1

Complementary note to EUA’s membership consultation and

recommendations for the future of the Erasmus+ programme

Erasmus + Mid-term evaluation: Grants for Refugee Students and Scholars, Masters’

Loan Guarantee Scheme and the Bologna Experts Scheme 31 May 2017

The present paper complements the European University Association’s (EUA) response to the EC’s

online questionnaire for the Open Public Consultation on the mid-term evaluation of the Erasmus+

Programme, the report based on EUA’s membership consultation1 (December 2016) and the resulting

set of Recommendations2 (February 2017).

One of the recommendations – Nr. 8 – proposes to establish a Grant for Refugee Students and Scholars.

EUA would like to provide further explanation for this specific recommendation. In addition, EUA

would like to express its views on the Masters’ Loan Guarantee Scheme and the Bologna Experts

Scheme – which had not been addressed in EUA’s previous statements.

1. Explanatory note on the Recommendation on a Erasmus+ Grant for Refugee

Students and Scholars

EUA’s Recommendation Nr. 8 refers to “flexibility to respond to emerging challenges, such as support for refugee students and staff.” It proposes “to establish a specific support action for refugee students and academics, not only in third countries, but also in the programme countries,” and concluded: “Taking part in Erasmus+ mobility would turn refugees into international students and academics, giving them better prospects for integration and careers in their country of origin, as well as in Europe. It would also allow better dissemination among different member states and universities and enhance their international cooperation and networking, as well as create long-term social and economic benefits. In addition, these measures would set an example and raise awareness for the situation of refugees, both in Europe and internationally.”

EUA would like to add the following explanatory points: 1. While for any person threats to civic rights, health and life can be reason to leave their country,

students and scholars are among those likely to suffer from persecution, due to involvement in

research, and their dependence on academic freedom and autonomy. Some become officially

refugees, others seek ways to become “international” students and scholars, so the dark figure

would be higher than any official number.

1 EUA 2016. EUA MEMBER CONSULTATION A CONTRIBUTION TO THE ERASMUS+ MID-TERM REVIEW. Available online: http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage-list/eua-membership-consultation-2016-mid-term-review-of-erasmus.pdf?sfvrsn=4 2 EUA 2017. ERASMUS+ MID-TERM REVIEW: EUA’S RECOMMENDATIONS. Available online: http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage-list/erasmus-recommendations.pdf?sfvrsn=2

2

2. Academic solidarity organisations, such as Scholars at Risk, the Scholars Rescue Fund, and CARA

report a steep increase in the number of academics seeking refuge in Europe and other parts of

the world, compared to one or two decades ago. This is also due to the fact that higher education

has expanded around the world, and in particular in third world countries, many of them with

weak democracies.

3. For young people, becoming a refugee is often synonymous with missing out on education. This is

particularly evident for students or potential students in higher education, as intervention in host

countries, reception centres or camps often focuses only on the provision of primary and

secondary education. A 2016 UNHCR report points to the fact that only 1% of refugees have access

to higher education. Missing out on education has a long-term impact, not only for the individuals,

but also the communities and the societies they live in.

4. As universities are under pressure to internationalise, and welcome international staff and

students, this presents a clear opportunity for both the refugees and the host institutions. Their

inclusion not only enhances the economic, professional and social prospects of the individual, but

also their ability to contribute to their host communities, or their community of origin.

5. Data collected by EUA suggests that universities all over Europe already support refugees. Apart

from legal status and language issues, what prevents more institutions from hosting more refugee

students and scholars is the lack of financial support. A few governments provide funding, but

European universities usually have to rely on their own resources.

6. A number of governmental and non-governmental organisations around the world provide

targeted support to refugee staff and students, for instance in Canada, and a few EU countries,

and the US, which takes them in as international students. But there is no real European-wide

initiative.

7. An Erasmus+ grant scheme could help to improve the situation for refugee students and staff, their

hosting institutions, and also contribute to the international visibility and standing of the EU.

2. Reinforcement of the Bologna Experts and Coordinators EUA calls for a reestablishment of the Bologna Experts in all Programme countries, and a systematic

exchange and cooperation with the HERE in partner countries. This could support the current reform

priorities, such as the enhancement of learning and teaching (including digitalisation), which require

close collaboration between governments, the higher education sector and other stakeholders.

For almost a decade, Bologna Experts (previously Bologna Promoters and ECTS counsellors) have been

a crucial resource for the dissemination and implementation of European reforms, but also for their

further development. They provided an important link between policy and practice levels, within their

countries and across borders, and have been drivers and multipliers for national and institutional

higher education development in line with agreed European policy principles and instruments. It is

very difficult to imagine the implementation of the three-cycle system, ECTS, learning outcomes and

also institutional and national QA approaches without the support of the Bologna Experts.

With the arrival of Erasmus+ in 2014, the funding mechanism for the Bologna Experts has been

changed: only a few Member States applied for funding, and continue to have National Bologna Teams.

Hence, the Bologna Experts have become a rather fragmented initiative, which is no longer used in all

Programme countries.

3

By contrast, in the 26 countries of the Eastern and Southern Neighbourhood the previous scheme has

been continued and is operated successfully under the name “Higher Education Reform Experts”

(HERE, formerly: Tempus experts).

3. Masters’ Loan Guarantee Scheme EUA calls for a thorough and impartial assessment of the Masters’ Loan Guarantee Scheme

(MLGS). As it principally welcomes the intention to enhance cross-border degree mobility,

this should also include the consideration of an alternative scheme, e.g. through a trust

fund.

Its implementation so far has been slow, and there is some indication that this is not just due to the

lead-time needed to develop and promote it, but that the MLGS has serious shortcomings As the

scheme is not attractive enough for banks, the European Investment Fund (EIF) and the EC have now

started to offer universities to become financial intermediaries. So far only five banks and one

university in six countries have agreed to get involved.

EUA is concerned that the scheme will result in relatively high bureaucratic efforts and costs for the

universities and students, with no real added value. Depending on the country, universities might not

be able to defer payments, either for legal reasons, or because there are no tuition fees. In some

countries, the scheme would not be able to compete with existing national portal loan and grant

systems. Given the patchy take up, the scheme is unlikely to develop into a truly European instrument.

EUA therefore calls for an assessment by a team of independent experts, from both higher education

and finance backgrounds. As the idea to have additional mobility schemes, and to enable Masters’

mobility throughout Europe is still welcome in principle, EUA invites the European Commission to

consider an alternative approach to the present MLGS, e.g. the establishment of a European trust fund,

which would provide grants instead of loans.

Various different approaches for selection (excellence, need, study in thematic priority areas, etc.)

would be possible. If successful, it could also be extended to Bachelor or PhD level.

The target of the Masters Loan Scheme is to finance an estimated 200 000 student loans until 2020

(loans between 12 000 and 18 000 EUR). Alternatively, the 520 million EUR would fund about 34 666

full scholarships with an average value of 15 000 EUR. Since January 2013, the new Financial Regulation

applicable to the EU budget (Article 187 of the Financial Regulation), allows the European Commission

to create and administer EU Trust Funds in the field of external action, which are multi-donor trust

funds for emergency or thematic actions.

4

Annex I

For further information, including the findings of a consultation conducted amongst

universities on Erasmus+, as well as concrete recommendations for the next programme

generation, please refer to the following sources:

EUA 2016. EUA MEMBER CONSULTATION A CONTRIBUTION TO THE ERASMUS+ MID-TERM REVIEW.

Available online: http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage-list/eua-membership-

consultation-2016-mid-term-review-of-erasmus.pdf?sfvrsn=4

EUA 2017. ERASMUS+ MID-TERM REVIEW: EUA’S RECOMMENDATIONS. Available online:

http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage-list/erasmus-recommendations.pdf?sfvrsn=2

ERASMUS+

MID-TERM REVIEW:

EUA’S RECOMMENDATIONS

EU

A M

EM

BER

CO

NS

ULT

AT

ION

FEBRUARY 2017

Copyright © European University Association 2017

All rights reserved.

This information may be freely used and copied for non-commercial purposes, provided that the

source is acknowledged (©European University Association).

European University Association asbl

Avenue de l’Yser 24 · 1040 Brussels, Belgium

info@eua.be · Tel: +32-2 230 55 44 · Fax: +32-2 230 57 51

ERASMUS+

MID-TERM REVIEW: EUA’S RECOMMENDATIONS

ERASMUS+ MID-TERM REVIEW: EUA’S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE 2020 PROGRAMME

The Erasmus+ Programme (2014-2020) is currently undergoing a mid-term review, and the European University Association (EUA) calls upon European higher education institutions and organisations to participate in the ongoing consultations, notably in the European Commission’s (EC) public consultation to be opened in March 2017. As a contribution to the discussion, EUA has drawn up a detailed report on how Erasmus+ is received at the institutions (“EUA member consultation: A contribution to the Erasmus+ mid-term review”). In addition, it proposes the following recommendations, formulated in close collaboration with its members and partners, on how to improve the programme beyond 2020.

EUA is the umbrella organisation of 33 national rectors’ conferences and 800 individual universities in 47 European countries. EUA is active in European policy making, both in the European Higher Education Area and the European Research Area. It is also engaged in international dialogue and cooperation with partner organisations around the globe.

1

Indispensable for EuropeThe Erasmus+ Programme is of high importance for the European higher education community, as it contributes to enhancing its quality and international recognition: It enables exchange and cooperation within Europe and beyond with partners from outside Europe. By doing so, it contributes in a very practical, efficient and effective way to enhancing the internationalisation and quality of higher education on a wide range of issues including credit transfer, new learning methods, quality assurance, cooperation with industry and communities, student participation in institutional governance and green sustainable campuses.

Supported by Erasmus+, institutions jointly develop and disseminate good practices, share their responses to European higher education reforms under the EU 2020 and ET 2020 strategies and the Bologna Process, but also feed into ongoing reform development processes and inspire new ones. Much of the progress in higher education that Europe has experienced over the past decade has derived from EC-funded projects. These actions generate immediate benefits for students and staff, and enable Europe’s higher education institutions and systems to keep abreast of developments in the sector and to demonstrate their leadership in international cooperation.

2

Achievement and an urgent need for enhancement

Erasmus+ has been a success: The EUA member consultation report found that it has brought a number of improvements compared to its predecessors, such as better integration of programmes, a more transparent structure, more streamlined rules and procedures, including the shift towards e- and online processes, and improved cooperation and exchange opportunities with international and non-higher education partners.

But the report also highlights areas for improvement. The success of the programme is not matched by funding: Under some of the actions, due to a limited number of grants, success rates are under 20%. As most European higher education institutions are publicly funded, the latter implies a quite substantial waste of taxpayers’ money. In addition, the goal of simplification has not always been reached, and, even on the contrary, for some actions the level of bureaucracy has increased – resulting in a higher workload and additional costs for all parties, including the EC’s Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) and the National Agencies. The combination of bureaucratic burden and low success rates increases the risk that despite the relatively high participation numbers, parts of the sector may disengage and orientate themselves elsewhere.

In this regard, EUA and its members and partners welcome the mid-term review as an opportunity for thorough and systematic enhancement. The following recommendations take into consideration the lessons learnt from the first years of implementation and the concrete needs of the stakeholders. They focus on enhancing the quality of outcomes, but also on ensuring the engagement and the satisfaction of all stakeholders, within and outside of higher education. In addition, they aim at enhancing the programme’s ability to function in and respond to a changing European and global framework, which will be of utmost importance for its relevance.

10 recommendations for enhancing Erasmus+1. Continue to simplify rules, requirements and processes for application, management and reporting, in order to decrease the administrative burden

This would benefit not only the higher education community, but also the EACEA and the National Agencies. It concerns all three Key Actions (KA), though most urgently KA1 mobility actions, where the administrative burden has increased significantly.

While Erasmus+ is indispensable for European higher education, the links and relations it helps build are of great benefit for society and the economy: Erasmus+ is a long-term investment into the integration and innovative power of Europe. It educates European citizens, builds an internationally educated workforce, and paves new ways of collaboration with industry and society, within Europe and beyond.

3

2. Enhance paper-free and online processes and tools, data compatibility and user-friendliness

The use of scanned copies in place of paper has been an improvement under Erasmus+, but this should be further enhanced. Online tools such as the mobility tool, and the language learning facility are a step in the right direction, but should be developed in close collaboration with and thoroughly tested by stakeholders. Data compatibility between the tools and with the database systems used by institutions has to be ensured, and access improved for all users, including mobile individuals.

Such changes would significantly ease the administrative burden, in particular but not only for the KA1 mobility actions, which are work intensive due to the large number of grants and beneficiaries and the complex documentation and communication processes they entail.

3. Improve funding and funding efficiency

More flexibility in managing project budgets for mobility and collaboration could help to decrease the administrative burden, avoid conflicts with beneficiaries’ national and institutional rules and regulations, improve quality and save money. As most European higher education institutions are publicly funded, their costs are taxpayers’ money spent.

Cost coverage has to be improved, in particular for staff and travel costs. The present unit cost approach of some actions should be reconsidered, as it effectively results in higher co-funding contributions and in uncertainties for budget planning.

The EC should also reassess the current practice of the obligatory external audit of every KA2 project. It creates an extra layer of work and cost. The previous audit practice seems to be much more appropriate, also as a majority of European higher education institutions are already subject to internal and external audits and accountancy.

4. Increase the number of grants under some of the actions in order to achieve reasonable success rates

In order to ensure the success of Erasmus+, its total funding has to be increased as there are evidently not enough grants. This is the case in particular for the KA1 Erasmus Mundus Joint Degrees (EMJD) and the KA2 – Cooperation Projects, where the low number of grants has resulted in low success rates. In one of its actions, the Knowledge Alliances, only 4% of applications were awarded in 2014. In the same year, only 12% of the grants under the Strategic Partnerships went to higher education.

Under KA1 International Credit Mobility (ICM), the focus on the Southern and Eastern Neighbourhood should be maintained and promoted as it helps to build links between people and institutions with a long-term positive impact. However, more grants for Latin America and industrialised countries should be made available in response to strong demand.

4

5. Maintain and further enhance the European dimension of all actions, as this is the key added value of the programme

All KA2 actions – including the KA2 Strategic Partnerships - should be selected and administered centrally at the European level, as was the case for collaboration programmes prior to Erasmus+. This would ensure their visibility and accessibility at the European level. Selection should be subject to quality, but also consider geographical balance.

In addition, the EC should reassess the current separation between KA2 and KA3 projects, as under KA2 there are also projects that contribute to policy reform.

With regard to eligibility rules, EUA proposes to grant “European status” to representative organisations and networks that have a pan-European identity and mission and are based in an EU member state (e.g. to allow for joint projects among organisations based in the same country).

6. Improve attractiveness and accessibility of the programme for institutions from all over Europe

The combination of complicated and work-intensive application and management processes, unattractive funding conditions (high co-funding margin, low and uncertain cost coverage), and low success rates impacts the attractiveness of the programme. Institutions may either be unable to afford participation, due to the financial or human resource implications, or simply decide not to participate, due to the cost-benefit ratio, and as they find more attractive funding opportunities elsewhere. This could result in lower quality participation, but also distort the geographical balance of Erasmus+ participation as it affects some countries more than others.

7. Foster more equity in Key Action 1 - Student Mobility

The EC should further encourage the member states to co-fund and top up the Erasmus+ student mobility grants to widen access to disadvantaged learners, among others, through regional and social funds. The availability of such funding could be included in the semester reports as one of the indicators for equity and social inclusion, which might also motivate other countries to follow suit.

8. Increase flexibility to respond to emerging challenges, such as support for refugee students and staff

Erasmus+ should be able to respond flexibly to emerging challenges at European and international levels. Under the new programme, EUA suggests the creation of a mechanism for repurposing, reallocating or setting some funding aside for calls for proposals and projects for such purposes.

In addition, EUA proposes to establish a specific support action for refugee students and academics, not only in third countries, but also in the programme countries. So far, refugees, while explicitly mentioned as a priority group in the Erasmus+ Programme guide as of 2015, are only indirectly supported by KA2 and KA3 projects, whereas measures under the Madad Fund benefit only refugees in third countries. Taking part in Erasmus+ mobility would turn refugees into international students and academics, giving them better prospects for integration and careers in their country of origin, as well as in Europe. It would also allow better dissemination

5

among different member states and universities and enhance their international cooperation and networking, as well as create long-term social and economic benefits. In addition, these measures would set an example and raise awareness for the situation of refugees, both in Europe and internationally.

9. Better support dissemination and sharing of outcomes

Erasmus+ should allocate some funding to facilitate networking and synergies among projects and other initiatives. This could be done through “structural” projects (projects awarded for coordinating activities, e.g. thematic networking events), which could be established on certain topics and regions.

The Repository of Erasmus+ Project Results is a major improvement. It should be maintained and enhanced, e.g. by linking in all projects of predecessor programmes and by improving user-friendliness, in particular the ability to search topics across all actions. This would enable follow-up and networking, as well as enhance impact and sustainability. It should include a contact database of all active stakeholders, administered in collaboration with the National Agencies. This would also help to further strengthen the support of the higher education community to Erasmus+, which is crucial for its enhancement and sustainability.

10. Increase collaboration with the higher education community and the National Agencies on these improvements

University staff and students are not only beneficiaries, but key stakeholders of Erasmus+. Many of them are highly committed, hold vast knowledge on and long-standing experience with the EC programmes, and engage in various ways for their improvement.

This community should be systematically and consistently consulted on the improvement of specific aspects and tools of the programme, rather than only asked to participate in a public consultation on the entire Erasmus+ Programme every other year. EUA therefore recommends that the EC organise focus groups on specific administrative matters and/or features of the Erasmus+ Programme.

This should especially be the case when new programme actions, features or tools are being launched, updated or adapted. These should be developed in collaboration and sufficiently tested with the end users – preferably in a time frame that allows for review throughout a full cycle of implementation, e.g. a semester covering a full cycle of mobility.

European University Association asbl · Avenue de l’Yser 24 · 1040 Brussels, Belgium

Tel: +32 2 230 55 44 · Fax: +32 2 230 57 51 · www.eua.be

The European University Association (EUA) is the representative organisation of universities and national rectors’ conferences in 47 European countries. EUA plays a crucial role in the Bologna Process and in influencing EU policies on higher education, research and innovation. Thanks to its interaction with a range of other European and international organisations EUA ensures that the independent voice of European universities is heard wherever decisions are being taken that will impact their activities.

The Association provides a unique expertise in higher education and research as well as a forum for exchange of idas and good practice among universities. The results of EUA’s work are made available to members and stakeholders through conferences, seminars, website and publications.