member  State.  For  instance,  they  are 
taken into account  during national  parliamentary debates as well as in  court proceedings in 
high courts of justice, impacting on all migrants of those countries. Moreover, EMN supports 
the daily operational activities related to the management of migration flows in the EU. 

The challenges that the EMN is currently facing. The constantly changing trends in migration 
and asylum, largely affected by societal events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the war in 
Ukraine,  etc.,  require  the  EMN  work  and  organisation  to  frequently  adapt  to  new  and 
emerging needs. One of the biggest challenges that the EMN recently faced was the shift to 
fully  online  meetings  as  a  result  of  the  lockdown  in  times  of  COVID,  as  well  as  the 
management  of  many  people  being  in  the  EU  territory  with  invalid  visas  though  unable  to 
return to their counties due to the pandemic. 

The EMN budget. Pursuant to Council Decision 2008/381/EC, the Steering Board approves 
the  minimum  and  maximum  amount  of  the  EMN  budget  to  be  allocated  to  EMN  NCPs  to 
finance  EMN  activities  in  accordance  with  the  objectives  set  in  the  Work  Programmes 
(Article 4).  The  budget  is  allocated  to  each  NCP  through  a  Direct  Award  process  launched 
annually. The grant allocation procedure is fully digitalised and is managed by DG HOME. 
Generally, Member States ask for a co-financing rate of 80-85% of EMN budget to support 
EMN-related  activities.  The  EMN  budget  is  mostly  spent  to  support  the  production  of 
outputs, especially those based on desk research (e.g. EMN studies, informs, glossary). Issues 
of  underspending  have  been  observed  for  the  period  2018-2021,  mainly  due  to  limited 
activities undertaken during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Areas of improvement. There should be higher alignment between the Commission and the 
NCPs, as well as among the NCPs, on what are the strategic and operational priorities in the 
field  of  migration  and  asylum.  Also,  shortcomings  in  the  EMN  implementation  procedures 

74 

 
 
were  highlighted,  including  the  lack  of  sufficient  expertise  within  the  NCPs  in  terms  of 
management of EU funds application procedures. It was also underlined that such expertise is 
not specifically requested by the Council Decision. 

3.3 Targeted interviews 

3.3.1  Effectiveness 

Overall,  it  was  confirmed  that  the  EMN  provided  accessible,  comparable,  easily  readable, 
objective,  reliable  and  up-to-date  information.  Most  NCPs  interviewed  during  the  study 
highlighted  that  the  EMN  provided  updated  information  mainly  through  the  regular 
publication of the ARMs and their statistical annexes, as well as through quarterly Bulletins. 
Objectivity and reliability of the EMN information were ensured through a multi-stakeholder 
and multi-agency approach to the data collection process, which included the involvement of 
the National  Migration Networks. According to  nine NCPs, three Steering Board members, 
two  EU  bodies  and  one  academic,  EMN  products  were  relevant  sources  of  information,  as 
well as appropriate in terms of number and topics covered. 

Moreover, as pointed out by one Steering Board member, four EU bodies and one CSO, the 
information  provided  by  the  EMN  was  used  by  EU-level  stakeholders  in  various  ways, 
including  to  assess  and  revise  EU  relevant  initiatives  (e.g.  the  Long-Term  Residence 
Directive  and  the  Temporary  Protection  Directive),  as  well  as  to  streamline  the  data 
collection conducted by other relevant EU bodies. 

The  collaboration  between  the  EMN  and  other  EU  bodies,  CSOs  and  international 
organisations was generally positive. 

Concerning  the  provision  of  information  to  the  general  public,  nine  NCPs  and  11  Steering 
Board  members  highlighted  that  EMN  products  were  properly  disseminated  withing  and 
beyond  the  EMN,  through  the  EMN  website  and  social  media  account.  Moreover,  the 
majority  of  consulted  stakeholders  agreed  that  EMN  conferences  and  events  contributed  to 
disseminating EMN products, thanks to the budget specifically allocated to such activities. 

3.3.2  Efficiency 

According to 11 Steering Board members, the EMN budget was sufficient to implement the 
Network’s  activities,  with  costs  being  proportionate  to  the  benefits  obtained.  Nevertheless, 
five Steering Board members complained that the funding awarded for unit costs foreseen for 
travelling and accommodation purposes was not sufficient. 

EMN grant award procedures were seen as time-consuming. More precisely, as highlighted 
by 11 Steering Board members, such procedures were not timely, with funding, often times, 
not  being  available  yet  when  the  implementation  of  the  activities  foreseen  by  the  Work 
Programmes started. 

75 

 
 
 
Also,  two  NCPs,  three  Steering  Board  members  and  one  EU  body  highlighted  that  the 
Commission’s  role  as  chair  of  the  Steering  Board  created  some  conflict  of  interest,  in 
particular during the selection of topics to be covered by the EMN, when the Commission’s 
priorities end up prevailing over those of the NCPs. 

3.3.3  Coherence 

The  work  conducted  by  the  EMN  was  found  to  be  consistent  with  the  work  conducted  by 
other relevant EU agencies, as confirmed by two NCPs, six Steering Board members, all EU 
bodies, one international organisation and two CSOs. 

3.3.4  EU added value 

Through its direct support towards enhanced cooperation both within and beyond the EU, the 
EMN  brought  about  remarkable  added  value,  as  highlighted  by  nine  Steering  Board 
members. Moreover, two NCPs, six Steering Board members and one academic highlighted 
that  the  permanent  nature  of  the  EMN  facilitated  cooperation  and  mutual  trust  among 
stakeholders involved in the field of migration and asylum, which were essential to retrieve 
data and provide comprehensive and reliable information. 

Consulted  stakeholders  (eight  NCPs,  four  Steering  Board  members,  three  EU  bodies,  all 
international  organisations  and  two  CSOs)  agreed  that  if  the  EMN  did  not  exist,  the  varied 
and structured information it produced would not have been in place, as there is no other EU 
network or organisation that offers the same quality of information. 

EMN  products,  especially  AHQs,  ARMs,  Informs,  as  well  as  the  EMN  Glossary,  played  a 
pivotal  role  towards  the  creation  of  a  common  understanding  of  key  migration-related 
features among policymakers from different Member States, as highlighted by six NCPs, one 
Steering Board member, one EU body, two CSOs and one academic. 

3.3.5  Relevance 

Overall,  it  was  confirmed  that  EMN  products  covered  all  the  priority  topics  suggested  by 
participants in the EMN meetings. Indeed, as highlighted by nine Steering Board members, 
topics were proposed by the Commission but need to be approved by a two-thirds majority of 
SB members. 

Four  NCPs  and  one  EU  body  highlighted  that  EMN  publication  procedures  were  often  too 
lengthy,  which  led  to  information  being  made  available  too  late,  affecting  the  Network’s 
timeliness and relevance. 

3.4 Case studies 

3.4.1  Effectiveness 

76 

 
 
 
Overall, consulted stakeholders from  all six  Member States selected as  case studies, agreed 
that the EMN, through its products and activities, supported EU and national policymaking in 
the  field  of  migration  and  asylum.  Among  EMN  products,  AHQs  were  highlighted  as 
extremely useful by stakeholders in four Member States. Nonetheless, in two Member States, 
some stakeholders noted that there was no direct link between the information produced by 
the EMN and national policies. 

Concerning  the  provision  of  information  to  the  general  public,  some  stakeholders  in  two 
Member States highlighted that there was a lack of public awareness of the EMN, noting that 
dissemination efforts targeted at the general public should be enhanced. 

3.4.2  Efficiency 

Consulted  stakeholders  in  five  Member  States  agreed  that  the  funding  allocated  for  EMN 
products  and activities  was appropriate, while stakeholders in  one Member State disagreed, 
stating that the funding they received was not sufficient to cover all expenses, preventing the 
organisation of events at the national level, as well as participation in other NCPs’ events. 

With regards to grant allocation procedures, stakeholders in four Member States complained 
that  such  procedures  were  lengthy  and  burdensome,  with  grants  often  being  available  only 
after the start of the activities envisaged by the Work Programmes. 

3.4.3  Coherence 

According to  stakeholders from  all six  Member States, there was a high  level  of coherence 
between  the  policy  areas  covered  by  EMN  products  and  national  policy  priorities  and 
strategies in their respective countries. 

Concerning  consistency  between  the  EMN  and  other  EU  agencies  and  initiatives, 
stakeholders from one Member State highlighted a degree of overlap between the activities of 
the EMN and those of EUAA, while stakeholders from another Member State highlighted a 
degree  of  overlap  between  the  activities  of  the  EMN  and  those  of  the  EU  Blueprint.  This 
results  in  duplication  of  work  for  those  involved  with  the  EMN  and  other  agencies  and 
initiatives. 

3.4.4  EU added value 

Stakeholders  from  all  six  Member  States  agreed  that  the  EMN,  through  its  provision  of 
timely,  up-to-date,  high  quality  and  reliable  information,  brought  remarkable  added  value. 
Moreover,  stakeholders  from  four  Member  States  highlighted  that  a  key  advantage  of  the 
EMN  was  the  establishment  of  a  formal,  structured,  and  comprehensive  platform  for  the 
provision  of  comparable  information.  Other  identified  advantages  were  the  networking 
opportunities  provided  by  EMN  meetings  and  events  (one  Member  State),  facilitation  of 
national  policymaking  (two  Member  States),  quick  access  to  information  through  AHQs 
(three Member States), cooperation and exchange of information and good practices among 

77 

 
 
Member States (four Member States), approximation of national approaches to migration and 
asylum (one Member State) and provision of public information (one Member State). 

Even in  cases  where mechanisms exist to  ensure the sustainability  of the EMN’s activities, 
the  consulted  stakeholders  largely  agreed  that  the  above-mentioned  advantages  would 
disappear if the EMN were to be discontinued, and retrieving the same information provided 
by the EMN would be extremely costly and time-consuming (three Member States). 

3.4.5  Relevance 

The EMN’s legal basis proved to be adequate to ensure the adaptability of the EMN to new 
and  emerging  challenges,  as  seen  during  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  when  the  EMN  swiftly 
adapted  the  focus  of  its  outputs  to  collect  information  and  cover  issues  related  to  the 
pandemic  (all  Member  States).  Yet,  according  to  consulted  stakeholders  from  one  Member 
State, the broad mandate of the EMN leads to the production of EMN outputs that are either 
too broad or too specific, consequently reducing their relevance to all Member States. 

Moreover,  consulted  stakeholders  from  three  Member  States  highlighted  that  the  topics 
covered  by  the  EMN  matched  the  information  needs  of  national  policymakers  in  their 
respective countries. Interestingly, consulted stakeholders from one Member State, noted that 
national policymakers require information on the spot, which can be difficult to obtain from 
the EMN, due to the lengthy topic selection and publication procedures of EMN outputs. As a 
result,  by  the  time  EMN  outputs  are  published,  they  are  not  as  relevant.  Yet,  consulted 
stakeholders from the same Member State highlighted that the EMN’s relevance resides in its 
contribution to improving cooperation among Member States and facilitating the exchange of 
expertise in the field of migration and asylum. 

3.5 Workshop with NCP coordinators 

Two  NCPs  that  participated  in  the  workshop,  stressed  the  need  to  assess  the  way  Work 
Programmes are developed, as they tend to be too ambitious, leading to some objectives (e.g. 
anticipate migration developments, prevent migration crisis and counter false narratives) not 
being achieved. Moreover, they noted that the Commission plays a pivotal role in designing 
the  Work  Programmes,  which  results  in  the  Work  Programmes  mainly  reflecting  the 
Commission’s priorities. 

Moreover,  three  NCPs  suggested  that  the  EMN’s  limited  contribution  to  anticipating 
migration  developments,  preventing  migration  crises,  and  exploiting  new  technologies  for 
migration  management  should  not  be  identified  as  an  issue,  as  these  are  not  part  of  the 
Network’s  mandate,  though  they  were  in  the  end  included  as  specific  objectives  in  the 
EMN’s Work Programmes. In this regard, five NCPs highlighted that the Commission played 
a stronger role that that of the NCPs when it comes to outlining the objectives of the Work 
Programmes, leaving NCPs with not enough room to negotiate the objectives. 

78 

 
 
Concerning  the  identified  issue  on  the  moderate  contribution  made  by  the  EMN  to  the 
dissemination of national good practices, two NCPs noted that this was not an issue, as EMN 
products included a section on good practices. 

As for the issue related to the EMN’s limited provision of comparable statistics, two NCPs 
agreed that the statistics  needed for EMN outputs were based on the data collected through 
administrative procedures which vary across countries. In this regard, one NCP noted that as 
EUROSTAT already works with national statistics offices, including on data harmonisation. 

As  regards  the  issue  of  unit  costs  foreseen  for  travelling  and  accommodation  purposes  not 
being sufficient, four NCPs highlighted that the only possible solution to tackle this issue is to 
change the threshold of unit costs. 

Three NCPs noted that is is essential to address the issue of grant allocation procedures being 
too lengthy, which is caused by understaffing in the Commission to regulate grant allocation 
procedures  (one NCP) and by the excessive rigidity  in the Commission hiring process  (one 
NCP). 

One NCP, who is also part of the EMN Communication and Dissemination Working Group 
(CDWG),  noted  that  since  2018  there  had  been  a  lot  of  focus  on  improving  the  issues 
highlighted  concerning  the  provision  of  information  to  the  general  public,  and  centrally 
produce  material  that  could  be  adapted  to  national  needs  and  disseminated  to  the  general 
public.  The  same  NCP  further  noted  that  at  the  national  level  the  NCP’s  communication 
efforts are supported by a national private service provider. Three NCPs highlighted their use 
of  Destination  Europe  to  reach  the  general  public  from  universities  and  be  in  close  contact 
with all associations of teachers that deal with the topic of migration. Among the main issues 
hindering  the  provision  of  information  to  the  general  public,  the  following  were  identified: 
the  excessive  number  of  outputs  to  be  provided,  which  prevented  NCPs  from  properly 
focusing on dissemination efforts (two NCPs), internal constraints related to the fact that the 
NCP was part of the Ministry of Interior (MoI) and that all communication efforts had to go 
through  the  PR  office  of  the  Ministry  (one  NCP)  and  internal  constraints  related  to  hiring 
additional staff (three NCPs). 

Five  NCPs  highlighted  that  overall,  there  is  not  enough  room  to  make  changes  once 
modifications  were  made  to  the  first  draft  of  Work  Programmes  by  the  Commission.  The 
process of drafting the Work Programmes was not a bottom-up process and NCPs were not as 
involved as the Commission. 

Finally,  an  NCP  stressed  that  the  fact  that  lengthy  process  to  launch  and  produce  a  Study 
affects the visibility of the EMN at the national level, and that this is partially caused by the 
fact that the EMN is a European Network and as such, requires several steps before finalising 
the approval of a topic or product. 

79