Ls and Unit Cost Decision Erasmus en

Ref.
Ares(2023)8102133 - 28/11/2023
DECISION authorising the use of lump sums and unit costs under the Erasmus+
Programme 2021 - 2027
1
HISTORY OF CHANGES
Version Publication date Changes

and Ares
Reference
1.0 24/03/2021 Initial version

Ares(2021)2083983
2.0 23/11/2021 Amendment to Annex 1

Ares(2021)7195205 • in particular to modify the following sections
o 3.1.4.1 Higher Education,
o 3.1.4.2 Mobility projects for VET learners
and staff, School education pupils and staff,
Adult education learners and staff,
o 3.1.4.3 Youth exchanges and, mobility of
Youth workers and Youth participation
activities,
o 3.2.1 Cooperation Partnerships
• and to add the following actions:
o DiscoverEU Inclusion action (under section
3.1.9),
o Support and network functions of National
Agencies (under section 3.3)
Amendment to Annex 2
• in particular to modify the following sections
o 3.1.1 XXX
o 3.1.7 Cooperation partnerships in the field of
sport, Education and Training, Youth
(European NGOs)
• and to add the following actions:
o Virtual Exchanges (under section 3.2),
o Capacity Building in the field of VET, in the
field of Higher Education and in the field of
Sport (under section 3.2),
o Policy Networks (under section 3.2),
o National Erasmus Offices (under section 3.2),
o Social Inclusion and Common Values (under
section 3.2),
o European policy netwok on teacher and school
leaders (under section 3.2),
o European Policy network in the field of
education of children and young people with
migrant background (under section 3.2),
o Jean Monnet EU Initiative (under section 3.1.4)
2
3.0 17/10/2022
Ares(2022)7195454 Amendment to Annex 2
• In particular to add the following actions
o Civil Society Cooperation: Education and
Training (under section 3.1.8)
o Civil Society Cooperation: Youth (under section
3.1.8)

Ares(2022)8015164 • In particular to modify section 3.1.4 – Individual
support
5.0 XX/XX/2023 Amendment to Annex 1

Ares(2023)XXXX • In particular to modify section
o 3.1.1 Travel support : new amounts
according to distance bands
o 3.1.2 Organisational support : updated
amounts for adult education (3.1.2.2) and
youth (3.1.2.3)
o 3.1.3 Inclusion support for organisations :
update of the fixed amount per eligible
participant for all sectors
o 3.1.4 Individual support : update of the three
country groups, amounts for HE staff, VET
staff and learners, adult education staff and
learners, school staff and pupils, youth
exchanges and youth workers
o 3.1.5 Preparatory visits : new fixed amount
per participant
o 3.1.8.2 Coaching costs : update of the
country groups
o 3.1.9 DiscoverEU inclusion action : new
amount of support per participant per day
• In particular to modify the following actions:
•
o Jean Monnet : new lump sums for Jean Monnet
Chairs, Jean Monnet Modules and EU Learning
Initiatives. (section 3.1.3, 3.1.4)
o Erasmus Mundus Joint Master -Design
Measuress : new lump sum (section 3.1.5)
And add the following actions to section 3.2:
o Erasmus+ Teacher Academies
3
o European policy experimentations
4
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation 2021/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council
establishing 'Erasmus+': the Union programme for education, training, youth and sport1, and in
particular Article 18.2
Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union2,
and in particular Articles 125 and 181 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Given the high number of actions and individual grants under the Erasmus+ programme,
there is significant potential for simplification.
(2) The use of lump sum and unit contributions will reduce administrative burden/costs for
beneficiaries and the granting authority, speed up the payment process and facilitate
increased focus on the quality of the results.
(3) Simplified cost options have been implemented in predecessor programmes to

Erasmus+ with great success in improving access, simplifying management, and
reducing irregularity; Simpler funding rules relating to reimbursement of costs can also
facilitate a wider range and increased quality of applications, and provide legal certainty
to beneficiaries.
(4) The use of lump sum and unit contributions under the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027
should therefore be authorised.
THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN DECIDED:
Sole Article
The use of the Union contribution in the form of lump sum and unit contributions is authorised
for education and training, youth and sport actions under the Erasmus+ Programme 2021-2027,
for the reasons and under the conditions set out in the Annex.
This Decision amends and replaces the previous Decision authorising the use of lump sums and
unit costs under the Erasmus+ Programme, of 18 November 2022 Ares(2022)798015164.
1
Political agreement between the European Parliament and the Council has been reached on 11 December 2020
and the Regulation is currently in the adoption procedure by the co-legislators.
2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules
applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No
1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and
Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p.1).@ecat
5
done at Brussels,
Authorising Officer signature

Director General DG EAC
Pia Ahrenkilde Hansen
6
Annex I – de-centralised actions – indirect management
1 Forms of Union contribution and categories of costs covered 9
1.1 Key Action 1 ................................................................................................................ 9
1.2 Key Action 2 ................................................................................................................ 9
2 Justification 10
2.1 Nature of the supported actions ................................................................................. 11
2.1.1 Key Action 1: Learning mobility of individuals ................................................ 11
2.1.2 Key Action 2: Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good practices 11
2.2 Risks of irregularities and fraud and costs of control ................................................ 12
3 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union contribution in the form of
lump sums and unit costs 12
3.1 Key Action 1 .............................................................................................................. 13
3.1.1 Travel Support .................................................................................................... 14
3.1.2 Organisational Support ....................................................................................... 16
3.1.3 Inclusion Support for Organisations .................................................................. 20
3.1.4 Individual Support .............................................................................................. 20
3.1.5 Preparatory Visits ............................................................................................... 30
3.1.6 Course Fees ........................................................................................................ 31
3.1.7 Linguistic Support .............................................................................................. 31
3.1.8 Categories only applicable to Youth Participation Activities ............................ 32
3.1.9 DiscoverEU Inclusion action ............................................................................. 34
3.2 Key Action 2 .............................................................................................................. 34
3.2.1 Cooperation Partnerships ................................................................................... 34
3.2.2 Small Scale Partnerships .................................................................................... 36
3.3 Support and network functions of the National Agencies ......................................... 38
3.3.1 EU contribution proposal ................................................................................... 38
3.3.2 Evaluation........................................................................................................... 38
3.3.3 Determination of the lump sum amount ............................................................. 39
4 Sound financial management, co-financing principle and absence of double
financing 39
4.1 Reasonable compliance with the principle of co-financing....................................... 39
4.2 Sound Financial Management ................................................................................... 40
4.3 Reasonable compliance with the principle of no double funding ............................. 41
7
Annex II – centralised actions – direct management
1.1 The Union contribution shall exclusively take the form of lump sum contributions for
the following actions under the Erasmus + programme ....................................................... 42
1.1.1 Education and training ....................................................................................... 42
1.1.2 Youth .................................................................................................................. 43
1.1.3 Sport ................................................................................................................... 43
1.2 The Union contribution shall exclusively take the form of unit contributions for the
following actions under the Erasmus+ Education and Training - Key action 2 .................. 43
2 Justification 44
2.1.1 Key Action 2: Cooperation among organisations and institutions ..................... 44
2.1.2 Key Action 3: Support for Policy Reform ......................................................... 45
2.1.3 Jean Monnet ....................................................................................................... 46
3 Method to determine the amount of the Union contribution in the form of lump sum
contributions 47
3.1 Method to determine the amount of the Union contribution in the form of lump sums
contributions for the following actions: ............................................................................... 47
3.1.1 Not-for-profit European sport events ................................................................. 48
3.1.2 Dialogue with stakeholders - National Activities .............................................. 49
3.1.3 Jean Monnet Modules and Chairs ...................................................................... 50
3.1.4 Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives................................................................. 58
3.1.5 Erasmus Mundus Joint Master -Design Measures ............................................. 61
3.1.6 Sport - Small scale partnerships ......................................................................... 63
3.1.7 Cooperation partnerships in the fields of sport, Education and Training, Youth
(European NGOs) ............................................................................................................. 63
3.1.8 Civil Society Cooperation in the field Education and Training and in the field of
Youth ............................................................................................................................ 63
contributions for the following actions ................................................................................ 66
3.2.1 Grant proposal .................................................................................................... 67
3.2.2 Evaluation........................................................................................................... 67
8
3.3 Method to determine the amount of the Union contribution in the form of unit
contributions for Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters (EMJM), including Erasmus Mundus Joint
Masters – Additional scholarships for targeted regions of the world .................................. 68
3.3.1 Justification ........................................................................................................ 68
3.3.2 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union contribution in the form
of unit contributions ......................................................................................................... 68
4 Sound financial management and co-financing principles and absence of double
financing 74
9
1 Forms of Union contribution and categories of costs covered
1.1 Key Action 1
The Union contribution for mobility actions under Key Action 1 of the Erasmus+ programme
shall exclusively take the form of unit contributions for the following categories of eligible
costs:
- Organisational support;
- Individual support;
- Inclusion support for organisations;
- Travel support;
- Course fees;
- Linguistic support;
- Preparatory visits;
- Project management;
- Coaching costs;
- Youth participation events support;
The following categories of eligible costs shall be reimbursed on the basis of eligible costs
actually incurred:
- Exceptional costs;
- Inclusion support for participants with fewer opportunities.
- System development and outreach activities;
The amounts of the unit contributions to be used shall be calculated in accordance with point 3.
1.2 Key Action 2
Under Key Action 2 of the Erasmus+ programme, the Union contribution shall exclusively take
the form of lump sum contributions.
10
2 Justification
By Decisions C(2013)8550 and C(2017)6864, the Commission authorised the use of simplified
forms of grants in the Erasmus+ programme 2014 – 2020, where the use of real costs was
limited to a minimum.
The approach to be followed for the programming period 2021-2027 is largely based on the
provisions set out in the aforementioned Decisions, with the introduction of additional
simplified forms of grants, such as the use of single lump sums for partnerships under Key
Action 2. While some unit cost amounts are to reflect the current levels of the cost of living and
new needs associated with the programme priorities, the overall structure of the funding
mechanism remains unchanged. This is intended to facilitate the transition to the new
programming period and was welcomed positively by stakeholders during the consultation
process.
These simplified forms of grant shall cover all educational and training sectors, including
Higher education (hereafter “HE”), School education (hereafter “SE”), Vocational education
and training (hereafter “VET”), Adult education (hereafter “AE”) and Youth under different
activities. Unit costs shall be widely used in Key Action 1 as the largest share of the overall
programme budget is allocated to learning mobility.
Reimbursement of eligible costs using simplified forms of grants for actions covered by this
Decision are considered appropriate because they are high volume, benefit most from
automation through the use of web-based forms, are appropriate for implementation in the
context of indirect management and provide transparency for final participants.
While great effort has been made to establish harmonised unit contributions for different target
groups and activities in Erasmus+, this Decision also recognizes that there are different needs
in some areas, which requires a differentiated approach. This is the case particularly for the
Learning Mobility actions, which require some variation in order to prevent a negative impact
on mobility numbers or budget absorption. For this reason it is justified to set ranges of unit
contributions for those cases, which can then be applied by national agencies depending on their
particular circumstances.
The use of lump sums, unit costs and flat-rate funding in the Programme has considerably
simplified the calculation of the grant amounts in comparison to the 'traditional' system of
basing the amount of the grant on a detailed budget of eligible costs per cost category. It has
decreased the workload of the contracting authorities and sped up the payment procedure. It
also reduces regularity errors on the part of the beneficiaries, thus resulting in lower error rates.
In summary the use of simplified forms of contribution will ensure simplification through:
• greater predictability for grant beneficiaries who can take the pre-established rates into
account when submitting their applications making the actions more attractive;
• greater focus on outputs rather than inputs, placing more emphasis on the quality and level
of achievement of measurable objectives;
• reduced administrative burden at application and payment stage reducing overheads for NAs
and facilitating productivity gains;
• simplified reporting requirements (no certification or formal financial statement to be
provided by beneficiaries);
11
• greater facilitation of the ex-post analysis and further limitation of the risk of error;
• consistency across actions in the Programme where appropriate making it easier for
beneficiaries participating in more than one action to manage their budgets;
• less complex funding rules contributing to easier readability of the Programme Guide.
2.1 Nature of the supported actions

2.1.1 Key Action 1: Learning mobility of individuals
This Key Action supports learning mobility activities for individuals in the following fields:
• Higher Education
• Vocational Education and Training (VET)
• School Education
• Adult Education
• Youth activities
• Sport
Learning mobility is defined as “moving physically to a country other than the country of the
sending institution/organisation and of residence, in order to undertake study, training or non-
formal or informal learning; it may take the form of traineeships, apprenticeships, youth
exchanges, teaching or participation in a professional development activity, and may include
preparatory activities, such as training in the host language, as well as sending, receiving and
follow-up activities”.
2.1.2 Key Action 2: Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good
practices
This Key Action supports:
• Partnerships for Cooperation, including Cooperation Partnerships and Small-scale
Partnerships;
A Partnership is defined as “an agreement between a group of participating organisations in
different Programme Countries to carry out joint European activities in the fields of education,
training, youth and sport or establishing a formal or informal network in a relevant field such
as joint learning projects for pupils and their teachers in the form of class exchanges and
individual long-term mobility, intensive programmes in higher education and cooperation
between local and regional authorities to foster inter-regional, including cross-border
cooperation; it may be extended to institutions and/or organisations from Partner Countries with
a view to strengthening the quality of the partnership”.
2.1.2.1 Cooperation partnerships
The primary goal of this action is to allow organisations and institutions to increase the quality
and relevance of their activities and/or develop and reinforce their networks of partners, thus
increasing their capacity to operate jointly at transnational and international level, boosting
internationalisation of their activities (including internationalisation at home), sharing and
confronting ideas, exchanging new practices and methods.
12
2.1.2.2 Small scale partnerships
This action aims at widening access to the programme to small-scale actors and individuals who
are hard to reach in education, training, youth and sport. With lower grant amounts awarded to
organisations, shorter duration and simpler administrative requirements compared to the
cooperation partnerships, this action will aim to reach out to grassroots organisations and
newcomers to Erasmus+, reducing entry barriers to the programme for organisations with
smaller organisational capacity.
2.2 Risks of irregularities and fraud and costs of control
The risk of irregularity and fraud when using these simplified forms of grant are considered low
for the following reasons:
• the inherent risk of irregularity is low due to the fact that the nature of the funded actions
are very standardised, and the associated triggering events are straightforward to verify
and monitor;
• the population of beneficiaries is mostly experienced and recurrent, and the entrusted
bodies (National Agencies) are subject to a standardised approach;.
• in order to reduce the risk of fraud and irregularities linked to the use of simplified forms
of grants in the Erasmus+ programme, a detailed set of minimum requirements for the
internal control system of National Agencies has been defined based on the
requirements resulting from the Financial Regulation for indirect management3
implemented by National Agencies under the Erasmus+ programme.
In addition, an assessment of the expected level of risk of error is carried out annually and
subsequently the Anti-Fraud Strategy (revised 2020) provides for tailored fraud prevention and
protection measures.
As regards costs of control, reporting and control shall focus on the realisation of the supported
activity and the achieved results rather than on the eligibility of costs incurred, reducing the
workload and scope for error of both programme participants and managing bodies. The whole
monitoring system is set up in a manner so as to ensure efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the
controls. The possibility for ex post controls of performance is foreseen which can further verify
sufficient quality of the outputs.
The Commission can have a high level of confidence in this control system as it builds on past
experience. The aggregate multiannual error rate for the implementation of Erasmus+ through
NAs was 1% for 2019 which was below the 2% materiality threshold. A limited number of
suspected frauds (0-2 per year, <500k per year) have been reported during the period 2014-19
indicating a low inherent risk and that the procedures are effective in both limiting and capturing
irregularities.
3 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union contribution in the form
of lump sums and unit costs
The basis for the determination of the amounts of the Union contribution set out in this Decision
are the previous authorising Decisions C(2013)8550 and C(2017)6864, applicable to the
Erasmus+ programme 2014-2020. This Decision revises and updates the categories and
3
These are set out in the delegation agreement signed by each national agency and in the National Agency Guide.
13
amounts of Union contribution set out in the aforementioned Decisions, and provides the
reasoning for each update.
A main element taken into account for the update of the amounts defined in 2021 was inflation,
calculated on the period between the last update in 2017 (based on 2016 data), and the last
available figure for 2020. Thus the initial level of unit cost contributions fixed for the start of
the new programme in January 2021 was an adjustment to the market prices in the previous
programme period, based on the cumulative EU inflation rate in the period 2017-2020 of 5,8%4
(Eurostat data). In addition to the general adjustments based on inflation, further adjustments
were made for each budget category based on historical data, expert judgement and
stakeholders’ feedback collected during the previous programming period.
In preparation for the 2021-2027 programming period, DG EAC and EACEA constituted a
working group on funding rules, including officials from all units involved in the design and
implementation of the programme, and organised over 30 consultative working groups with
National Agency and programme stakeholders. This allowed to collect relevant feedback from
all programme countries on the weaknesses in the funding model for the previous programme
and proposals for their improvement in the new one.
In addition, specific studies carried out at sectoral level allowed the Commission to assess the
adequacy of the levels of support in the different actions of the programme. Both the “Study on
the inclusiveness and adequacy of support for student mobility in higher education under the
next Erasmus+ Programme” and the “Study on Simplified Grants for the Future European
Solidarity Corps and Erasmus+ Youth actions”, carried out in 2019-2020, showed the need to
increase the levels of support in order to improve the accessibility and inclusiveness of the
programme, particularly towards participants with fewer opportunities or special needs.
On this basis the rates for the start of the 2021-2027 period were adopted, while a more
quantitative analysis, assessing the adequacy of the unit contributions to the costs actually
incurred by beneficiaries, was planned to be carried out later in the programming period to
underpin a subsequent update of this Decision.
In the meantime, however, the unexpected drastic increase of inflation rates between January
2021 and August 2022 had a severe impact on the number of participants in mobility actions.
Therefore, in order to allow optimal implementation of the program in 2023, a further specific
adjustment of 12,27% was considered appropriate for some unit costs, based on the comparative
increase of the price indices between January 2021 and July 2022 (latest monthly index
available).
As the inflation particularly affected subsistence costs (e.g; food, housing, etc.), this specific
adjustment was limited to the individual support rates which were increased accordingly. Other
budget categories were not updated at that time, as the additional studies were planned for 2023.
I
In 2023, two studies were carried out; the “Study on simplified grants in Erasmus+” and the
“Study on financial support of Erasmus+ grants” (“the 2023 studies”)5 which allowed the
Commission to evaluate the appropriateness of the funding for all actions and update the
amounts when necessary. They carried out a review of unit costs and lump sums, as defined by
the simplified grants, compared to real costs, in order to verify whether the grants ensure
4
Source: Eurostat HICP - inflation rate [TEC00118]
5
GOPA study reference
14
appropriate support for the beneficiaries in rolling out their projects and allow adapting to
country/area specific circumstances. In this direction, they provided evidence-based elements,
drawn from reference documents, official data, sample collection and ad hoc surveys, that
assisted the Commission in determining the adequacy of unit cost amounts and lump sums,
aiming to ensure that the EU contributions are proportionate to the actual costs sustained by the
participants.
The sections below provide the details and the methodology for the determination of the levels
of support in each budget category, as well as the specific rules for their application in each of
the sectors of the Programme.
3.1 Key Action 1
The eligible categories for Union support in the form of unit contributions under Key Action 1
are the following:
• Travel support
• Organisational support
• Inclusion support for organisations
• Individual support
• Preparatory visits
• Course fees
• Linguistic support
• Project management
• Coaching costs
• Physical events support
3.1.1 Travel Support
The system for the definition of travel support was originally established in decision
C(2013)8550 and then revised with decision C(2017)6864, based on the study “Mid-term
review of simplified grants used in the Erasmus+ programme”6. The 2017 revision aligned the
contributions to market prices and targeted an average co-financing rate of 80%.
The 2014-2020 rules on travel support were based on distance bands, so participants had
flexibility in the choice of the means of transport, while the amount of the contribution only
depended on the travel distance in kilometres. However, the Mid-term review study, which
contributed to the update of the levels of support, mainly used flight tickets as a reference for
market prices, while alternative means of transport (bus or train) were only included in the
analysis for distances below 500 km.
For the 2021-2027 programme, the reduction of the carbon footprint has become a horizontal
priority for all mobility activities, in line with the objectives of the European Green Deal7. To
this end, from 2021 to 2023 participants were given the choice between “standard travel
support”, with the same amounts as defined in decision C(2017)6864, and “green travel
support” with increased levels of contribution (15% compared to regular travel support) when
traveling by a low-emissions means of transport such as train or bus.
As of 2024, the travel support rates have been reviewed based on the study on Erasmus+
funding rules. This study included a methodology for collecting samples of travel itineraries,
primarily focusing on flights, and conducted simulations for a wide range of routes, mainly
6
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=COM:2018:50:FIN
7
https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en
15
within Europe (but also between Europe and other parts of the world). The simulations
contained representative routes, (such as Berlin - Paris, Lisbon - Brussels, etc.), but also
incorporated outermost regions, islands, as well as remote region and destinations that pose
logistical challenges. Based on the analysis of more than 27,000 valid itineraries, a comparative
table was created, incorporating the existing distance bands, along with the corresponding
percentage (80%) of average real costs.
To emphasise the importance of green travel, the following action have been taken:
- the standard travel is redefined and call renamed as “non-green travel” and the green
travel is presented as the first option for participants to consider.
- The difference in support between non-green and green travel is increased.
- The travel support is introduced in the action “mobility project for students in higher
education” for all type of students, thus streamlining the same system across all mobility
actions.
To determine the rate applicable for both green travel and non-green travel, the rates suggested
by the study have been decreased and increased by 15% respectively in relation to the study
results, leading to a difference of at least 30% between both options.
Green travel for distance band between 10km and 99km is now defined. Participants may use
their private car, which is not considered as green travel, therefore a distinction between
sustainable and other means of transport is necessary.
For the travel band 3000 – 3999 KM, the application of the methodology would have led to a
rate identical to the rate applicable since 2021. Consequently, in view of a fair treatment of
participants and considering the relevant increase in the other distance bands, it was decided to
increase the snon-green travel by EUR 50 and to consider this new amount as a basis for
calculation. This adjustment remains below the 80% of the average real costs for this distance
band.
16
Table 1: Travel support
Travel distances[1] Green travel Non-green travel
28 EUR per
Between 10 and 99 KM 56 EUR per participant
participant
211 EUR per

participant
309 EUR per

participant
Between 2000 and 2999 395 EUR per

535 EUR per participant
KM participant
Between 3000 and 3999 580 EUR per

KM participant
Between 4000 and 7999 1188 EUR per 1188 EUR per
KM participant participant
1735 EUR per 1735 EUR per

8000 KM or more
participant participant
[1]Based on the travel distance per participant. Travel distances must be calculated using the distance calculator supported by the European
Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/tools/distance_en.htm). The distance of a one-way travel must be used to
calculate the amount of the EU grant that will support the round trip.
17
3.1.2 Organisational Support
This category covers all costs directly linked to the implementation of mobility activities for
the organisation, excluding subsistence and travel for participants.
The “Study on financial support of Erasmus+ grants”, carried out in 2023, allowed the
Commission to assess the adequacy of the levels of organisational support.
Taking as a reference the survey carried out on beneficiaries, for which a high number of
responses was obtained, it was possible to evaluate the appropriateness of the organisational
support rates granted by programme sector and activity type. Overall, there is the evidence of
the adequacy of the comparison between amount received and actual costs (considering the
80% of the total reported cost).
The study identified a need to adjust the rates related to support for the adult education and
youth sector, taking into consideration that these activity types require more targeted support to
effectively address the overarching goal of promoting inclusion and ensuring equal
opportunities for all beneficiaries,. The table below, which includes the new action of staff
mobility in the field of sport, summarises the amounts of Union contribution applicable to each
action and is followed by a detailed justification for the choice of each amount for each of the
sectors.
Table 3: Organisational support
Action Amount of Union contribution (per mobility):
400 EUR per participant;

Mobility of higher education students
and staff 230 EUR per participant after 100 participants
in the same activity
400 EUR per participant with a minimum of 15

Blended Intensive Programmes in higher participants (not involved in the delivery of the
education programme) and a maximum of 20 funded
participants
- Group mobility of school pupils
- Staff mobility for courses and
training
- Participation in VET skills
competitions
- Invited experts
- Hosting teachers or educators in
training
18
- Group mobility of adult learners 125 EUR per participant
- Short-term learning mobility of VET
learners
- Short-term learning mobility of
pupils 350 EUR per participant;
- Short-term learning mobility of adult
200 EUR after one hundred participants in the
learners same type of activity
- Staff mobility for job shadowing and
teaching or training assignments
- Staff mobility in the field of sport
- Long-term learning mobility of VET
learners (ErasmusPro)
- Long-term learning mobility of
pupils
- Long-term learning mobility of adult 500 EUR per participant
learners
- Activities with non-associated

countries in the field of VET
- Mobility projects for young people
and youth workers 125 EUR per participant
3.1.2.1 Higher Education

i. Students and staff mobility
The main changes compared to decision C(2017)6864 are the update of the amounts on the
basis of inflation and of the policy priorities of the new programme.
The amounts of 350 EUR up to the 100th participant and 200 EUR per additional participant,
as defined in the Erasmus+ Programme Guide, were increased by 15% and rounded to the
closest multiple of 10, which corresponds to the two new levels of 400 EUR and 230 EUR.
The 15% increase is calculated as follows:
- 6% due to the inflation rate between 2017 and 2020, as described above;
- 9% due to the additional costs related with the implementation of new requirements from the
ECHE Erasmus+ Charter for the period 2021-2027:
- Digital mobility management: Implement the European Student Card Initiative: joining
the Erasmus Without Paper Network and adapting internal systems to its technical
standards, linking to the Online Learning Agreement, regularly feeding information into
the dashboard of the Erasmus+ Mobile App;
- Greening of Erasmus+: promoting environmentally friendly ways of mobility and other
activities, handling the proofs of green travel of participants to justify extra funding,
greening administrative procedures;
- Inclusion: promoting and encouraging the participation of individuals with fewer
opportunities, administratively handling the extra funding for these participants;
19
- Civic engagement of participants and alumni: identifying and promoting relevant
opportunities, matching persons to activities, monitoring activities.
- New mobility features: promoting and managing blended and/or international mobility.
The 9% increase is based on the expert opinion of the Commission as to the estimated additional
costs that will be incurred by these new requirements, and after benchmarking against feedback
provided by the external stakeholders involved in implementation.
ii. Blended intensive programmes
Blended intensive programmes for students and staff learners is a new activity under the
Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027. They will comprise a short-term physical mobility abroad
combined with a compulsory virtual component facilitating a collaborative online learning
exchange and teamwork. The virtual component will bring the participants together online to
work collectively and simultaneously on specific assignments that are integrated in the blended
intensive programme and count towards the overall learning outcomes.
For Blended Intensive Programmes, as in the other actions in the field of Higher Education the
amount of organisational support is set at 400 EUR per participant, with a minimum number
of 15 and a maximum of 20 participants (not involved in the delivery of the programme).
In this action, organisational support is intended to cover costs related to the preparation, design,
development, implementation and follow-up of the programme and delivery of virtual/remote
activities as well as the overall management and coordination. Costs may include: production
of documents or educational material, rental of rooms, rental of equipment, field trips,
excursions, communication activities, translation and interpretation, preparatory visits and
administrative tasks. The level of the administrative effort for the organisation of such activities
can be considered as similar to the organisation of a regular mobility action. Therefore, the level
of contribution under the category “Organisational support” is the same as in the mobility
activities for Higher Education students and staff, i.e. 400 EUR per participant.
The limitation in the number of funded participants is due to the high number of fixed costs in
the typical budget for the organisation of a blended intensive programme: it is considered that
an amount of 8 000 EUR, corresponding to 20 funded participants, can cover the costs for the
organisation of a programme even if the actual number of participants is higher.
3.1.2.2 VET, School Education, Adult Education
Compared to the 2014-2020 period, where there was one single amount for organisational
support, there will be differentiated amounts during the 2021-2027 period, taking into account
the different nature of organisational costs for each type of activity. The amounts were
determined on the basis of an analysis of the tasks that beneficiary organisations implement for
each type of activity.
Building on the experience acquired during the programming period 2014-2020, it has been
found that different levels of Union contribution are appropriate to reflect the nature and
complexity of the organisational workload required for each mobility type and to ensure the
good quality of organised activities and the capacity of organisations to operate internationally
and to acquire the necessary knowledge and experience.
As a result, as opposed to the period 2014-2020, with the same amount of 350 EUR per
participant attributed to all activities, the new scheme for the 2021-2027 programme includes
four different amounts, corresponding to the levels of organisational effort required for each
type of actions. An increased level of organisational support is applied to more complex
20
activities where there are fewer participants and less opportunity for economies of scale,
whereas a lower contribution is applied for courses and group activities where there is a large
number of participants and better potential for operational savings. As an overall result, the
expected total expenditure of the programme on organisational should be lower, while still
providing the correct funding across the board.
As detailed in Table 3: Organisational support above, the new amounts are 100 EUR, 125 EUR,
350 EUR and 500 EUR. These amounts are based on the expert opinion of the Commission,
taking into account experience gained from implementing the actions in the previous
programming period and after benchmarking against feedback from stakeholders on the actual
costs incurred, and are confirmed by the 2023 studies.
This has shown that lower costs per participant are associated with the organisation of group
activities, as in the case of school pupils’ mobility, due to the existence of economies of scale.
The costs are also lower when the purpose of the mobility is the participation to an activity
which was organised by external entity, as in the case of courses, or for the simple invitation of
an expert to an activity hosted by the beneficiary. The reduced level of support of 100 EUR per
participant was introduced for these three types of activities. The amount corresponding to the
group mobility of adult learners has been adjusted following the 2023 studies’ findings, which
showed a specific need to increase it, as a survey to beneficiaries clearly demonstrated that for
this category, the amount of actual costs incurred in projects (80%) was higher than the amount
received.
The basic amount used in the 2014-2020 period, 350 EUR per participant, is maintained for
activities requiring a medium organisational effort, such as short-term mobility for VET
learners and school pupils, as well as for job shadowing and teaching and training assignments.
Long-term mobility of learners and activities with non-associated countries require an
additional organisational effort. Such activities require the definition of a very detailed training
plan, intense monitoring and generally higher efforts in terms of logistic arrangements (such as,
for instance, costs for visas and/or vaccines). These activities are also highly individualised and
involve fewer participants, which reduces the opportunities for economies of scale. For this
type of activities, the increased level of support of 500 EUR per participant applies.
3.1.2.3 Youth
In the Erasmus+ 2014-2020 programme, organisational support was a contribution to costs
incurred by organisations related to the preparation, implementation and follow-up of activities.
Only in the case of activities in the field of youth, organisational support also covered:
subsistence and local transport of participants − renting of premises − training and teaching
materials - costs related to trainers, speakers, moderators, lecturers.
In substance, in the Youth field, one single contribution covered both the cost for the
organisation and for the mobility activities as such, as opposed to the other sectors where those
activities were covered by two separate budget categories/ contributions. The proposed
approach for the 2021-2027 period is to align the funding model to the other sectors and have
two categories/contributions, one covering preparation, implementation, follow-up,
trainers/facilitators costs, rental of rooms and one for subsistence. This approach will:
− Bring consistency across all KA1 Actions of the Erasmus+ Programme;
21
− Allow to finance blended activities8, where only organisational support is eligible for
the virtual components;
− Provide funding visibility for the activities implemented on top of the mobility
activities;
− Provide further flexibility in case of drop-outs;
− Bring in a simpler logic by reducing the complexity of eligible costs covered by the
grant item.
Mobility activities in the field of youth are comparable in terms of complexity and
organisational effort to the group mobility activities in the fields of School Education, VET and
Adult Education. As explained in the section above, group activities in general are associated
with lower organisational costs and benefit from economies of scale. Moreover, the 2023
studies, following a detailed survey on beneficiaries, demonstrated that for youth organisations,
the amount of actual costs related to organizational support incurred in projects (80%) was
higher than the amount received.
Therefore, the level of unit contribution for youth mobility was fixed at 125 EUR per
participant.
3.1.3 Inclusion Support for Organisations
The inclusion support is a contribution to costs incurred by organising institutions related to the
preparation, implementation and follow-up of activities in support of (incoming and outbound)
participants with fewer opportunities. The individual activities may vary from case to case but
they essentially apply to supplementary tasks carried out by projects that aim to actively involve
participants with fewer opportunities (providing tailor-made preparation, support and follow-
up for them, such as reinforced mentorship).
The new cost category for inclusion support is composed of one unit contribution intended to
support the organisation in the extra costs incurred for the participation of people with fewer
opportunities and one component based on real costs, to cover the direct needs of those
participants.
The component intended for the organisation was initially set as a fixed amount of 100 EUR
per eligible participant for all sectors.
Typical examples of expenses covered by this category are the following:
- Administrative costs of determining the participant’s status, type of fewer opportunities
and individual needs
- Estimating and processing costs that need to be covered in non-standard ways (real costs
as opposed to unit costs)
- Individualised preparation / pre-departure training for the participant
- Dedicated assistance with logistical arrangements and possible accompanying persons
or assistants
- Identifying suitable hosting institutions (this is a standard organisational task but its
difficulty is significantly increased because not all potential hosting partner institutions
are able or willing to host participants that require stronger individual engagement)
- Additional preparation of staff on hosting side to address the specific needs of the
participant
8
Blended learning: study type that involves learning in a combination of modes. Often used more specifically to
refer to courses which use a combination of traditional face-to-face teaching work-shops or seminars, and distance
learning techniques on-line (such as internet, television, conference calls).
22
The actual costs of the activities listed above are strongly variable by nature and do not allow
to achieve economies of scale, as they depend on the specific situation and needs of each eligible
participant. This cost category was introduced for the first time in the new programme, and in
absence of statistical data supporting the analysis, the determination of 100 EUR as the amount
of contribution was based on an expert judgment by the Commission, benchmarked against
feedback from National Agencies and other stakeholders. The 2023 studies further analysed
this component and proposed the adjustment by considering the following elements:
- Market reliable average price of related costs
- Extra cost needed for participants with fewer opportunities especially concerning
human resources (extra mentors).
- Inflation (between January 2021 and February 2023; equal to 16.58% on EU average)
Further reinforce the commitment with the transversal inclusion priority On this basis, it is
considered appropriate to raise this amount to 125 EUR per participant, to better support the
extra costs of organising activities involving participants with fewer opportunities.
3.1.4 Individual Support
The category “Individual support” is intended to cover costs directly linked to the subsistence
of participants during the activity. In general, the amounts of support depend on the receiving
country for the mobility activity.
23
i. Long-term mobility of students and recent graduates
Regarding the cost category “individual support”, different updates were applied to the grant
levels for students and for staff throughout recent years. As pointed out by the “Study on the
inclusiveness and adequacy of support for student mobility in higher education under the next
Erasmus+ Programme”9, the overall EU grant (all cost categories included) covered between
34% and 42% of the overall mobility costs incurred by students in the period 2014-2020. One
of the scenarios presented by the study proposed to increase all grant levels by 5%, as an
adjustment to cumulative inflation during the period 2014 – 2018.
However, in order to make the update of the grant levels more relevant to the programming
period 2021-2027, the adjustment took into account the inflation rate for the period 2017-2020,
corresponding to 6%10, as described in section 3 above. In addition, the results of the study
mentioned above showed that a further increase in the level of contribution would improve the
accessibility of the programme for all participants, but in particular for those who have limited
own resources to complement the Erasmus+ grants. Therefore, the levels of individual support
were increased by 15% in order to contribute to the objective to increase the inclusiveness of
the programme, while it is estimated that the Union contribution will remain below 80% of the
eligible costs (which themselves are only a part of the actual costs incurred by students (see
above)). A further adjustment was necessary to take into account the inflation rate for the period
2021-July 2022, corresponding to 12,27 %, as described in section 3 above.
As of 2024, the rates have been reviewed based on the 2023 studies on Erasmus+ funding rules,
which proposed an update to the categorisation of the listed countries, based on the average cost
of living.
To confirm whether and to what extent a modification of the current country groups was needed,
due to recent inflation, the studies carried out a comparison of the overall cost of living and
income levels, using various official economic data published by Eurostat, OECD and the
World Bank. It compared cost of living in the various EU Member States and third countries
associated to the Programme, and third countries not associated to the Programme by
considering the initial group classification.
Three different indicators were used to explore how sensitive the country classification is to the
indicator used to capture cost of living:
a. Price Level Indices
b. Median Income
c. GDP per capita
It is worth noting that the suggested values and ranges in Table 4 express the individual support
in relation to costs of living in the various countries to cover the subsistence (accommodation,
meals) and do not include travel costs, which are reimbursed in accordance with section 3.1.1
via a specific budget item, and not as part of the individual support. Up to now, students in
higher education were the only target group that did not receive a specific contribution to their
travel costs to and from their mobility destination within Europe, as travel costs were supposed
to be covered within the individual rates. Consequently, with the recent strong pressure on costs,
9
Ares(2020)3694813
10
Source: Eurostat - Ref. footnote 4 above
24
as the 2023 studies also confirmed, higher education students did not receive enough support
for travel and the system was unfair compared to other sectors.
Against this background, this adjustment will not only ensure visible and significant increase
of support for higher education students’ mobility but will also helpto better identify the support
for each type of costs and will streamline the management of travel costs across all actions of
the Programme allowing students to fully use their monthly grant for costs related to
accommodation and meals.
The increased level of “individual support”, combined with the cost category of “inclusion
support” is also intended to facilitate participation in the programme for participants who cannot
afford to cover a high proportion of the cost of mobility with own resources.
Table 4: Individual support for HE students and recent graduates
Group 1: Group 2: Group 3:

Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czechia, Bulgaria, Croatia,
France, Denmark, Estonia, , Greece, Hungary, ,
Origin/ Finland, Germany, Latvia, Malta, , Lithuania, Poland,
Iceland, Ireland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia,
Destination Italy, Slovakia, North Macedonia,
Liechtenstein, Slovenia, Spain Turkiye
Luxembourg,
Netherlands,
Norway, Sweden,
Group 1:
Austria, Belgium,
France, Denmark,
Finland, Germany, Between 292 and Between 225 and Between 225 and
Iceland, Ireland, Italy, 606 EUR 550 EUR 550 EUR
Liechtenstein,
Luxembourg,
Netherlands, Norway,
Sweden,
Group 2: Cyprus,
Czechia, Estonia, ,
Between 348 and Between 292 and Between 225 and
Greece, Latvia, Malta, ,
674 EUR 606 EUR 550 EUR
Portugal, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain
Group 3:
Bulgaria, Croatia,
Hungary, , Lithuania, Between 348 and Between 348 and Between 292 and
Poland, Romania, 674 EUR 674 EUR 606 EUR
Serbia, North
Macedonia, Turkiye
ii. Top up for students and recent graduates with fewer opportunities
Decision C(2013)8550 defined the amount as a range between 100 EUR and 200 EUR per
month. As specified above, the average co-financing rate for Higher Education students in
mobility was estimated between 34% and 42% in the 2014-2020 period.
25
In the new programme, reflecting the horizontal priority of inclusion, the level of support for
this category of participants shall be increased. The general increase in the level of individual
support is already expected to raise the average co-financing to at least 50% for all students.
This additional top-up is expected to bring the level of co-financing above 60% for the specific
category of students with fewer opportunities, whose definition is set out in the Programme
Guide.
The amount is differentiated according to the duration of the activity:
- Long term mobility: the amount is increased to 250 EUR.
- Short term mobility: 100 EUR for a physical mobility activity period of 5-14 days and
150 EUR for a period of 15-30 days
iii. Top up for students and recent graduates in traineeships
month. In the new programme, in order to simplify and harmonise the approach for all countries,
an initial fixed rate was established at the middle value of 150 EUR per month.
The “Study on financial support of Erasmus+ grants” of 2023 showed that a large majority of
surveyed organizations believe that this top up amount is sufficient to cover actual costs. In
this direction, the amount is maintained.
iv. Students and recent graduates from outermost regions and OCTs
In line with decision C(2013)8550, students and recent graduates from outermost regions and
OCTs receive a higher amount of individual support due to geographical disadvantages. In order
to simplify the previous scheme, the distinction by Country group was eliminated and the level
of support is 786 EUR for all participants in this category, corresponding to the middle value
used in the previous programme.
v. Short term mobility of students and recent graduates
The determination of the amount of support was based on the “study on the inclusiveness and
adequacy of support for student mobility in higher education under the next Erasmus+
Programme” undertaken by the PPMI Group. The study itself used as a reference the rates from
the short-term blended mobility in the framework of “Learning, Teaching and Training
activities” (LTTs) under the Erasmus+ KA2 Strategic Partnerships action. In fact, those
activities are very similar in terms of logistic arrangements and related costs. The main
difference is that under LTTs, as for all KA2 activities, travel support is calculated separately.
In short term-mobility under KA1, instead, in order to ensure consistency within the action, the
costs of travel should be covered by the same category of individual support.
The levels of support for short-term blended mobilities under LTTs in KA2, as defined in
decision C(2017)6864, are the following:
- Up to the 14th day of activity: 58 EUR per day
- From 15th to the 30th day of activity: 42 EUR per day
During the 2014-2020 period, 10 719 Higher Education students participated in short-term
blended mobility activities. The average duration of an activity was 8 days, corresponding to
an allowance of 464 EUR, while the average distance travelled was 1 040 Km, corresponding
26
to an allowance of 275 EUR 11. Based on these data, the average incidence of travel on the grant
amount per mobility is about 60%.
KA2 short-term blended mobility 2014-2020
- Up to the 14th day of activity: 58

EUR per day
Level of support
- From 15th to the 30th day of
activity: 42 EUR per day
Average grant per participant 760 EUR
Average distance 1 040 Km
Average travel support 275 EUR
Average duration 8 days
Average individual support 464 EUR
As pointed out above, the average level of co-financing in mobility actions for students in
Higher Education was between 34% and 42% in the 2014-2020 period and the objective for the
new programme is to bring it to 50-60%, as opposed to KA2 actions, where co-financing is
generally estimated at 80%. The difference is due to the availability of additional sources of
funding from national and regional schemes in KA1, which are not available in KA2. To reflect
this difference, the new unit contribution for short term mobility is defined as follows:
KA1 short-term mobility 2021-2027

EUR per day
Level of support
The average grant level is lower than in the case of KA2 blended mobility, which is in line with
the targeted difference in the levels of co-financing between the two actions.
vi. Mobility between Programme and non-associated countries – students and recent
graduates
The rates determined by Decision C(2014)6158, as amended by Decision C(2017)6863 and

detailed in the Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2018 are confirmed.
11
Source: Erasmus+ Dashboard
27
The three categories of listed countries have been updated, according to the average cost of
living, as explained in section 3.1.4.1 above.
From To Amount
EU Member States and third Third countries not associated

countries associated to the to the Programme from 700 EUR per month
Programme Regions 1-12.
As described above in
EU Member States and third Third countries not associated section “Grant support for
countries associated to the to the Programme from the mobility of students –
Programme Regions 13 and 14. Individual support for
physical mobility”
Group 1:
Austria, Belgium, France, Denmark,
Finland, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, 900 EUR per month
Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg,
Netherlands, Norway, Sweden,
Third countries not Group 2:

associated to the Programme Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, , Greece, 850 EUR per month
from Regions 1-12. Latvia, Malta, , Portugal, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain
Group 3:
Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, , 800 EUR per month
Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Serbia,
North Macedonia, Turkiye
The base rate of 700 EUR per month is maintained for all mobility activities from all EU
member states and countries associated to the programme to all third countries non-
associated to the programme, except for regions 13 and 14.
Mobility from and towards non-associated countries that are within the geographical zone
of Programme countries (regions 13 and 14), namely Andorra, Faroe Islands, Monaco, San
Marino, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and Vatican City is supported with the same rates
as intra-EU mobility12.
In particular, group 1 includes Faroe Islands by analogy with Denmark, Switzerland by
analogy with Liechtenstein, and the United Kingdom in continuity with the previous
programming period. Andorra, Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City are also included in
group 1 by analogy with France and Italy.
Mobility activities from and to the countries listed above, by analogy with intra-EU
mobility, are not eligible for travel support.
12
In addition to the geographical criterion, these countries are treated as an exception as they are not covered by
the External Action Instruments
28
Staff mobility
Evidence from the programming period 2014-2020 and feedback from stakeholders showed
that the considerations made for student mobility do not equally apply to staff mobility, where
the levels of funding are higher and sending institutions generally ensure that all sources of
funding combined (EU and national) cover the actual costs incurred by participants. In addition,
the existence of ranges allows the national authorities to adjust the actual grant amounts to the
specific needs. The initial lower end rates set in Decision C(2017)6864 were adjusted on the
base of the inflation rate of the period between 2021 and July 2022.
Ranges were further updated with the inflation rate over the period July 2022-May 2023.
Calculation was based on the HICP EU 27 countries which was equal to 126,35 in April 2023
and 119,31 in July 2022 thus producing an average rate equal to 5,9%
Table 5 presents the granted amount according to the new cluster of countries.
Table 5: Individual support for HE staff
Staff from
Staff from
Programme
Partner Countries
Countries
Receiving country Min-Max (per

Amount (per day)
day)
Austria, Belgium,
France, Denmark,
Finland, Germany,
Iceland, Ireland, Italy, 96-190 190
Liechtenstein,
Luxembourg,
Netherlands, Norway,
Sweden
Cyprus, Czechia,
Estonia, , Greece,
84-170 170
Latvia, Malta, ,
Portugal, Slovakia,
Slovenia, Spain
Bulgaria, Croatia,
Hungary, , Lithuania,
Poland, Romania, 71-148 148
Serbia, North
Macedonia, Turkiye
Partner Countries
Regions 13, 14 Not eligible
190
3.1.4.2 Mobility projects for VET learners and staff, School education pupils and staff, Adult
education learners and staff
For VET learners and staff, School education pupils and staff, and Adult education learners and
staff, the amounts of contribution are based on Decision C(2013)8550, amended by
C(2017)6864.
29
The programme guides for the period 2014-2020 offered a minimum and a maximum level of
support and each National Agency selected its own actual level within that range, based on
factors such as number of beneficiaries, availability of other sources of funding and more
accurate estimates on the costs of living. The average grant level in the period was always
falling between 60% and 100% of the maximum value in the range13.
For the new programme, the range of contribution levels available to national agencies for
individual support was reduced by increasing the lower end of the range by 10%, while leaving
the higher end unchanged. This increased amount results from a combination of the adjustment
to inflation (6%) and an additional increase aimed to improve the inclusiveness of the
programme, as described above. A further adjustment of the lower end of the range was
necessary to take into account the inflation rate for the period 2021-June 2022, corresponding
to 12,27 %, as described in section 3 above.
An additional update was made in 2023, based on inflation (5,9% as described in the previous
section above). Moreover, an alignment of the minimum amount for school pupils and VET
learners was deemed necessary, due to the similar nature of such mobilities.
The resulting update of the levels of support is presented below:

Category of participants Country group 114 Country group 2 Country group 3
Staff 107-191 EUR 95-169 EUR 84-148 EUR

VET / Adult education learners 48-127 EUR 41-110 EUR 36-93 EUR
School pupils 48-85 EUR 41-74 EUR 36-64 EUR
The above are base rates per day of activity. Each NA will decide on exact base rates based on
the allowed ranges.
The base rate is payable up to the 14th day of activity. From the 15th day of activity, the payable
rate will be equal to 70% of the base rate.
Non-associated countries have been attributed to the three country groups in use for intra-EU
mobility, as detailed in footnote 16. The attribution was done by adding up the amount of daily
allowance and accommodation allowance calculated by the MIPS system for travel of EU
officials and applying 80% as an average co-financing rate.
13 Source: Erasmus+ Dashboard

14 For Programme Countries
Country group 1: Austria, Belgium, France, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden
Country group 2: Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, , Greece, Latvia, Malta, , Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain
Country group 3: Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, , Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Serbia, North Macedonia, Turkiye
For non-associated Countries
Country group 1: Australia, Canada, Japan, Israel, South Korea, Georgia, Argentina, Armenia, Angola, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United States, Bahrain, Azerbaijan,
Sudan, Saint Kitts & Nevis, St. Vincent & Grenadines, United Arab Emirates, Hong Kong, Lebanon, Vietnam, Mexico, Singapore, Thailand, Taiwan, Moldova,
Malaysia, Tanzania, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Faroe Islands, South Sudan, State of Palestine, , Vatican City State, Monaco, San Marino, Andorra
Country group 2: India, Kazakhstan, Brazil, DR Congo, Chile, Nigeria, Uganda, Liberia, Djibouti, DPR Korea, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Dominican Republic,
Jamaica, Belarus, Libya, Syria, Cuba, Yemen, Kenya, Rwanda, Seychelles, Antigua and Barbuda, Brunei, Montenegro, Switzerland, Malawi, Barbados, Saint Lucia,
Grenada, Dominica, Uruguay, Albania, China, Philippines, Peru, Venezuela, Panama, Ghana, Chad, Guyana, Egypt, Morocco, Kirib ati, Oman, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Iran, Mozambique, Senegal, Mauritius, Qatar, Andorra, Jordan, Indonesia, Laos, South Africa, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Ecuador, Paraguay, Costa Rica,
Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Gabon, Haiti, Bahamas, Papua New Guinea, Micronesia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Russia
Country group 3: Nepal, Maldives, Tajikistan, Nicaragua, Zambia, Guinea, Congo, Botswana, Belize, Samoa, Marshall Islands, Palau, Tuvalu, Nauru, Cook Islands,
Niue, New Zealand, Pakistan, Bhutan, El Salvador, Suriname, Guatemala, Honduras, Somalia, Trinidad and Tobago, Algeria, Columbia, Gambia, Fiji, Solomon
Islands, Vanuatu, Cambodia, Zimbabwe, Burundi, Mongolia, Cameroon, Timor-Leste, Sri Lanka, Madagascar, Mali, Togo, Sao Tome & Principe, Tonga, Bolivia,
Benin, Lesotho, Macao, Tunisia, Iraq, Burkina Faso, Equatorial Guinea, Central African Republic, Guinea-Bissau, Namibia, Comoros, Eritrea, Myanmar,
Afghanistan, Niger, Mauritania, Cabo Verde, Kosovo, Eswatini
30
i. Determination of the amounts of unit contribution for School pupils mobility
In the programme 2014-2020 the mobility of School pupils was allowed within the framework
of partnership projects under KA2. For the 2021-2027 period, in order to ensure more coherence
within the programme, these activities will be financed under KA1.
In order to harmonise the structure of the rules, the level of individual support, which was
presented as a single amount in the old KA2 School exchange partnerships, had to be
transformed into a range within which National Agency can choose their own level of support,
as in the typical KA1 mechanism.
The base for calculation, corresponding to the unit contribution for “individual support” for the
same type of activities under KA2 in the Erasmus+ programme 2014-2020, is 58 EUR.
This base is taken as equivalent to the average KA1 VET learner rate in a mid-income country
(group 2).
The average rate for country groups 1 and 3 is then calculated based on the same deviation from
country group 2 as used for VET learners (+/-18.06%)"
Avg. country Avg. country Avg. country

Step 1
group 1 group 2 (base) group 3
VET learners 85 (+18.06%) 72 59 (-18.06%)

School pupils 68 58 48
In the second step, the ranges are created for the three country groups to align the approach with
the other types of participants in Key Action 1. In order to take into account the possibility to
obtain economies of scale when large groups of pupils take part to a mobility activity, as well
as the existence of other sources of funding, the lower end of the range is calculated as 40%
less than the average rate, while the higher end is calculated as 15% more than the average.
This flexibility is important in case of pupil mobility activities because pupils from different
countries typically take part in activities at the same venue during multilateral exchanges. In
the final step, rates are rounded to the nearest 10.
Average
Step 2 Range Low High
(base)
- 40% ; + 15%;
Country group 1 68 40 80
rounded
- 40% ; + 15%;
rounded
- 40% ; + 15%;
rounded
3.1.4.3 Youth exchanges, mobility of Youth workers and Youth participation activities
The contributions are based on Decisions C(2013)8550, amended by C(2017)6864. The
funding mechanism was aligned with the other sectors, by separating the items “organisational
support”, covered in the dedicated secton above, and “individual support”.
i. Individual support for Youth exchanges, Youth workers and Youth participation
activities
31
As mentioned in the section on organisational support above, in the previous programming
period, the category “organisational support” in the field of youth included both the costs related
to the actual organisation of the activity and the subsistence costs for participants, which were
falling under the category “individual support” in all the other sectors of the programme. As a
result, the overall levels of support for activities in this field were significantly lower than in
the other fields. As the Interim report from the “Study on Simplified Grants for the Future
Humanitarian Aid Strand of the European Solidarity Corps and Erasmus+ Youth Participation
Activities” pointed out, “both beneficiaries and NAs thought that the amount to support
participants with accommodation and subsistence needs to be increased to better reflect the
increase in costs of living in many countries”15.
In a logic of harmonisation of the programme rules, the old category “organisational support”,
where the determination of the amounts of support was based on the cost of living in receiving
countries, was translated into “individual support” for the new programme. Meanwhile, the
component which is specifically intended to cover the organisational costs is now covered by
the category “organisational support” described in the dedicated section above.
In order to assess the appropriates of individual support for youth, the 2023 studies carried out
a market analysis to collect data in order to provide an estimate of subsistence costs as well as
two different surveys, one provided to the beneficiaries and the other to the Erasmus+ National
Agencies, with the aim of gathering opinions about the adequacy of the individual support and
to inquire the amounts that they considered adequate to cover subsistence costs of participants
in these activities.
As a result, following triangulation of the findings and considering that individual support
cannot exceed 80% of real costs, the increased levels of contribution are listed in the following
tables.
Table 6: Individual support for Youth exchanges and Youth workers
Mobility of
Youth
Youth
Exchanges
Workers (
( per day)
per day)
Austria 78 € 84 €
Belgium 78€ 88 €
Bulgaria 45€ 60 €
Croatia 57€ 75 €
Cyprus 63€ 81 €
Czechia 53 € 65 €
Denmark 81 € 95 €
Estonia 48 € 76 €
15
In the context of the EAC-02-2019 framework service contract https://etendering.ted.europa.eu/cft/cft-
display.html?cftId=4820
32
Finland 79 € 93 €
North Macedonia 41 € 57 €
France 67 € 85 €
Germany 71 € 77 €
Greece 68 € 80 €
Hungary 60 € 77 €
Iceland 76 € 99 €
Ireland 73 € 91 €
Italy 69 € 85 €
Latvia 48 € 66 €
Liechtenstein 77 € 84 €
Lithuania 49 € 65 €
Luxembourg 77 € 84 €
Malta 57 € 77 €
Netherlands 69 € 92 €
Norway 83 € 94 €
Poland 51 € 68 €
Portugal 57 € 78 €
Romania 46 € 64 €
Serbia 47 € 59 €
Slovakia 48 € 67 €
Slovenia 54 € 78 €
Spain 58 € 81 €
Sweden 72 € 87 €
Türkiye 50 € 68 €
Neighbouring
44 € 62 €
Partner Countries
3.1.4.4 Mobility of staff in the field of sport
In order to cover costs of subsistence for participants and accompanying persons during the
activity, and given the similarities in the type of profile of these target groups, individual
support for staff in the field of sport is provided according to the rules set for adult education
staff (see paragraph 3.1.4.2 above)
3.1.5 Preparatory Visits

In the 2014-2020 programme, organisations taking part in actions in the fields of VET and
Youth had the possibility to carry out “Advance planning visits” to the country of the receiving
organisations, with the purpose to ensure high quality activities by facilitating and preparing
curricular and administrative arrangements, building trust and understanding and setting-up a
solid partnership between organisations involved. Such activities receive contributions
calculated on the basis of the applicable unit costs, namely travel and individual support in the
case of VET, travel and organisational support in the case of Youth.
33
For the programme 2021-2027, this activity – under the simpler title of “Preparatory visits” will
be available for VET, School Education, Adult Education and Youth.
In order to reduce the administrative burden for organisations taking part in such visits, the
contribution will take the form of a fixed amount per participant, covering all categories of
expenses.
The method for the determination of the amount of contribution is based on the budget item
“Transnational project meetings” for Strategic Partnerships under KA2 in the Erasmus+ 2014-
2020 programme. This category in KA2 covers the participation in meetings between project
partners for implementation and coordination purposes. The contribution is intended to cover
both travel and subsistence costs.
Preparatory visits in KA1 are a similar activity with a comparable cost structure, as they consist
in short stays abroad of the staff of beneficiary organisations with the purpose to meet partners
in a transnational project.
In KA2 Strategic partnerships, the amount of contribution for transnational project meetings
was 575 EUR per participant. The same amount of contribution was initially established for
preparatory visits in the fields of VET, School Education, Adult Education and Youth.
The 2023 studies concluded that, for preparatory visits, the amount provided per participant per
visit required further adjustments in relation to the real costs identified, notably when the
number of preparatory visits increases from 1 to 5 visits. Ranges were therefore further updated
with the inflation rate over the period January 2021-May 2023. The calculation was based on
the HICP rate for EU 27 countries which was equal to 126,35 in April 2023 and 106,27 in
January 2021, thus producing an average rate equal to 18,89%
Consequently, the new funding amount (rounded for practical reasons) is 680 EUR per
participant.
3.1.6 Course Fees

Based on contribution set in Decision C(2013)8550. Increased by 6% due to the inflation rate,
as described above, and an additional 8% to increase the level of co-financing in favour of
beneficiaries, in line with the inclusion priority of the new programme.
New rate: 80 EUR per day, with a maximum of 800 EUR.
3.1.7 Linguistic Support
The Erasmus+ Online Language Support (OLS) will allow participants in mobility activities to
assess, practice and improve their knowledge of the language to be used during their experience
abroad. The platform will provide features such as assisted and blended learning tools to enable
teachers and youth workers to provide extra support to their learners and social networking to
enable collaborative learning. The Erasmus+ Online Linguistic Support (OLS) will also provide
free language learning material.
The cost category “Linguistic support” is intended for participants who are eligible to benefit
from the OLS tool, but whose learning needs are not met by this tool as the required language
or level is not available.
The amount of contribution is the same as defined in Decision C(2013)8550: 150 EUR per
participant eligible for Online Language Support that cannot receive it, excluding staff in
mobility up to 30 days of duration. For learners, the availability of the support is not linked to
34
the duration of the mobility, as it is assumed that all periods of mobility require a linguistic
support.
For the 2021-2027 period, a higher level of contribution is introduced for participants in
ErasmusPro and long-term individual mobility of school pupils, in consideration of the higher
complexity of the activities carried out during the mobility. In the case of ErasmusPro, this
entails a period learning abroad at a partner VET provider, in a company, or in another
organisation active in the field of VET or the labour market. The learning period must include
a strong work-based component and an individual learning programme must be defined for each
participant.
In the case of school pupils on long-term mobility, participants spend a period abroad to study
at a partner school or perform a traineeship at another relevant organisation abroad. Also in this
case, an individual learning programme must be defined for each participant to enable them to
follow the curriculum and integrate at their host school.
In view of the above, linguistic support for participants in ErasmusPro and long term
individual mobility of school pupils will be supported with an additional 150 EUR per
participant. The determination of this amount was based on the expert judgment of the
Commission, benchmarked against feedback from stakeholders. It is intended to cover the
additional needs of participants who are minors or very young adults starting from a lower level
of proficiency (compared to e.g. higher education students) and need a strong, individualised
linguistic preparation in order to be able to undertake their mobility. In case OLS is not
available, these learners will receive both the regular linguistic support grant to replace OLS
and the additional 150 EUR grant to cover their specific needs.
3.1.8 Categories only applicable to Youth Participation Activities
Youth Participation Activities are non-formal learning activities revolving around active
participation of young people. Such activities aim to enable young people to experience
exchanges, cooperation, cultural and civic action. Supported activities should help the
participants strengthen their personal, social, citizenship and digital competences and become
active European citizens.
Supported activities can take the form of (or a combination of): workshops, debates, role-plays,
simulations, use of digital tools (e.g. digital democracy tools), awareness raising campaigns,
trainings, meetings and other forms of online or offline interaction between young people and
decision-makers, consultations, information events etc.
As the mobility component is central in the structure of this action, it is financed under Key
Action 1 of the program. However, the action also supports a dimension of transnational
cooperation, which results in similarities with the structure of Key Action 2 actions. To reflect
such characteristics of this action, three new budget categories are introduced, replicating
similar categories already existing in KA2:
• Project management
• Coaching costs
• Physical events support
3.1.8.1 Project management

The organisation of Youth participation activities does not only consist in setting up the logistic
arrangements for a mobility, but involves preparation, implementation, of activities, evaluation,
35
dissemination and follow-up. In this respect, the typical KA1 “organisational support” unit
contribution, based on the number of participants, does not reflect the nature of the funded
activities and a contribution based on the duration of the project in months was found to be
more adequate.
The cost category “Project management and implementation” under KA2 cooperation
partnerships is intended to cover coordination and communication between partners,
learning/teaching/training materials, tools, approaches etc. Virtual cooperation and local project
activities. Its scope is very similar to project management in Youth participation activities and
the rule of allocation is based on the project duration in months.
Based on these considerations, the amount of unit contribution for project management in Youth
participation activities is defined as the same amount set out in decision C(2013)8550, as
amended by C(2017)6864 for “Project management and implementation” in KA2 and it is set
at 500 EUR per month.
3.1.8.2 Coaching costs
This cost category covers the costs linked to the involvement of a coach in the project.
In this element too, the action presents a similarity with KA2 cooperation partnerships. The
participation of a coach to the activity constitutes a staff cost, whose structure is compatible
with the cost category “intellectual outputs” in the 2014-2020 programme, renamed as “project
results” in the new programme.
The Erasmus+ Programme guide defines a Youth worker as “a professional or a volunteer
involved in non-formal learning who supports young people in their personal socio-educational,
and professional development” and a coach as “a resource person who could have youth work
experience to accompany groups of young people (especially those with fewer opportunities),
helping them put their idea in practice, supporting them in the preparation, implementation and
evaluation of their project”. Based on these definitions, the responsibilities of the two profiles
can be considered as similar and the same unit contribution per day can be applied,
corresponding to the category “Teacher/Trainer/Researcher/Youth worker” in KA2 cooperation
partnerships.
Table 7: Coaching costs
Teacher/Trainer/Researcher
/
Youth worker
Unit contribution per day
Austria, Belgium, France,

Denmark, Finland,
Germany, Iceland, Ireland,
241
Italy, Liechtenstein,
Luxembourg, Netherlands,
Norway, Sweden
Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, , 137

Greece, Latvia, Malta, ,
36
Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Spain
Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary,

, Lithuania, Poland,
74
Romania, Serbia, North
Macedonia, Turkiye
3.1.8.3 Youth participation events support

This cost covers the organisation of national and transnational conferences, seminars and events
in presential format.
The category Multiplier events in KA2, defined in decision C(2013)8550, as amended by
C(2017)6864, provides a contribution to the costs linked to national and transnational
conferences, seminars, events sharing and disseminating the results of the project (excluding
costs for travel and subsistence of representatives of participating organisations involved in the
project). The rule of allocation assigns a contribution of 100 EUR per local participant and 200
EUR per international participant.
In Youth participation activities, the scope of project events is very similar to the Multiplier
events category described above. The only substantial difference is that the events are attended
by participants who may already be in the location where the activities take place and/or who
are also eligible for travel and individual support insofar as they are involved in a mobility
activity. Therefore, for this action, the funding mechanism for “Multiplier events” can be
modified by considering all participants as local.
In light of the above, based on the amounts defined in decision C(2013)8550, as amended by
C(2017)6864, the amount of contribution for Youth participation events is set at 100 EUR per
participant.
3.1.9 DiscoverEU Inclusion action

The DiscoverEU Inclusion action offers young people who are 18 years old a chance to have a
short-term individual or group experience travelling across Europe by rail or other modes of
transport where necessary. Participants are provided with a travel pass of seven days within one
month and an individual support contributing to subsistence costs during the activity. In
addition, organisations are entitled to claim inclusion support (see paragraph 3.1.3 above) for
participants with fewer opportunities.
The amount of individual support is set at 78 EUR per participant per day for a maximum
of 21 days. This amount is determined as the average of the rates for youth workers mobility
(Table 6 above). This choice is justified by the fact that the profile of participants and the
modalities of the mobility are similar, however the activity is intended to take place across
different countries and therefore a MS-specific rate would not be appropriate. The choice of the
same rate as in youth workers mobility also reflects the fact that, as in that action, DiscoverEU
participants have to pay for their accommodation and choose freely on the market, as opposed
to youth exchanges where the organisation negotiates the price of accommodation in the same
structure for all participants.
37
In case they need additional travel in order to reach the location where the activity starts,
participants are also entitled to travel support, including “green travel” where applicable (see
paragraph 3.1.1 above).
3.2 Key Action 2

In the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027, the action “Partnerships for cooperation” represents
the continuaton of the “Strategic partnerships” under the 2014-2020 programme.
The main novelty for the new period is the introduction of the new action “small scale
partnerships”, aimed at reaching smaller organisations and newcomers, while the action
“Cooperation partnerships” presents a substantial continuity with its predecessor. In line with
this principle of continuity, the funding model for Cooperation partnerships is largely based on
the one of “Strategic partnerships” as defined in decision C(2013)8550 and amended by
C(2017)6864.
, The adequacy of the lump sums was assessed in the Study 2023, which found that those lump
sums detailed below remain relevant. Inflation over the 2022-2023 period, which might have a
certain impact on the set of activities to be implemented, was not identified as a justification for
modifying them.
3.2.1 Cooperation Partnerships
The determination of the amounts of contribution in the form of single lump sums was based
on an analysis of project budgets financed under the Strategic partnerships action in the period
2014-2020.
As shown by the graph below, the highest concentration of projects, about 64%, was in the
range between 100.000 and 300.000 EUR16, while project budgets comprised between 300.000
and 450.000 EUR represented about 16% of the total17.
The 20% of projects with a budget below 100.000 EUR will be covered by the action Small
Scale partnerships, described above, with a funding mechanism based on two single lump sums
with pre-defined amounts of 30.000 and 60.000 EUR. The two actions, small-scale and
cooperation partnerships, should in fact be considered as complementary, as they aim at
supporting similar activities but with different levels of complexity, number of partners and
involved and expected results.
16
Awarded grant amounts
17
Source: Erasmus+ Dashboard. The analysis did not take into account school exchange partnerships, which had
a stronger focus on mobility compared to the other KA2 actions, and therefore has more significant differences
with the 2021-2027 cooperation partnerships.
38
Figure 1- Distribution of KA2 2014-2020 project budgets
All KA2 - 2014 - 2020

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
< 60,000 60,000 <X< 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000
100,000 <X< <X< <X< <X< <X< <X< <X<
150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000
Table 8: Distribution of KA2 2014-2020 project budgets
SE VET HE AE YOUTH TOT %

< 60,000 129 139 2 327 632 1,229 10%
60,000 <X< 100,000 311 233 16 324 409 1,293 10%
100,000 <X< 150,000 530 369 70 464 419 1,852 15%
150,000 <X< 200,000 499 512 190 517 291 2,009 16%
200,000 <X< 250,000 473 549 279 486 179 1,966 16%
250,000 <X< 300,000 430 700 383 473 106 2,092 17%
300,000 <X< 350,000 166 234 218 107 20 745 6%
350,000 <X< 400,000 142 170 207 86 6 611 5%
400,000 <X< 450,000 134 159 238 64 5 600 5%
2,397
Based on the experience from the previous programming period, it is considered that three
predefined amounts of 120.000, 250.000 and 400.000 EUR will constitute an adequate and
representative menu of funding levels. Combined with the small scale partnerships, this will
offer applicants a clear and simple set of choices for their projects, allowing them to apply for
a level of grant which is in line with the scale of their proposed activities. Given the diverse
nature of all the fields covered in the programme, reaching from Education to Training to Youth
and Sport, the needs and type of activities will differ. It is therefore left to the applicants to
describe the planned activities adequate for their respective objectives and within the funding
level chosen. Therefore, the expected outputs corresponding to the amounts are not predefined:
on the contrary, a high degree of flexibility is left to applicants to define their targets in line
with the programme objectives and build their project around the requested budget.
Based on the table above, the single lump sum of 120.000 EUR targets the type and scope of
projects which obtained between 100.000 and 150.000 EUR in the previous programme; the
lump sum of 250.000 EUR will target the main bulk of projects which obtained between
150.000 and 300.000 EUR, while the projects requiring a higher level of funding will be
targeted by the 400.000 EUR lump sum. Projects which received a grant between 350.000 and
450.000 EUR in the previous programming period represented 10% of the total number and
39
15% of the budget. Apart from its statistical representativeness, offering this amount also
constitutes a strategic policy choice, allowing to finance the most innovative and ambitious
partnerships.
As the list of eligible activities and the award criteria for the action are the same for all the three
fixed amounts, applicants will choose the desired level of funding based on the level of
complexity and ambition of their proposal, taking into account elements such as the number of
partners, the duration of the project and the number and type of proposed activities.
In particular, applicants are required to provide evidence for the elements of value for money
in their application, showing that the amount requested is adequate to the content and objectives
of their proposed activities. Such elements are then assessed by experts in the evaluation phase
and influence the position of each proposal in the ranking list, so that proposals which are found
to offer poor value for money will have a lower score and fewer chances to be selected for
funding. It is therefore expected that projects will rather target a high level of activities with
high European added value in order to be successfully selected within their chosen group.
The experts involved in the evaluation of proposals will also be supported by specific
guidelines, providing a common methodology to use the information from projects financed in
2014-2020 as a reference for the evaluation of new proposals.
A quality assessment will also be carried out ex-post, based on the information presented in the
final reports, with a view to determine the level of achievement of the project objectives stated
in the application forms. Insufficient quality, corresponding to a low score in the final
assessment, will constitute the basis for the application of grant reductions for poor or partial
implementation.
3.2.2 Small Scale Partnerships
i. Determination of the amounts of Union contribution
The funding mechanism for this action will be based on single lump sums of predefined
amounts.
In the programming period 2014-2020, the action “Strategic partnerships” funded over 3 550
projects with grant amounts lower than 100 000 EUR, for a total value of 220 million EUR, out
of a total of 12 500 projects (28%) and a total budget of 2.1 billion eur (10%).
Within this portion of the projects population, about 2 700 had grant amounts comprised
between 50 000 and 100 000 EUR (21% of the total). Their average value was 76 000 EUR,
with a duration of 22 months and 4 partners involved. Based on the funding rules applicable in
the previous programming period, the typical budget structure was the following:
Category Amounts
1 Coordinator 11 000
Project management
3 Partners 16 500
and implementation
Total 27 500
Project meetings 10 600
40
Intellectual outputs 32 700
Multiplier events 5 200
As the figures show, more than a third of the average grant amount was already determined in
the form of a lump sum on the basis of the number of partners and project duration (Project
management and implementation), while the remaining part, determined on the basis of unit
contributions, was used for project meetings, events and intellectual outputs (staff costs).
In the same period, the number of grants with amounts lower than 50 000 EUR was about 850,
with an average value of 35 000 EUR, a duration of 16 months and 3 partners.
The first group of grants, with amounts comprised between 50 and 100 thousand EUR, already
represented a relevant portion of the population in the Erasmus+ 2014-2020 programme, while
the second group with amounts below 50 000 EUR, could be considered as marginal. However,
in the Erasmus+ 2021-2027 programme, the objective of the new action “Small scale
partnerships” is to increase the involvment of smaller organisations and newcomers to the
programme, which translates into a higher number of grants of small amounts. This motivates
the choice to propose a standard amount below 50 000 EUR to attract this specific group of
beneficiaries.
Based on the analysis above, the average values which would allow to cover the typical costs
of projects under the 2014-2020 funding rules are 35 000 and 75 000 EUR. However, in order
to stimulate participants to achieve efficiencies and seek the best value for money in their
projects, the predefined amounts for the lump sum contributions will be respectively 15% and
20% lower than the average value calculated above. The predefined amounts are therefore the
following:
a) 30 000 EUR
b) 60 000 EUR.
Applicants will select the requested amount between the two options above, based on the
proposed level of complexity, ambition and duration of their project.
The minimum requirements for both budgets are the presence of two partners and the definition
of a plan of eligible activities. The completion of the project activities constitutes the condition
for the payment of the lump sum contribution.
The adequacy of the selected amount to the proposed project activities and their value for money
will be a central element of the quality assessment in the evaluation of proposals at selection
stage. Only proposals obtaining a sufficient score in these aspects will be selected for funding.
3.3 Support and network functions of the National Agencies
Apart from their role in the implementation of the programme under a contribution agreement,
some National Agencies receive specific Union contributions for the following support and
networking functions:
- National VET Team:
- Eurodesk: European youth information network providing information on learning
mobility for young people.
- SALTO (Support, Advanced Learning and Training Opportunities): network of
resource centres organising trainings for organisations and agencies involved in the
Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes.
41
The EU contribution to these activities implemented by National Agencies will take the form
of a single lump sum.
The amount of the single lump sum will be determined for each contribution based on the
estimated budget of the action proposed by the Agency. The Commission will fix the lump sum
of each contribution based on the proposal, evaluation result, funding rates and the maximum
contribution amount set in the work programme.
Based on these principles the following steps will be taken to calculate the amount of the lump
sum contribution:
3.3.1 EU contribution proposal

National Agencies will provide an estimated budget for the work to be carried out under the
action (using the submission form template). The budget can be split into work packages and
eligible cost categories.
a) The National Agencies must provide their proposals in form of activity plans, with a
breakdown of the lump sum showing the share per work package (where applicable);
b) The proposal must describe the activities covered by each work package;
c) Proposals for lump sum contributions must contain the resources and a detailed cost estimate
per work package;
d) The co-financing rate will be applied to the total estimated eligible costs, using the funding
rate approved in the work programme.
3.3.2 Evaluation
a) Proposals will be evaluated according to the standard evaluation procedures with the help of
internal and/or external experts. The experts will assess the quality of the proposals, against the
requirements defined in the work programme and the expected impact, quality and efficiency
of the action.
b) For each work package, the estimated budget will be assessed for accuracy and if the
appropriateness of the resources proposed and the split of lump sum shares allows achieving
the activities and expected outputs, to be achieved in the light of the proposed resources.
To ensure equal treatment and benchmark the estimated activities and costs, the experts will
consult statistical, historical or any other appropriate data on costs and resources from
previously comparable funded projects, and will check that the correct indirect cost and co-
financing rate have been correctly applied.
c) They will propose to remove some ineligible costs and/or actions from the proposal, as e.g.
cost of activities outside the eligibility period, costs not permitted in the action.
d) They will check that the costs proposed are in line with the National Agency’s work
programme specifications, the appropriateness of the split of the work packages and the quality
of the outputs
3.3.3 Determination of the lump sum amount

a) Following the activity plan evaluation, the authorising officer will establish the amount of
the lump sum, taking into account the findings of the assessment carried. If cost or activities
items are adapted, the lump sum and the lump sum breakdown are modified accordingly.
42
b) The final lump sum is included in the contribution agreement as the maximum contribution
amount. It is calculated by the Commission by applying the co-financing rate set out in the work
programme specifications to the total estimated eligible costs in the budget table.
c) The maximum amount established for the country allocations in the Commission’s Annual
work programme will be respected.
4 Sound financial management, co-financing principle and absence of double financing

All methodologies described above and the previous Commission authorising decisions
C(2013)8550 and C(2017)6864 comply with the principles of sound financial management,
co-financing and absence of double financing as required by the Financial Regulation.
4.1 Reasonable compliance with the principle of co-financing

The amounts set out in this decision are unit and lump sum contributions, meaning that the
principle of co-financing has been taken into account in setting the amounts. A maximum rate
of co-financing is foreseen for all the actions of the Programme. Notwithstanding the principle
of co-financing, the maximum funding rate can be up to 100%, as the beneficiaries will bear
additional costs which are not captured by the Union contribution.
The majority of the amounts set in this Decision are based on amounts authorised for the 2014-
2020 period. As explained in the authorising decisions for that period, the contribution amounts
have been defined so as to ensure they are below, or at least close to, the actual cost of the
actions. For example, for the cost category “individual support”, the “Study on the inclusiveness
and adequacy of support for student mobility in higher education under the next Erasmus+
Programme”, calculated that Union contribution covered between 34% and 42% of the overall
mobility costs incurred by students. As part of the 2013 assessment for defining the
methodology and levels of contribution, the proposed amounts were compared to past grants
awarded as well as to the real costs reported. This analysis indicated that amounts are close to
the real grants previously awarded on a global basis. Moreover, an analysis of the typical budget
structure of similar projects in the past showed that the costs represented by the unit contribution
is normally the largest element (average 75% of total eligible costs) of the eligible cost and that
other (ineligible) costs are systematically necessary for achieving the objective of the action.
This ensures that even if the unit contribution represents 100% of the eligible costs it covers,
the presence of other costs ensure that, overall, the co-financing principle is respected.
Simulations were carried out for each contribution individually, but also by country and by
sector (where several sectors are concerned by the same unit cost), to ensure that structural or
significant isolated deviations from the historical levels of grant are limited when balanced with
the overall goal of a simplicity and attractiveness for beneficiaries, thus ensuring the co-
financing principle is respected on an overall basis.
Furthermore, a cap is set for contributions to costs of actions such as Jean Monnet Projects or
Key Action 2 Cooperation partnerships to add further assurance to ensuring co-financing on an
overall basis, but not necessarily in all projects. The cap has been set with reference to simulated
budgets compared to past budgets at a lower level than the simulated total costs. Indeed, the
simulations indicate that the average amount of the Union contribution under all grant items
achieves the relevant Union co-financing rate as defined in the work programme, thus ensuring
the respect of the co-financing principle on an overall basis. The overall co-financing rate of
overall grants by action is lower than the individual ones because it takes account of eligible
43
costs which do not receive a contribution (e.g. under the project results support a contribution
to staff cost shall be made, but the eligible communication costs shall not be taken into account).
Moreover, it can be verified during assessment stage that for any individual grant there are
additional resources necessary for the implementation of the action above that provided by the
EU contribution. Detailed guidelines and additional training in this respect shall be provided to
the national agencies.
4.2 Sound Financial Management

Sound financial management is ensured because the methodology used to calculate the amounts
set out in the decision ensure they are a proxy of the real costs. Moreover, simulations have
shown that the proposed methodologies result in amounts that are on average comparable to but
below the current real costs and/or real grants given (taking account of at most the maximum
level of co-funding), which ensures that the grants remain attractive while respecting sound
financial management.
In some cases there will be complementary sources of financing to that of the Union (e.g. some
individual mobility actions). When the Union contribution is set within a range (e.g. Individual
support), the overall external sources of financing are one of the factors which shall be
specifically taken into account when setting the contribution amount within the defined range
specified by the Commission. For example, in sending countries where little or no external co-
funding is available, the agencies can apply higher ranges than in countries with greater external
co-financing sources. In addition, the nature of the actions as detailed in the Work Programme
excludes the possibility of generating revenues through the action.
By nature, simplified forms of grant are a proxy of the underlying costs and not an exact
reimbursement of real costs. While great efforts have been invested to minimise negative
impacts on any country associated to the programme18, it cannot be avoided that the new
approach for 2021 - 2027 might result in different consequences for different countries. As
required by the Financial Regulation the impact of the new amounts shall be closely monitored
in order to be able to address any undesirable side effects. Intermediate reviews and check-
up/control mechanisms are foreseen in order to ensure that the approved methodology is up to
date throughout the whole programme period.
Lump sums for small-scale partnerships in KA2
In the case of small-scale partnerships under KA2, lump sum contribution amounts have been
set using data from projects implemented in the 2014-2020 period, which themselves were
funded using simplified forms of contributions. The amounts can therefore be expected to
represent a proxy of the real costs. However, to ensure sound financial management, a further
reduction of 15% was applied to the amounts.
4.3 Reasonable compliance with the principle of no double funding
44
There is no overlap between eligible costs. Unit costs refer to specific individual eligible costs
in many cases (e.g. travel, staff costs). Where this is not the case, the funding model ensures
that double funding is avoided by requiring additional outputs.
In the present Programme, double funding is prevented already effectively by preventive

controls at selection stage, by national and executive agencies and the Commission. The
Programme draws clear division lines between actions which reduces the risk that similar
activities can be undertaken under different actions by the same participants. Furthermore,
double funding is avoided by identifying all categories of eligible and ineligible costs related to
the supported activities.
In this respect, as from 2014 applicant organisations have been registered and controlled in
order to achieve unique identification and assist monitoring. Use of this unique identity
facilitates checking of multiple applications and reduce the potential for double funding. Other
tools are also available for national agencies to cross check the content of applications to avoid
that the same action is funded twice.
Control of participants in learning mobility will also be possible via the Beneficiary module
application that contains details of all mobility participants in mobility projects of the
Erasmus+ Programme.
45
1.1 The Union contribution shall exclusively take the form of lump sum contributions
for the following actions under the Erasmus + programme
1.1.1 Education and training
a) Key action 1: Learning Mobility
• Erasmus+ Virtual Exchanges
b) Key action 2: Cooperation among organisations and institutions

• Partnership for Excellence: Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Design Measures
• Partnerships for Innovation: Alliances
• Partnerships for Innovation - Forward Looking Partnerships
• Partnership for Excellence - Centres of Vocational Excellence
• Partnership for Excellence – Erasmus+ Teacher Academies
• Partnerships for cooperation in the field of Education and Training: European NGOs
• European Universities
• EPALE - Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in Europe
• eTwinning - National Support Organisations
• Capacity Building in the field of VET
• Capacity Building in the field of Higher Education
c) Key action 3: Support to policy development and cooperation

• European Higher Education Area (EHEA) – Initiative to support to the
implementation of the reforms
• Implementing renewed priorities for the European Agenda for Adult Learning
• The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA)
- International Civic and Citizenship Education survey (ICCS)
• The International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS)
• EUROSTUDENT VIII - Social dimension of European Higher
• Eurydice: Network of National units
• Support to the European Quality Assurance in Vocational Education and Training
National Reference Points EQA(VET)-NRP
• Support for further implementation of the graduate tracking initiative
• National Academic Recognition Centres (NARIC)
• Support to better knowledge in youth policy
• TALIS - Teaching and Learning International Survey
• PIAAC - Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies
• Policy Networks (EQF, EUROPASS, EUROGUIDANCE)
• National Erasmus Offices (NEOs)
• Social Inclusion and Common Values
• European policy network on teachers and school leaders
• European policy network in the field of education of children and young people with
a migrant background
• European policy experimentations
46
• Civil Society Cooperation in the field of Education and Training
d) Jean Monnet actions
• Jean Monnet Actions in the field of Higher Education: Chairs, Modules and Centres
of Excellence
• Jean Monnet Policy Debate: Networks in the field of Higher Education and in other
fields of education and training
• Jean Monnet in other fields of education and training: Teachers Training and
Learning EU Initiatives
1.1.2 Youth
a) Key action 2: Cooperation among organisations and institutions
• Capacity building in the field of youth
• Partnerships for Cooperation in the field of Youth : European NGOs
b) Key action 3: Support to policy development and cooperation
• European Youth Together (Large and Small scale)
• EU Youth Dialogue: support to National Working Groups
• Civil society cooperation in the field of Youth
1.1.3 Sport
• Not-for-profit European sport events
• Small scale partnerships
• Cooperation partnerships
• Capacity Building in the field of Sport
• Dialogue with stakeholders - National Activities
The categories of eligible costs covered by the lump sum contribution are the following:
a) Personnel costs,
b) Travel and subsistence
c) Subcontracting cost,
d) Purchase costs,
e) Other cost categories,
f) Financing support to third parties
g) Indirect cost
The amounts of the lump sum contributions to be used shall be calculated in accordance with
point 3.
following actions under the Erasmus+ Education and Training - Key action 2
• Partnerships for Excellence: Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters, including Erasmus
Mundus Joint Masters – Additional scholarships for targeted regions of the world
The categories of eligible costs covered by the unit contributions are the following:
a) Student scholarships to individuals covering travel and installation costs and
subsistence costs,
47
b) Institutional costs covering staff costs (teaching), staff travel costs, invited guest
lecturers, promotion, dissemination, organisational costs (including insurance for
the students, financial support to students special needs , assistance with
accommodation, and other student services), administrative costs, and all other
costs necessary to implement a successful master programme,
c) Cost for special needs for the enrolled students
The amounts of the unit contribution to be used shall be calculated in accordance with point 3.
2 Justification
The use of lump sum and unit contribution will reduce the administrative burden and reduce
the scope for error in the cost claims, will speed up the payment process and will ensure an
effective risk control, while focusing on the quality of the results
The high number of actions and applications together with average amount of the grants justify
the use of simplified cost options.
This sytem will facilitate a wider access to the grants as the rules for participation,
implementation and reporting, are simpler and easier of understand for beneficiaries than the
classical budget based mechanism. It provides legal certainty to the beneficiaries and ensures a
better quality of the applications.
The diversity of actions and beneficiaries (profit making companies, public bodies, cultural
associations, universities, designated bodies…) within this programme, makes the use of lump
sum appropiate to facilitate the correct and complete implementation of the action.
The outputs of individual co-financed projects are tangible, qualifiable, and quantifiable (they
include scholarships, trainings, traineeship for students, mobilities, lectures, events…).
Finally, the use of lump sum and unit contributions can reduce the administrative costs for
participation in the programme and contribute to the prevention and reduction of financial errors
(i.e staff cost calculations…). It also simplifies the calculation of grant amounts, while
decreasing significantly the workload of both the beneficiaries and the granting authority (i.e
complexity of verification of real costs through underlying supporting documents…). As a
consequence, the payment procedures are accelerated
Erasmus+ is the EU Programme in the fields of education, training, youth and sport for the
period 2021-2027. Education, training, youth and sport are key areas that support citizens in
their personal and professional development. High quality, inclusive education and training, as
well as informal and non-formal learning, ultimately equip young people and participant of all
ages with the qualifications and skills needed for their meaningful participation in democratic
society, intercultural understanding and successful transition in the labour market.
The Erasmus+ programme is subdivided in 3 key actions and Jean Monnet actions under
Education and Training, Youth and Sport.
This Annex II part of the decision applies to centralised actions managed by the Agency
2.1.1 Key Action 2: Cooperation among organisations and institutions
The actions supported will bring positive and long-lasting effects on the participating
organisations, on the policy systems in which such Actions are framed as well as on the
organisations and persons directly or indirectly involved in the organised activities.
48
This Key Action is expected to result in the development, transfer and/or implementation of
innovative practices at organisational, local, regional, national or European levels.
• strengthened cooperation between organisations and institutions active in the fields
of education, training, youth and sport;
• development of innovative and inclusive approaches in addressing and reaching
out to target groups of education, training, youth and sport policies;
• increased participation of individuals with fewer opportunities in education,
training, youth and sport activities.
• increased digital capacity and readiness of organisations and institutions; a more
strategic and integrated use of digital technologies and support for support digital
transformation plans, open educational resources and open practices in education,
training, youth and sport;
• more modern, dynamic, committed and professional environments inside the
participating organisations: ready to integrate good practices and new methods into
daily activities; open to synergies with organisations active in different fields or in
other socio-economic sectors; strategic planning of professional development for
staff in line with individual needs and organisational objectives;
• increased capacity of organisations and institutions to work and cooperate at
EU/international level.
• improved sharing of good practices among organisations and institutions.
2.1.2 Key Action 3: Support for Policy Reform
Provides support to policy cooperation at European Union level, thereby contributing to the
development of new policies, which can trigger modernisation and reforms, at European Union,
and systems' level, in the fields of education, training youth and sport.
The actions implemented through Key Action 3 are intended to produce the main following
results:
• improved quality, equity and inclusiveness education and training systems as well
as youth and sport policies;
• higher degree of transnational cooperation and mutual learning between competent
authorities and policy makers in the fields of education, training, youth and sport;
• increased knowledge and analytical capacity to support evidence-based policies in
the fields of education, training, youth and sport;
• availability of sound comparative international data and appropriate secondary
analyses for European and national policy making;
• improved tools for assessment, transparency and recognition of skills and
qualifications acquired through formal, non-formal and informal learning;
• good functioning of European networks in charge of guidance and implementing
tools that foster the transparency and recognition of skills and qualifications
acquired through formal, non-formal and informal learning;
• active involvement of civil society networks and non-governmental organisations
in policy implementation;
49
• increased participation of young people and youth stakeholders in the EU Youth
Dialogue;
• increased levels of participation of individuals in sport and physical activity
• higher degree of exchanges of good practices, dialogue, mutual learning and
cooperation among policy makers, practitioners and stakeholders from Programme
and Partner Countries;
• increased public awareness about European policies in the fields of education,
training, youth and sport as well as increased awareness about the results of the
Erasmus+ Programme;
• greater synergies with other EU Programmes, such as the European Structural and
Investment Funds, as well as with funding schemes at national or regional level.
2.1.3 Jean Monnet
a) Jean Monnet actions in the field of higher education enable higher education institutions
inside and outside the EU to promote teaching and research on European integration
and promote policy debate and exchanges involving the academic world and policy-
makers on Union policy priorities. The following actions are supported:
• Jean Monnet Modules: short teaching programmes in one or more disciplines of
European Union studies;
• Jean Monnet Chairs: longer teaching posts with a specialization in European Union
studies for individual university professors, including Honorary Jean Monnet Chairs
(without grant);
• Jean Monnet Centres of Excellence: focal points gathering knowledge of high-level
experts in various disciplines of European studies, as well as developing
transnational activities and structural links with academic institutions in other
countries;
b) Jean Monnet actions in other fields of education and training supports learning about
the objectives and the functioning of the European Union and promotes active
citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination
institutions in other fields of education. The following actions are supported:
• Jean Monnet Teacher Training: enables teachers in schools to develop new skills
and to teach and engage on EU matters, thus empowering them through a better
understanding of the EU and its functioning. It will offer opportunities to education
providers to develop content (teaching and training modules, materials for teachers
and trainers, etc.) and innovative tools as well as to carry out activities within
education and training institutions, to raise awareness and exchange views about
the European Union matters and subject studies;
• Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives: addresses schools and VET institutions the
current widespread lack of knowledge of the EU, its basic functioning and
objectives by promoting critical awareness of the EU. They will help young
Europeans become active and informed citizens, engaged in the democratic
processes that shape their future and that of the EU. The Learning EU initiatives
will enable teachers in schools and VET institutions to develop activities bringing
facts and knowledge on the European Union to a broad spectrum of learners, also
reaching out to their community (parents and families, local actors and authorities).
c) Jean Monnet policy debate
50
• Jean Monnet networks in Higher Education: have as primary objective to collect,
share and discuss among the partners research findings, content of courses and
experiences, products (studies, articles, etc.).
• Jean Monnet networks in other fields of education: promotes an international aspect
to school education and exchange of good practices and co-teaching within a group
of countries. It will promote a common understanding on learning methodologies
relevant to EU issues among practitioners working under different constraints such
as differing national legislations and curricula structures.

The use of lump sum and unit contributions is essential for the actions where activities and
outputs are evaluated and approved by an ex-ante evaluation, based in objective and reliable
information (historical, statistical data…).
The risk of errors or irregularities is lower than when using real costs because there is no
reporting of actual costs. Moreover, beneficiaries have no obligation to provide documents to
the granting authority on the costs incurred. Notwithstanding this, they remain subject to
applicable accounting rules and the specific eligibility rules of the programme.
The lump sum and unit contributions are output-based, meaning the main condition for payment
is achievement of the pre-defined outputs. In terms of control, the granting authority will
undertake checks at the time of preparation of the grant, during the implementation of the action
and at the completion of the actions (through reports from funded projects, checks on milestones
and deliverables, reviews and/or audits).
The risk of fraud and the cost of controls of the triggering event, for the lump sum or unit cost
payment, are limited, since the proper implementation of the action is clearly defined and
output-based. If the conditions for payment of the lump sum or unit cost have not been met,
(e.g. a particular work package has not been completed or not as defined), or if the action that
entitles the unit cost has not been carried out (e.g. not travel made, not scholarship implemented)
and an undue payment was made to a beneficiary, those costs will become ineligible and the
granting authority will be entitled to reduce the grant and consequently recover the undue paid
amounts. All of this can be verified in the context of the granting authority’s control and anti-
fraud strategy, (AFS)19 that together with a long experience of controlling simplified cost
options will ensure a reasonable level of assurance,.
contributions
contributions for the following actions:
- Not-for-profit European sport events,
- Dialogue with stakeholders - National Activities,
- Jean Monnet Modules and Chairs,
- Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiative,
- Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Design Measures,
19
The EACEA Anti-Fraud Strategy (AFS) and its related action plan 2018-2020 were adopted on 9 July 2018 by the Steering Committee and
approved by the college on 29 April 2019
51
- Sport - Small scale partnerships,
- Sport - Cooperation partnerships,
- European NGOs Partnerships for cooperation in the field of Education and Training and in
the field of Youth
- Civil Society Cooperation in the field Education and Training and in the field of Youth
3.1.1 Not-for-profit European sport events
3.1.1.1 Nature of the supported actions
This action will support the preparation, organisation and follow up of not-for-profit sport
events, organised either in one single country or in several countries by not-for-profit
organisations or public bodies active in the field of sport.
The EU grant covers the following activities (non-exhaustive list): preparation and organisation
of the event, organisation of educational activities for athletes, coaches, organisers and
volunteers in the run-up to the event; organisation of side-activities to the sporting event
(conferences, seminars); training of volunteers; implementation of legacy activities
(evaluations, drafting of future plans); communication activities linked to the topic of the event.
3.1.1.2 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union contribution in the form of
lump sums contributions
Each year the Agency receives 80-100 applications under this action with a result of 11 to 18
grants agreement signed.
The calculation of the lump sum contributions is determined based on an internal expert
judgement based on historical data of the total reimbursed cost of the financed projects.
A sample of 27 financed projects of 2016/2018 of the previous MMF (2014-2020), were pre-
selected for this analysis.
From this 27 financed projects we took out 4 projects with an average funding of 57 000, and
3 projects above 1 000 000 EUR that would be financed during the period 2021-2027 via
another funding mechanism.
Of the 20 projects (representing 70% of the total number of financed projects) covering 2 years
of calls, the analysis identifies two types of events with clear different categories of costs:
i. European local events where national events were replicated/organised in
different countries (e.g. Special Olympic football) event across 21 countries.
ii. European wide events in one programme country: one major event organised
with the participation of organisations from at least 10 different countries
(e.g. opening of the Women World Football cup in Copenhagen).
These two types of events have specific characteristics in terms of funding:

i. The European wide events were awarded a Union contribution ranging between 400 000 and
500 000 EUR and while European local events were awarded a Union contribution between
200 000 and 300 000 EUR.
The correlation of the grant awarded with the number of events being higher than the one with
the number of countries (0,93 vs 0,63) it was decided to use the former as parameter to generate
the lump sum.
52
ii. For European local event actions, each event must be held in each of the Programme
countries of the participating organizations. The grant requested will correspond to the amount
assigned to the number of participating events/organisations .
Based on the data at hand, a distinction should also be made between events replicated in less
than 6 countries, and larger scale replication (from 6 territories).
- actions involving a minimum of 3 organisations coming from 3 different
Programme countries to a maximum of 5 organisations coming from 5 different
Programme countries could request 200 000 EUR
Programme Countries could request 300 000 EUR
Simulations of these lump sums show that it would entail a global funding reduction of ~5%. It
can therefore be accepted as a reliable proxy of the actual cost.
The European wide event, are mono event with at least the participation of 10 organisations
from 10 different Programme countries. The activities must take place in the Programme
country of the applicant organisation involved.
The strand proposed will be set one event organised and the corresponding action will involve
10 or more countries at 450 000 EUR
The final payment will correspond to the completed work packages, with the limit established
in the maximum grant amount set in the grant agreement, and, without prejudice to the
application of the articles specifically related to payment conditions and grant reduction.
Simulations of this lump sum applied to actions implemented in the past show that it would
entail a global funding reduction of ~4%. It can therefore be accepted as a reliable proxy of the
actual cost.
i. European local events
Number events Funding

3 to 5 200 000 EUR
>or = 6 300 000 EUR
ii. European wide events
Number countries Funding

>or = 10 450 000 EUR
3.1.2 Dialogue with stakeholders - National Activities
The European Week of Sport initiative is part of an overall policy aiming at increasing the level
of participation in sport and physical activity in the EU. The main objective of the action is to
help to ensure that the European Week of Sport initiative is implemented and gets visibility in
the participating countries and that the messages of the Week reaches out to as many Europeans
as possible and encourages them to be active. To this end, the competent ministries of each
53
Member State appoints each organizing entities, National Coordinating Bodies (NCB) that will
perform three main tasks:
i. Event(s) organisation: each National Coordinating Body (NCB) must organise at least
one national event in their country, preferably during the European Week of Sport (23-
30 Sept.);
ii. Coordination: Ensure close links with national key players (e.g. National Olympic
Committees, sport federations and confederations, education institutions and schools,
etc.) who can play a role for the action before, during and after the European Week of
Sport;
iii. Communication: Ensure visibility for the European Week of Sport through national and
European campaigns.
The outputs are the sport events themselves and the communication campaign(s) with the
#BeActive message “let’s do sport”, as well as the network of stakeholders.
lump sum contributions
a) Data sources and sample
This action began in 2015 and since then has been modified and adapted to the needs of the
action. The level of funding has varied as more activities have been added and more needs have
been met. Therefore, the data selected was obtained from the latest implemented projects; 32
grant agreements signed in 2018 for actions implemented up to 2019.
For the following analysis we have considered the EU grant awarded after the co-financing rate
of 80% was applied .
b) Analysis
Most actions are concentrated between 150 000 and 200 000 EUR, with an average of 176 000
EUR.
Simulations have been carried out to verify the effect on the actual funding levels of applying
a number of amounts :
- an amount of 150 000 EUR results in an overall reduction in funding of 13,5%;
- an amount of 160 000 EUR results in an overall reduction in funding 8,3%;
- an amount above 160 000 EUR, although diminishing this funding gap, results in
overfunding of some smaller project by up to 14% (for 165 000 EUR) or to 18%
(170 000 EUR) in some regions.
Based on this, and in order to ensure the principle of co-financing, the lump sum contribution
for this action is set at 160 000 EUR.
3.1.3 Jean Monnet Modules and Chairs

This action has used simplified cost options since 2010 and therefore the beneficiaries are
familiar with these methdologies. The new lump sums will be based on the previously used unit
costs and flat rates and will further simplify the implementation of the action.
54
• Jean Monnet Chair - a teaching post with a specialisation in European Union studies
for university professors or senior lectures. Only one professor may hold the Chair
and must provide a minimum number of teaching hours per academic year.
• Jean Monnet Module - a short teaching programme (or course) in the field of
European Union studies at a Higher Education Institution. Each Module has a
minimum duration of teaching hours per academic year. Modules may concentrate
on one particular discipline in European studies or be multidisciplinary in approach
and therefore call upon the services of several professors and experts.
A significant added value of this system is the possibility to differentate the lump sum to
correspond to countries with similar teaching hour costs. This methodology will allow the
granting authority to differentiate the maximum amount of the grant according to the country
of each applicant and the teaching hours that they have declared in the application.
Moreover, simulations have shown that the proposed methodologies result in similar amounts
to the current use of flat rates and unit costs, which ensures that the grants remain attractive
while respecting sound financial management
a) Data sources
The simplified funding model for the Lifelong Learning Programme Jean Monnet was
established after a study carried out by EACEA and approved for the previous MMF period
2014-2020.
For the purposes of this new methodology, historical data from Jean Monnet Chairs and
Modules selected between 2014 and 2020 was extracted.
b) Sample
Data was extracted from the final activity reports of 203 projects from a population of 299
financed projects, specifically, 142 out of 227 for Jean Monnet Chair and 61 out of 72 for Jean
Monnet Modules.
c) Analysis
The lump sum has been estimated using the following information :
Unit cost for teaching costs per country approved in the previous MMF20, where the
minimum hourly teaching cost was set at 80 EUR and the maximum at 200 EUR. The Jean
Monnet Programme is open to participants and beneficiaries from all over the world.
Country teaching rate: is a flat rate for costs not associated with the preparation and delivery
of teaching programme (10% for a Chair and 40% of a Module) including non-teaching
staff costs (for assistants, administrative staff, etc.), travel and subsistence costs,
dissemination costs, interpretation costs and other costs linked to event organisation,
teaching materials, etc. This top-up enables the beneficiary to implement the action
properly.
• The country teaching rate: flat rates of 10% and 40% are calculated as
percentages of the national teaching costs;
20
The system was introduced for these project types under the 2010 Call for proposals following the European
Commission’s approval of the 2010 EAC Annual Work Programme (C(2009)7734) of 7 October 2009 and
C(2013)8550 of 4 December 2013
55
• The top-up percentage is higher for Module as more additional (accompanying)
activities are organised, and, several teachers/professors are involved in the
delivery of the teaching programme, whereas for a Jean Monnet Chair only one
staff member is responsible for the delivery of the entire teaching programme;
In both cases, for the Module and the Chair, the top-up percentages have been set to reflect the
real costs typically incurred for each type of activity over the lifetime of the programme and as
such are based on actual expenditure.
The final payment will correspond to the hours finally implemented, with the limit established
in the maximum grant amount set in the grant agreement and without prejudice to the
application of the grant reduction articles in this regard.
In addition, using this lump sum the risk of irregularity on adding teaching hours without a
maximum limit is limited.
• Methodology for Jean Monnet Chairs
From a population of 227 financed projects belonging to the 2014-2020 MFF, a selection of
142 projects has been made through the following steps:
a) The following formula has been applied: Total number of teaching hours for a 3 years
period* country teaching rate (110%) *75% co-financing;
b) After a screening of these projects, the non-compliant projects with the 100% teaching
rate (not 100% match between grant awarded and ex-post checked) were removed;
c) In order to focus on countries having a specific teaching cost amount, projects from
“Other countries” were taken out of the sample.
Applying these parameters, a population of 142 projects is obtained amounting to EUR 6 624
898, covering actions from Programme and Partner countries
75% of the population is within the range 270-450 hours for teaching hours over the 3 year
period.
Using these results, a reference grid has been developed establishing different tranches with the
ratios of teaching hours and groups of countries (see Tables 1 and 2 below). The starting point
has been set to 270 hours (minimum requested hours) and it is increased by 30 hours for each
tranche with a maximum amount of the grant set at 50 000 EUR. The beneficiary will request
the amount corresponding to the number of hours they intend to teach over the 3 year period. If
at the final payment, those hours are not delivered, the amount of the grant will be reduced to
the amount corresponding to the tranche below, and without prejudice to the grant reduction
articles set in the grant agreement. The maximum grant amount set in the grant agreement may
not be exceeded.
The countries have been distributed into the groups based on their similar teaching costs. The
application of the grid amounts ensures the best proxy to the reality of each action and country,
and the rule of non-profit is ensured.
The tranches are designed covering the 100% of the analysed population.
In order to avoid the disparities in the reported working hours from the former financing
scheme, where no upper limit on teaching hours was fixed, this lump sum scheme will set an
equitable distribution system between the different countries, where everyone has the
opportunity to reach the maximum lump sum contribution of 50 000 EUR.
56
Financial result of the simulation with this method: new budget within error margin (<1%):
6.597.00 vs 6.624.898 EUR.
Initial amounts resulting from this calculation were further updated with the inflation rate over
the period January 2021-May 2023. Calculation was based on the HICP EU 27 countries which
was equal to 126,35 in April 2023 and 106,27 in January 2021, thus producing an average rate
equal to 18,89% While this index applies to the EU Member States, recognising that specific
economic conditions may vary across regions, the same increase has been applied with respect
to partner countries. In this direction, taking into account that the countries remain distributed
according to their similar teaching costs, this approach preserves continuity and maintains a
consistent framework for all participating entities.
• Methodology for Jean Monnet Modules

From a population of 72 financed projects belonging to the 2014-2020 MFF, a selection of 61
projects has been made through the following steps:
period* country teaching rate* (140%) *75% co-financing;
b) After a screening of these projects, the non-compliant projects with the 100% teaching
rate (not 100% match between grant awarded and ex-post checked) were removed.
Applying these parameters gives a population of 61 projects amounting to EUR 1 544 867,
covering actions from Programme and Partner countries.
75% of the population is within the range 120-240 hours for the teaching hours over a 3 year
period.
Following this, a reference grid has been developed establishing different tranches with the
has been set to 120 hours (minimum numero of hours required) and it is increased by 30 hours
for each tranche with a maximum amount of the grant set at 30 000 EUR. The beneficiary will
request the amount corresponding to the number of hours they intend to teach over the 3 year
period. If at the final payment, those hours are not delivered, the maximum amount of the grant
will be reduced to the amount corresponding to the tranche below and without prejudice to the
grant reduction articles set in the grant agreement. The maximum grant amount set in the grant
agreement may not be exceeded.
application of the grid amounts ensures the best proxy to the reality of each action and country
and the rule of non-profit is ensured.
The tranches are designed to cover the 100% of the analysed population.
opportunity to reach the maximum lump sum contribution of 30 000 EUR
Financial result of the simulation with this method: new budget within error margin <1%: 1 547
000EUR (vs 1 544 867 EUR).
Similar to Jean Monnet Chairs, initial results following this method were further updated with
the inflation rate over the period January 2021-May 2023.
57
58
Table 1: Lump sum for Jean Monnet Chair for Programme countries
Teaching hours over the 3 years period (min 90/year)

270- 301- 331- 361- 391- 421- 451- 481- 511- 541- 571- 601- 631- 661- 691- 721-
Country 300 330 360 390 420 450 480 510 540 570 600 630 660 690 720 750 >750
Bulgaria
Liechtenstein
Republic of North
Macedonia 21,500 24,000 26,000 28,000 30,000 32,500 35,000 37,500 40,000 42,500 45,000 47,500 50,000 52,500 55,000 57,500 60,000
Romania
Serbia
Croatia
Latvia
22,500 25,000 27,000 29,000 31,000 33,500 36,000 38,500 41,000 43,500 46,000 48,500 51,000 53,500 56,000 58,000 60,000
Turkiye
Czechia
Estonia
Hungary
Lithuania 30,000 33,500 37,000 40,500 44,000 47,500 51,000 54,500 58,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Poland
Slovakia
Greece
Malta
Portugal 37,000 40,500 44,000 47,500 51,000 54,500 58,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Slovenia
Cyprus
Iceland 44,000 48,500 53,000 57,500 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
59
Italy
Spain
Finland
France
51,000 55,000 59,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Ireland
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Germany
Luxembourg 55,500 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Netherlands
Norway
Sweden
60
Table 2 Lump sum for Jean Monnet Chair for Partner Countries

Country 270-300 301-330 331-360 361-390 391-420 421-450 451-480 481-510 511-540 541-570 571-600 601-630 631-660 661-690 691-720 721-750 >750
Antigua and
Barbuda
Barbados
Chile
Libya
Mexico 25,000 27,500 30,000 32,500 35,000 37,000 39,000 41,000 43,500 46,000 48,500 51,000 53,500 56,000 58,000 60,000 60,000
Saint Kitts
and Nevis
OTHER
COUNTRIE
S
Bahrain
Russian
Federation
29,000 32,500 36,000 39,500 41,000 46,500 50,000 53,500 57,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Trinidad and
Tobago
Equatorial
Guinea
Israel
Oman
37,000 40,500 44,000 47,500 51,000 54,500 58,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Saudi
Arabia
Seychelles
Korea,
Republic of
61
New-
Zealand 44,000 48,500 53,000 57,500 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Japan
United
Kingdom
51,000 55,000 59,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Australia
Brunei
Canada
Hong Kong
Kuwait
Qatar
Singapore 55,500 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000 60,000
Switzerland
United Arab
Emirates
United
States of
America
62
Table 3 Lump sum for Jean Monnet Modules for Programme countries

Country 120-150 151-180 181-210 211-240 241-270 271-300 301-330 331-360 >360
Bulgaria
Liechtenstein
Republic of
13.500 17.000 19.500 22.500 25.500 28.500 31.500 35.000 35.000
North Macedonia
Romania
Serbia
Croatia
Latvia 16.000 19.500 23.000 26.500 30.000 33.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
Turkiye
Czechia
Estonia
Hungary
18.000 22.000 26.000 30.000 34.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
Lithuania
Poland
Slovakia
Greece
Malta
23.000 27.000 32.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
Portugal
Slovenia
Cyprus
Iceland
26.000 32.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
Italy
Spain
Finland 31.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
63
France
Ireland
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Germany
33.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Sweden
64
Table 4 Lump sum for Jean Monnet Modules for Partner countries

Country 120-150 151-180 181-210 211-240 241-270 271-300 301-330 331-360 >360
Antigua and
Barbuda
Barbados
Chile
Libya 13.500 16.500 19.500 22.500 25.500 28.500 31.500 35.000 35.000
Mexico
Saint Kitts and
Nevis
OTHER
COUNTRIES
Bahrain
Russian
Federation 18.000 22.000 26.000 30.000 34.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
Trinidad and
Tobago
Equatorial
Guinea
Israel
Oman
23.000 27.000 32.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
Saudi Arabia
Seychelles
Korea, Republic
of 26.000 32.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
New-Zealand
Japan
31.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
United Kingdom
Australia 33.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000
65
Brunei
Canada
Hong Kong
Kuwait
Qatar
Singapore
Switzerland
United Arab
Emirates
United States of
America
66
3.1.4 Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives
3.1.4.1 Nature of the action
The Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives is a short teaching programme (or course) in the field
of European Union studies at schools or VET providers at level ISCED 1-4. Each Learning EU
initiative action has a minimum duration of 40 teaching hours per school year over 3 years
period. The Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives action concentrates on the creation of
experiences with a focus on learning outcomes about the European Union and its policies for
pupils in both primary or secondary schools. Schools will create the learning content and must
provide a minimum number of learning hours per school year. Learning EU Initiatives cover
only programme countries.
This action follows a lump sum funding model for grants. This funding scheme will allow
putting the focus on the outputs rather than the inputs, thereby placing emphasis on the quality
and level of achievement of measurable objectives.
A significant added value of this model is the possibility to differentiate the lump sum according
to groups of countries with similar teaching hour costs. Doing so will allow the granting
authority to differentiate the maximum amount of the grant according to the country of each
applicant.
This action is a mirror action of Jean Monnet Modules21 but with different actors. Jean Monnet
Modules are developed by Higher Education Institutions while Jean Monnet Learning EU
initiatives is to be developed by schools and VET providers at level ISCED 1-4.
Jean Monnet Modules have been implemented with simplified cost options since 2010. For the
new MFF 2021_2027, a new simplified cost – based on a lump sum approach- was developed
(see 3.1.3).
The amounts of the grants for each tranche have been set according to the country of the
applicants, which are grouped by similar standards of living. It ensures that the grants remain
attractive while respecting sound financial management. In addition, using this lump sum the risk
of irregularity on adding teaching hours without a maximum limit is limited.
Learning EU initiatives is built on the existing methodology for Jean Monnet Modules, which
is developed based on two factors: a) the unit value of teaching hours per country and b) the
flat rate for additional costs not associated with the preparation and delivery of teaching
programs.
As a basis:
− Minimum of learning hours is set at 40 hours per year over a 3-year period, exactly like
for Jean Monnet Modules;
− Five tranches of learning hours have been established over a 3-year period while for
Jean Monnet Modules there are eight tranches;
21
Jean Monnet Module being a short teaching program (or course) in the field of European Union studies at a
Higher Education Institution. Each Module has a minimum duration of teaching hours per academic year. Modules
may concentrate on one particular discipline in European studies or be multidisciplinary in approach and therefore
call upon the services of several professors and experts.
67
− The grouping of countries, having a similar living cost, is the same as for Jean Monnet
Modules;
− The value of teaching hours was established based on historical data in projects showing
the actual remuneration of professors within the same group of countries;
− A correction of 15 % was applied due to the difference in salaries between academic
staff and teachers;
− A 40% flat rate was applied as a top-up for costs that are not associated with the
preparation and delivery of teaching programs, such as non-teaching staff costs (for
assistants, administrative staff, etc.), travel and subsistence costs, dissemination costs,
interpretation costs and other costs linked to event organization, teaching materials, etc.,
- like for Jean Monnet Modules.
• Unit value of teaching hours

For Jean Monnet Modules, the unit value of teaching was built on the basis of unit cost for
teaching costs per country from historical project data.
For Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives, a difference of 15% has been applied to reflect a
salary difference between academic staff and teachers in school.
This was based on the following elements:
− ISCED 1-4 covers schools while ISCED 6-7-8 covers universities.
− There are only data for 9 European countries.
− The teachers’ salaries are taken from Eurydice study « Teachers’ and School Heads’
Salaries and Allowances in Europe 2018/19» and, more specifically, on page 25 Figure
7: Average annual gross actual salaries (EUR) of teachers aged 25-64 in public schools,
2018/19.
− Information about remuneration of professors was taken from pages 75-76 in Eurydice
study «Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Academic staff - 2017 ». This is
based on surveys including self-reported pay.
68
Based on the above analysis, the average teacher’s remuneration for these countries is about
84% of the average remuneration of senior staff at university.
Staff at universities progress rapidly to higher pay scales whereas they can have about 10%
income from other sources. Assuming 70% at senior staff at university times €54,000 and 30%
at junior staff level at university times €32,400 multiplied by 1,10 for other compensation, the
end result indicates again a ratio of about 84% between the average teacher salary of €45,168
in these 9 countries and the average remuneration of senior staff at university.
Therefore, this analysis reflects that school teachers’ salaries are about 15% lower than
academic staff.
• The flat rate for costs not associated with the preparation and delivery of teaching programs
The lump sum includes a flat rate for costs not associated with the preparation and delivery of
teaching programs. Learning EU initiatives is the same action than a Jean Monnet Module.
Therefore, the flat rate covers exactly the same activities including the non-teaching staff costs
(for assistants, administrative staff, etc.), travel and subsistence costs, dissemination costs,
interpretation costs and other costs linked to event organisation, teaching materials, etc.
Consequently, the flat rate proposed for EU learning initiatives will re-use the 40 % top up used
in Jean Monnet Modules.
In summary, the following formula has been applied: “Total number of teaching hours for a 3
years period* country teaching rate from Jean Monnet modules country teaching rate*(85% to
reflect salary difference between university staff and school teachers * (140%) top-up *80%
co-financing”
Similar to Jean Monnet Chairs and Modules, initial results following this method were further
updated with the inflation rate over the period January 2021-May 2023
.
This gives the following end result for the lump sums:
Learning EU initiatives
Groups of Tranche 1 Tranche 2 Tranche 3 Tranche 4 Tranche 5

countries22
120-150 151-180 181-210 211-240 ≥241
Bulgaria, Romania, 12.250 14.750 17.250 19.750 22.000

Republic of North
Macedonia,
Liechtenstein, Serbia
Turkey, Croatia, 14.250 17.500 20.750 24.000 27.250

Latvia
22
If new countries will join the program, their participation would be included in the same group of living
conditions as the one established for Jean Monnet Modules
69
Hungary, Poland, 16.000 19.500 23.500 27.000 31.000
Lithuania, Czech
Republic, Estonia,
Slovakia
Portugal, Greece, 20.000 24.000 28.000 32.000 35.000

Slovenia, Malta
Cyprus, Iceland, 23.500 29.000 34.000 35.000 35.000

Spain, Italy
Ireland, France, 27.000 33.000 35.000 35.000 35.000

Finland
Belgium, Denmark, 30.000 35.000 35.000 35.000 35.000

Germany,
Luxembourg,
Netherlands,
Austria, Sweden,
Norway
3.1.5 Erasmus Mundus Joint Master -Design Measures

The Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Design Measures (EMJM-DM) is a new independent action
aiming to facilitate the setting up of new joint master programmes in the framework of new
partnerships and to involve Erasmus Mundus underrepresented regions, institutions and
thematic areas.
Under the former Erasmus+ Programme, there were no design / accompanying measures linked
to the Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degrees. In this sense, the EMJM – Design Action is a
new initiative. However, similar actions (‘accompanying measures’) have been running under
the earlier funding generation (2007-2013).
• The grants awarded (based on real costs) under the Lifelong Learning Programme –
Accompanying Measures Erasmus action (2007 – 2013, LLP-AM) have been taken
as reference action for the following reasons: Similar target field (higher education)
and beneficiaries (mainly higher education institutions);
• Similar objectives, namely contributing to the modernisation agenda of Higher
Education and enhancing the implementation of Erasmus Mobility. The LLP-AM
Erasmus gathered different European higher education institutions (HEIs) into small
70
consortia (consortium size between 2 to 25 partners) to discuss cooperation on
concrete topics in an academic setting23;
• Comparable duration of the agreement (12 to 18 months);
• Same range of eligible activities and related cost items. Both actions consider as
eligible academic staff costs (for preparation time and course revisions),
international travels (to consortium meetings, e.g.), small equipment (promotion
material), subcontracting (experts, website designer, ad hoc studies) and indirect
costs.
As for the EMJM-DM, in the LLP-AM, beneficiaries were expected to identify a number of
work packages, to which they could allocate different costs. An analysis of the (real) costs
reported by the 45 beneficiaries shows a large variation between the costs reported (see last
column of the table below). This variation reflects the different needs and situation of the
partner institutions and is expected to be comparable for the EMDM.
Indeed, some consortia may already have had a prior (research, teaching) cooperation or may
be already advanced in some aspects of their cooperation (e.g. curriculum development).
Therefore, they need to have the flexibility to focus on specific topics, which may generate
different costs.
In the table below, an overview of all 45 projects grants (funded between 2007 and 2013 under
LLP-AM) per cost category is provided, on the basis of which the average grant amount per
project was calculated.
Total paid LLL- Average grant Range (€, minimum

AM- Erasmus contribution per and maximum
(€, 45 projects) project (€) across 45 projects)
Staff costs 3 223 769 71 639 22 000 to 123 200
Travel and subsistence costs 894 110 19 869 0 to 63 188
Equipment 7 254 161 0 to 1 185
Subcontracting 357 036 7 934 0 to 34 494
Other costs 1 120 736 24 905 0 to 81 485
Indirect costs 317 731 7 061 0 to 9 813
Total 5 920 635 131 570 70 000 to 150 000
The average grant amount per project for the LLP-AM Erasmus was thus € 131 570, whereby
the Union grant contribution covered maximum 75% of the total eligible costs. The actual total
costs for one LLP-AM project can be estimated at € 175.427.
Furthermore, an indexation of 6.77%24 is applied in order to adapt the costs to the current price
levels, which leads to an average cost of € 187.303 per project.
23
LLP-Accompanying Measures: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/sites/2007-2013/lifelong-learning-programme_en
24
Eurostat, Harmonized Consumer Price Index for EU-27, 2015 = 100; whereby 2013 MTH1 = 98.34 and 2020
MTH5 = 105.00; https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do
71
The EMJM-DM action is intended as an incentive to further cooperation and
internationalization, but not as a full-fledged funding scheme of these activities. The aim is to
cover specific activities related to the preparation of a joint programme, but it can be reasonably
expected of the higher education institutions involved to co-finance most of the activity cost.
This applies in particular to the staff costs, comprising also regular academic tasks related to
e.g. curricular activities, developing student monitoring mechanisms and joint teaching
approaches. Moreover the agreement of the institutions to cover a substantial part of the costs
will be a sign of their commitment and therefore a guarantee for the long term sustainability of
the endeavor.
The Union contribution to the grant was therefore initially set at 55.000 EUR per project, which
was a funding rate of 29.36 %.
Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Design Measures
LUMP SUM 55.000
2023 studies further analysed the adequacy of the lump sum for EMDM projects, with two-step
methods, which include the primary data collection of the EMDM projects beneficiaries in the
Call of 2021 and the analysis of official education indicators with a focus on educational staff
wage, collected from OECD.
The quantitative data shows a slightly higher demand on the financial support to support staff
costs. In this perspective, since the majority of the budget is allocated to cover staff costs,
statistical data analysis helped to provide a quantification of the possible increase in the granted
amount. According to the official data analysis conducted using OECD indicators, the EMDM
lump sum is adjusted to 60,000 EUR for Call 2024.
3.1.6 Sport - Small scale partnerships

The nature of this action and the method to determine and update the amount of Union
contribution are the same as in paragraph 3.2.2 under Annex 1 above, with the only difference
that the action is managed directly by EACEA.
3.1.7 Cooperation partnerships in the fields of sport, Education and
Training, Youth (European NGOs)
This is the part managed by EACEA of the action Cooperation partnerships, described under
paragraph 3.2.1 in Annex 1 above.
The primary goal of this action is to allow organisations and institutions to increase the quality
and relevance of their activities and/or develop and reinforce their networks of partners, thus
increasing their capacity to operate jointly at transnational and international level, boosting
internationalisation of their activities, exchanging new practices and methods, as well as sharing
and confronting ideas.
72
3.1.8 Civil Society Cooperation in the field Education and Training and in
the field of Youth
The Civil Society Cooperation (CSC) actions in the fields of Education and Training (E&T),
and in Youth are operating grants for organisations working in the areas specified. The objective
of the action is to support the functioning of these organisations. These organisations aim at
facilitating cross-country cooperation to promote knowledge and policy transfers for learning
and supporting EU objectives and priorities among the relevant stakeholders as well as relay
their views to the Commission.
The CSC action provides structural support to 2 categories of stakeholders in the fields of Youth
and E&T:
• European non-governmental organisations (ENGOs);
• EU-wide networks (formal for E&T; informal for Youth)
The Civil Society Cooperation actions existed in both the 2007-2013 and the 2014-2020
Erasmus+ programmes. In 2014-2020, the funding model was unit cost based with two unit
costs defined (staff costs and statutory meetings)25. This model facilitated the execution of the
grants for the stakeholders because of their simple set-up and support of essential functions
within the organisations. A move to lump sum funding model for future operating grants would
simplify even more the applicants’ and beneficiaries’ project management: the previous use of
unit costs entailed extra calculation for the final grant (number of staff and number of meetings).
The new lump sum model will be based mainly on staff costs and would simplify the
implementation of the action by reducing the administrative burden of the recipients which are
largely small sized organisations doing work directly with education and training, and youth
target populations. As a knock-on effect, it would also simplify the reporting and payment
analysis for the EU services allowing a faster delivery of grant for the benefit of the
stakeholders.
The main cost category of organisations working on civil society cooperation is ‘staff costs’ as
confirmed by the real cost data supplied for the 2022 CSC selection funded with budget-based
model. Data collection at reporting and submission stage shows that staff costs make up
between 65 and 80% of total costs. The remaining costs are to be classified as ‘other eligible
costs’ (subcontracting, travel and subsistence, equipment and other goods, works and services).
In order to cover the main driver of eligible costs, and in order to ensure respect of sound
financial management, the lump sum funding will be essentially based on ‘staff costs’.
The data used in order to determine the lump sum was collected from final reports of projects
selected in 2020 (ENGOs and EU-wide Networks). Even though the action was funded with
25
C(2014) 6145 final: Commission Decision authorising the use of reimbursement on the basis of unit costs for the Civil
Society Cooperation actions under the Erasmus+ Programme
73
unit costs, the final reports provided documentation on real staff costs incurred (payslips of staff
in education, training and youth organisations). In addition, the reports provided data on number
of employees per organisation.
The analysis of data reveals that there is a wide spread in salary levels. The average yearly
salary level in the sample for the CSC E&T employees was approximately EUR 37.000 and
EUR 27.000 for youth, with the average number of staff being respectively 5.05 and 4.1.
The table below shows the basic information used for the lump sum funding levels.
Field Sample Average salary Standard deviation
(rounded)
E&T 106 37.000 17.000

Youth 329 27.000 15.000
As the data collection of salaries showed a wide variation, it is proposed to:
− Differentiate the funding of Youth organisations from the Education and Training
organisations,
− Set three lump sum amounts depending on the number of staff (between one and two,
between three and four, and five or more) for ENGOs and informal networks,
− Distinguish between ENGOs and EU-wide formal networks for E&T (an umbrella
organisation of European non-governmental organisations (ENGOs).
The average total costs of the 2022 E&T projects was EUR 155.00026. Applying the co-
financing rate for this action of 90% results in a lump sum contribution of EUR 140.000.
Taking into account the average salary level of EUR 37 000, the contribution of EUR 140.000
is set as the middle value lump sum of between 3 and 4 staff.
E&T (figures in EUR)

Average tot cost 90% cofinancing average staff costs average #staff
155.000 140.000 37.000 3,78
From this, regression analysis is used to determine the amounts for the other contributions for
actions with one to two staff (EUR 105.000), or more than five (EUR 175.000).
Based on the 2020-2021 data of the selected organisation, the average costs after applying the
90% co-financing for EU-wide formal Networks was EUR 530.000. However, due to the
maximum amount of the grant set in the work programme, this is limited to EUR 330.000. The
methodology of this specific category has been therefore based on the multiplication of the
average staff costs (EUR 37.000) by the number of staff.
Consequently, the maximum grant allowed by the call being EUR 330.000 the same
extrapolation has been used to determine the amount for the other contribution with seven to
eight staff.
Education and Training
N° of staff per organisation Lump sum proposed
26 The budget higher than EUR 200.000 have been excluded for this calculation since they result in a grant largely above the
maximum grant amount set by the Call.
74
For European From 1 to 2 staff members EUR 105.000
ENGOs
From 3 to 4 staff members EUR 140.000
CSC
Education 5 or more staff members EUR 175.000
and For EU-wide formal From 7 to 8 staff members EUR 280.000
Training Networks
9 or more staff members EUR 330.000
Youth
Applying a similar method for youth, the total average cost for 2022 projects was found to be
EUR 126.000. Applying the co-financing rate of 80% resulted in a lump sum contribution of
EUR100.000. Taking into an average staff cost of EUR 27.000, this lump sum contribution
corresponds to the middle lump sum value for between 3 – 4 staff.
Youth (figures in EUR)
126.000 100.000 27.000 3,70
Again, applying regression analysis and the maximum amount of the grant to this contribution
of 100.000 leads to amounts of EUR 75.000 and 125.000 for the other lump sums of between 1
and 2 and more than 5 staff:

ENGOs and EU-
EUR 100.000
CSC Youth wide informal From 3 to 4 staff members
Networks EUR 125.000
5 or more staff members
In order to assess the reliability of these lump sum contributions, a simulation based on 2022
selected ‘projects’ with this methodology shows:
• Youth: new budget within error margin (<3%): EUR 4.450.000 vs EUR 4.262.007.
• E&T: new budget has increased due to both the new co-financing rate of 90% (i/o80%)
and the global increase of the maximum amount (EUR 125.000 to EUR 175.000) EUR
2.614.668 vs EUR 3.725.000.
The table below shows the global view of the lump sum funding levels for CSC E&T and Youth
for 2023-2027.

CSC
Education
ENGOs
and 5 or more staff members EUR 175.000
Training
75
For EU-wide formal
Networks 9 or more staff members EUR 330.000
ENGOs and EU-
wide informal EUR 100.000
CSC Youth From 3 to 4 staff members
The number of staff employed per organisation will be checked by the Agency at final report
stage.
contributions for the following actions
• European Higher Education Area (EHEA) – Initiative to support to the implementation
of the reforms
• Jean Monnet Centres of Excellence in the field of Higher Education
• Jean Monnet Policy Debate: Networks in the field of Higher Education and in other
• Jean Monnet Teachers Training in other fields of education and training
• National Academic Recognition Centres (NARIC)
• European Universities
• Support for further implementation of the graduate tracking initiative
• Partnerships for Innovation: Alliances
• EPALE - Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in Europe
• Support to better knowledge in youth policy
• eTwinning - National Support Organisations
• EQAVET - European Quality Assurance in Vocational Education and training -
designated bodies
• Partnerships for Innovation: Forward looking
• The International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS)
• National units for the Eurydice network
• Implementing renewed priorities for the European Agenda for Adult Learning
• TALIS - Teaching and Learning International Survey
• PIAAC - Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies
• EUROSTUDENT VIII - Social dimension of European Higher
• The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) -
International Civic and Citizenship Education survey (ICCS)
• European Youth Together (Large scale and small scale)
• Capacity building in the field of youth
• Capacity Building in the field of VET
• Capacity Building in the field of Higher Education
• Capacity Building in the field of Sport
• EU Youth Dialogue: support to National Working Groups
• Partnership for Excellence - Centres of Vocational Excellence
• Partnership for Excellence – Erasmus+ Teacher Academies
• Policy Networks (EQF, EUROPASS, EUROGUIDANCE)
• National Erasmus Offices -NEOs
• Erasmus+ Virtual Exchanges
76
• Social Inclusion and Common Values
• European policy network on teachers and school leaders
• European policy network in the field of education of children and young people with a
migrant background
• European policy experimentations
The amount of the single lump sum contribution will be determined for each grant based on the
estimated budget of the action proposed by the applicant. The granting authority will fix the
lump sum of each grant based on the proposal, evaluation result, funding rates and the maximum
grant amount set in the call.
Based on these principles the following steps will be taken to calculate the amount of the lump
sum contribution:
3.2.1 Grant proposal

Applicants will provide an estimated budget for the work to be carried out under the action
(using the submission form template). The budget will be split into work packages and eligible
cost categories, by beneficiary and its linked third party, as explained below
The applicants must fill in a detailed budget table, which enumerates the costs of each
beneficiary in the categories listed under point 1.
a) The applicants must provide in their proposal a breakdown of the lump sum showing the
share per work package (and, within each work package, the share assigned to each beneficiary
and linked third party);
c) Proposals for lump sum grants must contain the resources and a detailed cost estimate per
work package and per beneficiary and linked third party;
d) Indirect costs should be calculated by applying a flat rate of 7% to the direct cost;
e) The co-financing rate will be applied to the total estimated eligible costs, using the funding
3.2.2 Evaluation
a) Proposals will be evaluated according to the standard evaluation procedures with the help of
internal and/or external experts. The experts will assess the quality of the proposals, against the
requirements defined in the call and the expected impact, quality and efficiency of the action.
b) Experts will need to have the necessary financial know-how as they will also have to check
the estimated budget and verify whether the resources proposed, and the split of work packages,
allows the achievement of the activities and expected outputs. For each work package, the
estimated budget will be assessed for accuracy and if the appropriateness of the resources
proposed and the split of lump sum shares allows achieving the activities and expected outputs,
to be achieved in the light of the proposed resources.
c) To ensure equal treatment and benchmark the estimated activities and costs, the experts will
77
d) They will propose to remove some ineligible costs and/or actions from the proposal, as e.g
cost of activities outside the eligibility period, costs not permitted in the action, indirect cost
included as direct cost.
e) They will check that the costs proposed are in line with the call specifications, the
appropriateness of the split of the work packages and the quality of the out puts

a) Following the proposal evaluation, the authorising officer will establish the amount of the
lump sum, taking into account the findings of the assessment carried out (including
recommendations from the evaluation committee). If cost or activities items are adapted, the
lump sum and the lump sum breakdown are modified accordingly during grant preparation.
b) The final lump sum is included in the grant agreement as the maximum grant amount. It is
calculated by the granting authority by applying the reimbursement rate set out in the call to the
total estimated eligible costs in the detailed budget table.
c) The minimum and maximum amount established in each call will be respected.
contributions for Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters (EMJM), including Erasmus
3.3.1 Justification
The EMJM aims to enhance the attractiveness and excellence of European higher education in
the world and attract talent to Europe, through a combination of a) institutional academic
cooperation to showcase European excellence in higher education, and b) individual mobility
for all students taking part in the EMJM, with EU-funded scholarships for the best students
applying.
The tangible outputs are the selected international EMJM study programmes, at Master course
level, jointly delivered and jointly recognised by HEIs established in Europe, and open to
institutions in other countries of the world; as well as the graduates of these master programmes.
The new unit cost system will entail three key features:
Firstly, there will be a new unit cost system for student scholarships, leading to a significant
simplification for the students and for the consortia managing the scholarships.
Secondly, more visibility will be given to the institutional support of the action.
Thirdly, a unit costs system will be implemented for special needs allowances, contributing to
additional costs of students with disabilities.
3.3.2 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union
contribution in the form of unit contributions
3.3.2.1 Institutional unit contribution calculation
Under the former EMJMD (2014-2020), the funding ratio was approximately 5% of the grant
for the management of the consortium delivering the joint master programme (in the form of a
lump sum) and 95% for the scholarships (as unit costs). However, these scholarships also
included ‘participation costs’ (namely tuition fees, insurance, etc.), which in reality were
directly claimed by the consortium to cover their running costs. In the EMJM, these
participation costs and the management lump sum will be merged into a new single institutional
78
unit cost. At the same time, the institutional unit cost system proposed creates an incentive for
the consortia to recruit self-funded students, which will increase their chances of becoming
fully sustainable after the project lifetime. In this sense, it is preferable over the lump sum
system as it was in vigour under the EMJMD project generation and will allow for a more
balanced contribution (in other words: programmes that attract more students will obtain more
institutional funding).
Similarly, to the student scholarship contributions, a monthly unit cost will be introduced, based
on the number of enrolled students. This institutional unit cost will be the same for all types of
students (with or without scholarship) and will cover a proportionally larger share of the actual
cost to implement a master programme (approximately 80%).
As the EMJM action is open to HEIs from all over the world, statistical data covering a larger
area than only the EU or the Erasmus Programme Countries is required. The 2019 OECD
Education Indicators published in the OECD report: Education at a glance 201927, provide an
estimate of the average institutional cost per student for all types of education in all OECD
countries. The publication provides the total expenditure on educational institutions per full-
time equivalent student as an average for all OECD countries (37 countries), which is an
appropriate basis to estimate the average cost of a student in a master programme organised
between higher education institutions in different countries from all over the world.
The indicators on which the OECD figures are based28 provide an assessment of the institutional
cost per student (as a national average). Expenditure per student on educational institutions is
influenced by core educational activities (teachers’ salaries and pension systems, instructional
and teaching hours, the cost of teaching materials and facilities), ancillary services (i.e. costs
related to student welfare, at tertiary level) and R&D activities (laboratories, equipment,
libraries etc.). The expenditure per student on educational institutions at a particular level of
education (tertiary – long cycle in the case of Erasmus Mundus) is calculated by dividing total
expenditure on educational institutions at that level by the corresponding full-time equivalent
enrolment. Excluded from these indicators are e.g. costs for countries’ education ministries and
other non-institutional investments. The Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters aims to cover the same
institutional costs (core educational activities, ancillary services and research and development
costs) and therefore the OECD figures are considered an appropriate proxy.
Benchmarking the average OECD data against average data for 23 EU countries results in a
ratio of 98.9/100 and confirms the relevance of the data29.
The total expenditure on educational institutions per full-time equivalent student for tertiary
education of the long cycle (applicable to master level education as offered under the EMJM)
amounts to 16 576 USD-PPP per student per year for the average OECD country30.
As the EMJM involve a minimum of three HEIs from different countries, and often more, taking
the OECD average (ranging between high national averages of 51.000 USD for LUX and the
lowest of 7.143 USD for LV) is still preferable over applying separate country unit cost rates.
Calculating this combination of rates per country would be highly complex. Often students in
the same programme follow entirely different mobility paths (not all students study at all
27
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/education-at-a-glance-2019_f8d7880d-en
28For more information on the applied Methodology, please see the OECD Handbook for Internationally Comparative
Education Statistics 2018 and Annex 3 for country-specific notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/f8d7880d-en).
29 (Figure C1.2)
30https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org//sites/f8d7880d-en/1/2/4/1/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/f8d7880d-
en&_csp_=b2d87f13821f45339443c7ca94aafe46&itemIGO=oecd&itemContentType=book#tablegrp-d1e18349
79
partners of the consortium), which would require an individually calculated unit cost for each
student, each month. Moreover, the institutional contribution of the Union is usually managed
centrally by the coordinator, and allocated to the different partners based on the consortium
agreement, taking into account the real needs/costs of the different institutions.
An average is therefore likely to be more accurate for the situation of EMJD consortia, and far
more easily applicable than country-based rates, which would require specific unit costs for
each student. Moreover, OECD data would not allow us to cover all countries worldwide.
Furthermore, this OECD average amount is a generic average and are estimated to be an
underestimation for the EMJMs, considering that international master programmes require
more organisation than the average national master programmes on which these calculations
are largely based. Indeed, an international joint master requires additional coordination (e.g.
meetings and staff) and implementation costs (e.g. staff mobility, student services such as help
with registration, housing, visa, etc.) in comparison to ‘simple’ national master programmes.
Using the currency conversion based on the Purchasing Power Parities (PPPs), equalizing the
purchasing power of different currencies by eliminating differences in price levels between
countries indicated in the same OECD report31, the applicable exchange rate is set by the OECD
at 0.697 for reference year 2017 in the EU-28 countries, which leads to an equivalent amount
of 11.553 EUR per full-time equivalent student per year.
The EMJM action aims to enhance institutional academic cooperation. The commitment at
institutional level is crucial to achieve this, so it can be reasonably expected of the higher
education institutions involved to express this commitment in a co-financing contribution. For
this reason, the Union contribution will be limited to 78% of the OECD estimation of 11.553
EUR, namely 9.011. Like for the student scholarship unit cost (see below) and as the duration
of the studies may vary according to the length of the master programme, the unit costs will be
defined on a monthly basis: 750 EUR (9011/12).
This leads to an institutional unit cost of 750 EUR per enrolled student (with or without
scholarship) per month for all EMJM programmes.
3.3.2.2 Scholarship unit cost calculation
Under the former Erasmus+ EMJMD action, student scholarships included monthly subsistence
costs, travel and installation costs and a participation cost, directly claimed by the consortium
(see above). In the new EMJM action, the student scholarships will exclude the participation
costs, as scholarship holders will not have to pay for any costs related to their participation in
the course, (tuition fees, insurance coverage and any other mandatory costs). The scholarship
will thus consist of a monthly unit cost covering subsistence costs, travel costs and installation
costs jointly.
The calculation of this monthly unit cost is based on the former EMJMD student scholarships,
but applying the same scholarship amount for all students, irrespective of their residence and
nationality.
Under the Erasmus+ EMJMD action, the actual student scholarship depended mainly on:
• the student’s nationality (either from a Programme Country or Partner Country);
• the student’s place of residence (less than 2000km, between 2000km and 3000km
and more than 3000km from the first home institution);
• the duration of the master programme (12, 18 or 24 months).
31
https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SNA_Table4
80
This led to a scenario in which students could have quite different scholarships while attending
the same programme at the same place.
The calculation for the new simplified unit cost is based on the previous unit costs actually paid
to the last 3 generations of EMJMD students (2017, 2018, 2019).
In this period, an amount of 53.093.000 EUR was paid as scholarship contribution to travel
costs, an amount of 8.846.000 EUR to installation costs and 217.836.000 EUR to subsistence
costs. Divided by the numbers of respective student months applicable (number of students,
multiplied by either 12 - for 60 ECTS programmes, 18 - for 90 ECTS programmes or 24 - for
120 ECTS programmes), the average scholarship contribution under the EMJMD for the last 3
student generations was 1.284 EUR per month32. The proportion expected to be covered by
these unit costs varied between 75% and 95% of the overall costs, considering:
• the distance from the students’ residence to their first home institution;
• the obligation for all scholarship holders to study in a minimum of two different
Programme Countries;
• additional costs related to the issuing of visas and residence permits, as well as the
temporary accommodation needs after their arrival in each study destination;
• the students' destination countries, not known in advance and varying in number in
accordance with the JMD structure and/or the scholarship holder needs.
Excluded in these calculations were e.g. travels home in between semesters and/or academic
years and family arrangements made by scholarship holders
As these unit costs were defined by the Decision for EMJMD based on 2013 data, the simplified
new unit cost should takes into account a 6.77 % inflation rate33. The new unit costs would thus
increase to 1.370 EUR per month. Rounded up for communication purpose and ease of
calculation, this leads to a monthly unit cost rate of 1.400 EUR per month for all scholarship
holders in all Erasmus Mundus Joint Master programmes.
3.3.2.3 Special needs unit costs calculation
Cost for special needs for the enrolled students (with or without scholarship), in line with the
Decision authorising the use of lump sums contribution and unit contributions for the Marie
Skłodowska-Curie Actions under the Horizon Europe Programme 2021-2027.
In order to establish a special needs allowance based on unit cost, the MSCA special needs unit
costs34 will be applied.
MSCA performed an analysis of costs incurred for researchers/staff members with disabilities
(e.g. long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments), participating in training
and research activities. Based on historical evidence, these costs were grouped according to the
average cost of the items or services considered. On this basis, a list of categories was
established based on quantitative and qualitative data, each corresponding to a range of costs.
32
Ranging between € 1.389 / mth for 90 ECTS students travelling from >4.000km, to 1.089 / mth for 120 ECTS students from
Europe, or less if their studies took place in their country of residence.
33 Eurostat, rate based on EU 27 (without UK) - HICP index (Index 2015 = 100), whereas 2013 MTH 1 is 98.34 and 2020 MTH
1 is 105.00.
34 For a more detailed justification of the costs and categories applied, please refer to the Decision authorising the use of lump
sums contribution and unit contributions for the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions under the Horizon Europe
Programme - Ares(2021)902919.
81
Taking into account the existing margins due to different price levels of special needs items or
services across countries and the impact that fluctuations in the range from 1 000 to 2 000 EUR
have at the lower end of the scale of the categories, the final unit costs were set as follows:
EUR 3 000 EUR 13 000 EUR 47 500
EUR 4 500 EUR 18 500 EUR 60 000
EUR 6 000 EUR 27 500
EUR 9 500 EUR 35 500
The triggering event for the payment of the special needs allowance will be the enrolment of a
student (with or without scholarship) with disabilities whose long-term physical, mental,
intellectual or sensory impairments are certified by a competent national authority and of such
nature that their participation in the action would not be possible without the special needs items
or services.
Beneficiaries shall claim the closest lower rate per student compared to the estimated actual
costs of his/her special needs. Special needs allowance may be assessed on a case-by-case basis,
in order to further ensure compliance with the principle of sound financial management. Where
this assessment shows that the needs described do not match the category of allowance
proposed, the Agency may adjust that the category of need be changed to reflect the description.
Costs lower than 3 000 EUR and higher than 60 000 EUR shall not be reimbursed through the
special needs allowance.
The amount of the monthly unit contribution shall be calculated as follows:

{(special needs unit x (1/number of months)}
The number of months in the formula above shall correspond to the number of months the
special needs items or services were used or produced for implementing the action, depending
on the nature of the items or services. For one-off costs, the number of months shall correspond
to 1.
Enrolled students will declare what type of items/services are needed and their cost. The
applicable unit cost will be identified as the rate corresponding to or immediately lower than
the estimated expenses. This unit cost is a contribution, and is not intended to fully cover the
actual costs.
The use of the MSCA unit costs for special needs are justified under the EMJM as well, because:
- The EMJM students are from the same target group, namely excellent
students/researchers from all around the world, from the same age group, selected on
the basis of their excellence with the same kind of training (classroom, group work, etc.)
and research (laboratory work, thesis, internships) activities;
- EMJM students with special needs will thus require the same type of assistance in terms
of travel, international mobility, infrastructural adaptations, technological equipment
and specific services (e.g. assistance by third persons, adaptation of work environment,
additional travel/transportation costs) than they need under the MSCA, with similar
costs.
Like for the Horizon Europe Programme, inclusiveness is a specific aim of the Erasmus+
Programme. EMJM should be accessible to all students, regardless of their origin,
background or the special needs they require
82
Finally, using the same special needs unit cost scheme means a significant simplification
for beneficiaries (universities applying for both EMJM and MSCA grants) and for students
(EMJM graduates often enrol in PhD programmes).
Erasmus Mundus Joint Master

Institutional unit per month/per enrolled student
750 EUR
cost
Scholarship unit per month/per scholarship holder
1400 EUR
cost
Special needs unit
(special needs unit x(1/number of months)
cost

financing
The principle of sound financial management, co-financing and no double financing are
ensured.
The methodologies explained in section 3 ensures sound financial management since they all
aim at establishing an amount which is a proxy of the real costs. The methodologies are based
on either costs reimbursed under the previous programme, statistical data or the estimated
budget of the beneficiary. The proposed budget in the application will have been assessed via
expert judgement based on reference and comparative data to ensure that the submitted
information is reasonable, and the overall feasibility of the project.
Co-financing will be ensured by applying the reimbursement rate set out for each action during
the preparation of the Grant Agreement. The co-financing is also ensured in actions where the
cost covered by the action are not fully covered with the value of the contributions, and in some
other actions the use of contributions guarantees the co-financing principle as it was taken into
account for the lump sum or unit cost calculation.
Absence of double funding can be ensured by clearly identifying in the call and in the grant
agreement all categories of eligible and ineligible the costs and activities which are covered,
and subsequently checking in e-Grants or other systems any potential overlapping with other
grants awarded to same beneficiary.
83
Electronically signed on 27/11/2023 19:10 (UTC+01) in accordance with Article 11 of Commission Decision (EU) 2021/2121
Ref. Ares(2022)7195454 - 18/10/2022
DECISION authorising the use of lump sums and unit costs under the Erasmus+
Programme 2021 - 2027
1
HISTORY OF CHANGES
Version Publication date Changes

and Ares
Reference
1.0 24/03/2021 Initial version

Ares(2021)2083983

Ares(2021)7195205  in particular to modify the following sections
o 3.1.4.1 Higher Education,
o 3.1.4.2 Mobility projects for VET learners
and staff, School education pupils and staff,
Adult education learners and staff,
o 3.1.4.3 Youth exchanges and, mobility of
Youth workers and Youth participation
activities,
o 3.2.1 Cooperation Partnerships
 and to add the following actions:
o DiscoverEU Inclusion action (under section
3.1.9),
o Support and network functions of National
Agencies (under section 3.3)
 in particular to modify the following sections
o 3.1.1 XXX
o 3.1.7 Cooperation partnerships in the field of
sport, Education and Training, Youth
(European NGOs)
 and to add the following actions:
o Virtual Exchanges (under section 3.2),
o Capacity Building in the field of VET, in the field
of Higher Education and in the field of Sport
(under section 3.2),
o Policy Networks (under section 3.2),
o National Erasmus Offices (under section 3.2),
o Social Inclusion and Common Values (under
section 3.2),
o European policy netwok on teacher and school
leaders (under section 3.2),
o European Policy network in the field of education
of children and young people with migrant
background (under section 3.2),
o Jean Monnet EU Initiative (under section 3.1.4)
2
3.0 XXXX Amendment to Annex 2
Ares(2022)XXXXX  In particular to add the following actions
o Civil Society Cooperation: Education and Training
(under section 3.1.8)
o Civil Society Cooperation: Youth (under section
3.1.8)
3
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Regulation 2021/817 of the European Parliament and of the Council
establishing 'Erasmus+': the Union programme for education, training, youth and sport1, and
in particular Article 18.2
Having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of
the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the
Union2, and in particular Articles 125 and 181 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Given the high number of actions and individual grants under the Erasmus+
programme, there is significant potential for simplification.
(2) The use of lump sum and unit contributions will reduce administrative burden/costs
for beneficiaries and the granting authority, speed up the payment process and
facilitate increased focus on the quality of the results.
(3) Simplified cost options have been implemented in predecessor programmes to

Erasmus+ with great success in improving access, simplifying management, and
reducing irregularity; simpler funding rules relating to reimbursement of costs can also
facilitate a wider range and increased quality of applications, and provide legal
certainty to beneficiaries.
(4) The use of lump sum and unit contributions under the Erasmus+ programme 2021-
2027 should therefore be authorised.
THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN DECIDED:
Sole Article
The use of the Union contribution in the form of lump sum and unit contributions is
authorised for education and training, youth and sport actions under the Erasmus+ Programme
2021-2027, for the reasons and under the conditions set out in the Annex.
This Decision amends and replaces the previous Decision authorising the use of lump sums
and unit costs under the Erasmus+ Programme, of 23 November 2021 Ares(2021)7195205.
1
Political agreement between the European Parliament and the Council has been reached on 11 December 2020
and the Regulation is currently in the adoption procedure by the co-legislators.
2 Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 2018 on the financial rules
applicable to the general budget of the Union, amending Regulations (EU) No 1296/2013, (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No
1303/2013, (EU) No 1304/2013, (EU) No 1309/2013, (EU) No 1316/2013, (EU) No 223/2014, (EU) No 283/2014, and
Decision No 541/2014/EU and repealing Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 (OJ L 193, 30.7.2018, p.1).
4
done at Brussels,
Authorising Officer signature

Director General DG EAC
Themis Christophidou
5
1.1 Key Action 1 ................................................................................................................ 9
1.2 Key Action 2 ................................................................................................................ 9
2 Justification 10
2.1.1 Key Action 1: Learning mobility of individuals ................................................ 11
2.1.2 Key Action 2: Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good practices 11
3 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union contribution in the form of
lump sums and unit costs 12
3.1 Key Action 1 .............................................................................................................. 13
3.1.1 Travel Support .................................................................................................... 14
3.1.2 Organisational Support ....................................................................................... 16
3.1.3 Inclusion Support for Organisations .................................................................. 20
3.1.4 Individual Support .............................................................................................. 20
3.1.5 Preparatory Visits ............................................................................................... 30
3.1.6 Course Fees ........................................................................................................ 31
3.1.7 Linguistic Support .............................................................................................. 31
3.1.8 Categories only applicable to Youth Participation Activities ............................ 32
3.1.9 DiscoverEU Inclusion action ............................................................................. 34
3.2 Key Action 2 .............................................................................................................. 34
3.2.1 Cooperation Partnerships ................................................................................... 34
3.2.2 Small Scale Partnerships .................................................................................... 36
3.3 Support and network functions of the National Agencies ......................................... 38
3.3.1 EU contribution proposal ................................................................................... 38
3.3.2 Evaluation........................................................................................................... 38
4 Sound financial management, co-financing principle and absence of double financing39
4.1 Reasonable compliance with the principle of co-financing....................................... 39
4.2 Sound Financial Management ................................................................................... 40
4.3 Reasonable compliance with the principle of no double funding ............................. 41
6
for the following actions under the Erasmus + programme ................................................. 42
1.1.1 Education and training ....................................................................................... 42
1.1.2 Youth .................................................................................................................. 43
1.1.3 Sport ................................................................................................................... 43
following actions under the Erasmus+ Education and Training - Key action 2 .................. 43
2 Justification 44
2.1.1 Key Action 2: Cooperation among organisations and institutions ..................... 44
2.1.2 Key Action 3: Support for Policy Reform ......................................................... 45
2.1.3 Jean Monnet ....................................................................................................... 46
contributions 47
contributions for the following actions: ............................................................................... 47
3.1.1 Not-for-profit European sport events ................................................................. 48
3.1.2 Dialogue with stakeholders - National Activities .............................................. 49
3.1.3 Jean Monnet Modules and Chairs ...................................................................... 50
3.1.4 Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives ................................................................. 58
3.1.5 Erasmus Mundus Joint Master -Design Measures ............................................. 61
3.1.6 Sport - Small scale partnerships ......................................................................... 63
(European NGOs) ............................................................................................................. 63
Youth ............................................................................................................................ 63
contributions for the following actions ................................................................................ 66
3.2.1 Grant proposal .................................................................................................... 67
3.2.2 Evaluation........................................................................................................... 67
contributions for Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters (EMJM), including Erasmus Mundus
Joint Masters – Additional scholarships for targeted regions of the world .......................... 68
7
3.3.1 Justification ........................................................................................................ 68
3.3.2 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union contribution in the
form of unit contributions ................................................................................................ 68
financing 74
8
1.1 Key Action 1
The Union contribution for mobility actions under Key Action 1 of the Erasmus+ programme
shall exclusively take the form of unit contributions for the following categories of eligible
costs:
- Organisational support;
- Individual support;
- Inclusion support for organisations;
- Travel support;
- Course fees;
- Linguistic support;
- Preparatory visits;
- Project management;
- Coaching costs;
- Youth participation events support;
The following categories of eligible costs shall be reimbursed on the basis of eligible costs
actually incurred:
- Exceptional costs;
- Inclusion support for participants with fewer opportunities.
- System development and outreach activities;
The amounts of the unit contributions to be used shall be calculated in accordance with point
3.
1.2 Key Action 2
Under Key Action 2 of the Erasmus+ programme , the Union contribution shall exclusively
take the form of lump sum contributions.
9
2 Justification
By Decisions C(2013)8550 and C(2017)6864, the Commission authorised the use of
simplified forms of grants in the Erasmus+ programme 2014 – 2020, where the use of real
costs was limited to a minimum.
The approach to be followed for the programming period 2021-2027 is largely based on the
provisions set out in the aforementioned Decisions, with the introduction of additional
simplified forms of grants, such as the use of single lump sums for partnerships under Key
Action 2. While some unit cost amounts are to reflect the current levels of the cost of living
and new needs associated with the programme priorities, the overall structure of the funding
mechanism remains unchanged. This is intended to facilitate the transition to the new
programming period and was welcomed positively by stakeholders during the consultation
process.
These simplified forms of grant shall cover all educational and training sectors, including
Higher education (hereafter “HE”), School education (hereafter “SE”), Vocational education
and training (hereafter “VET”), Adult education (hereafter “AE”) and Youth under different
activities. Unit costs shall be widely used in Key Action 1 as the largest share of the overall
programme budget is allocated to learning mobility.
Reimbursement of eligible costs using simplified forms of grants for actions covered by this
Decision are considered appropriate because they are high volume, benefit most from
automation through the use of web-based forms, are appropriate for implementation in the
context of indirect management and provide transparency for final participants.
While great effort has been made to establish harmonised unit contributions for different
target groups and activities in Erasmus+, this Decision also recognizes that there are different
needs in some areas, which requires a differentiated approach. This is the case particularly for
the Learning Mobility actions, which require some variation in order to prevent a negative
impact on mobility numbers or budget absorption. For this reason it is justified to set ranges
of unit contributions for those cases, which can then be applied by national agencies
depending on their particular circumstances.
The use of lump sums, unit costs and flat-rate funding in the Programme has considerably
simplified the calculation of the grant amounts in comparison to the 'traditional' system of
basing the amount of the grant on a detailed budget of eligible costs per cost category. It has
decreased the workload of the contracting authorities and sped up the payment procedure. It
also reduces regularity errors on the part of the beneficiaries, thus resulting in lower error
rates.
In summary the use of simplified forms of contribution will ensure simplification through:
 greater predictability for grant beneficiaries who can take the pre-established rates into
account when submitting their applications making the actions more attractive;
 greater focus on outputs rather than inputs, placing more emphasis on the quality and level
of achievement of measurable objectives;
 reduced administrative burden at application and payment stage reducing overheads for
NAs and facilitating productivity gains;
10
 simplified reporting requirements (no certification or formal financial statement to be
provided by beneficiaries);
 greater facilitation of the ex-post analysis and further limitation of the risk of error;
 consistency across actions in the Programme where appropriate making it easier for
beneficiaries participating in more than one action to manage their budgets;
 less complex funding rules contributing to easier readability of the Programme Guide.

2.1.1 Key Action 1: Learning mobility of individuals
This Key Action supports learning mobility activities for individuals in the following fields:
 Higher Education
 Vocational Education and Training (VET)
 School Education
 Adult Education
 Youth activities
Learning mobility is defined as “moving physically to a country other than the country of the
sending institution/organisation and of residence, in order to undertake study, training or non-
formal or informal learning; it may take the form of traineeships, apprenticeships, youth
exchanges, teaching or participation in a professional development activity, and may include
preparatory activities, such as training in the host language, as well as sending, receiving and
follow-up activities”.
2.1.2 Key Action 2: Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of good practices
This Key Action supports:
 Partnerships for Cooperation, including Cooperation Partnerships and Small-scale
Partnerships;
A Partnership is defined as “an agreement between a group of participating organisations in
different Programme Countries to carry out joint European activities in the fields of
education, training, youth and sport or establishing a formal or informal network in a relevant
field such as joint learning projects for pupils and their teachers in the form of class
exchanges and individual long-term mobility, intensive programmes in higher education and
cooperation between local and regional authorities to foster inter-regional, including cross-
border cooperation; it may be extended to institutions and/or organisations from Partner
Countries with a view to strengthening the quality of the partnership”.
2.1.2.1 Cooperation partnerships
The primary goal of this action is to allow organisations and institutions to increase the
quality and relevance of their activities and/or develop and reinforce their networks of
partners, thus increasing their capacity to operate jointly at transnational and international
level, boosting internationalisation of their activities (including internationalisation at home),
sharing and confronting ideas, exchanging new practices and methods.
11
2.1.2.2 Small scale partnerships
This action aims at widening access to the programme to small-scale actors and individuals
who are hard to reach in education, training, youth and sport. With lower grant amounts
awarded to organisations, shorter duration and simpler administrative requirements compared
to the cooperation partnerships, this action will aim to reach out to grassroots organisations
and newcomers to Erasmus+, reducing entry barriers to the programme for organisations with
smaller organisational capacity.
The risk of irregularity and fraud when using these simplified forms of grant are considered
low for the following reasons:
 the inherent risk of irregularity is low due to the fact that the nature of the funded
actions are very standardised, and the associated triggering events are straightforward
to verify and monitor;
 the population of beneficiaries is mostly experienced and recurrent, and the entrusted
bodies (National Agencies) are subject to a standardised approach;.
 in order to reduce the risk of fraud and irregularities linked to the use of simplified
forms of grants in the Erasmus+ programme, a detailed set of minimum requirements
for the internal control system of National Agencies has been defined based on the
requirements resulting from the Financial Regulation for indirect management3
implemented by National Agencies under the Erasmus+ programme.
In addition, an assessment of the expected level of risk of error is carried out annually and
subsequently the Anti-Fraud Strategy (revised 2020) provides for tailored fraud prevention
and protection measures.
As regards costs of control, reporting and control shall focus on the realisation of the
supported activity and the achieved results rather than on the eligibility of costs incurred,
reducing the workload and scope for error of both programme participants and managing
bodies. The whole monitoring system is set up in a manner so as to ensure efficiency and
cost-effectiveness of the controls. The possibility for ex post controls of performance is
foreseen which can further verify sufficient quality of the outputs.
The Commission can have a high level of confidence in this control system as it builds on past
experience. The aggregate multiannual error rate for the implementation of Erasmus+ through
NAs was 1% for 2019 which was below the 2% materiality threshold. A limited number of
suspected frauds (0-2 per year, <500k per year) have been reported during the period 2014-19
indicating a low inherent risk and that the procedures are effective in both limiting and
capturing irregularities.
3 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union contribution in the form
of lump sums and unit costs
The basis for the determination of the amounts of the Union contribution set out in this
Decision are the previous authorising Decisions C(2013)8550 and C(2017)6864, applicable to
3
These are set out in the delegation agreement signed by each national agency and in the National Agency
Guide.
12
the Erasmus+ programme 2014-2020. This Decision revises and updates the categories and
amounts of Union contribution set out in the aforementioned Decisions, and provides the
reasoning for each update.
A main element taken into account for the update of the levels of contribution was inflation,
calculated on the period between the last update in 2017 (based on 2016 data), and the last
available figure for 2020.
Based on Eurostat data, the cumulative EU inflation rate in the period 2017-2020 was 5,8%4,
therefore an adjustment of 6% was considered as appropriate for a general update of the levels
of contribution to the market prices.
In addition to the general adjustment based on inflation, further adjustments were made for
each budget category based on historical data, expert judgement and stakeholders’ feedback
collected during the previous programming period.
In preparation for the 2021-2027 programming period, DG EAC and EACEA constituted a
working group on funding rules, including officials from all units involved in the design and
implementation of the programme, and organised over 30 consultative working groups with
National Agency and programme stakeholders. This allowed to collect relevant feedback from
all programme countries on the weaknesses in the funding model for the previous programme
and proposals for their improvement in the new one.
In addition, specific studies carried out at sectoral level allowed the Commission to assess the
adequacy of the levels of support in the different actions of the programme. Both the “Study
on the inclusiveness and adequacy of support for student mobility in higher education under
the next Erasmus+ Programme” and the “Study on Simplified Grants for the Future European
Solidarity Corps and Erasmus+ Youth actions”, carried out in 2019-2020, showed the need to
increase the levels of support in order to improve the accessibility and inclusiveness of the
programme, particularly towards participants with fewer opportunities or special needs.
As the programme 2014-2020 was already largely based on unit contributions closely aligned
to the underlying historic costs, their revision and the introduction of new costs categories in
the new programme were mainly based on percentage increases to the amounts defined in the
previous programme. Such increases were defined on the basis of an expert judgment by the
members of the working group and confirmed by consultations with representatives of the
National Agencies. A more quantitative analysis, assessing the adequacy of the unit
contributions to the costs actually incurred by beneficiaries, will be carried out by an external
contractor in the course of 2021 and will support a subsequent update of this Decision.
The sections below provide the details and the methodology for the determination of the
levels of support in each budget category, as well as the specific rules for their application in
each of the sectors of the Programme.
3.1 Key Action 1
The eligible categories for Union support in the form of unit contributions under Key Action 1
are the following:
 Travel support
 Organisational support
 Inclusion support for organisations
4
Source: Eurostat HICP - inflation rate [TEC00118]
13
 Individual support
 Preparatory visits
 Course fees
 Linguistic support
 Project management
 Coaching costs
 Physical events support
3.1.1 Travel Support
The system for the definition of travel support was originally established in decision
C(2013)8550 and then revised with decision C(2017)6864, based on the study “Mid-term
review of simplified grants used in the Erasmus+ programme”5. The 2017 revision aligned the
contributions to market prices and targeted an average co-financing rate of 80%.
The 2014-2020 rules on travel support were based on distance bands, so participants had
flexibility in the choice of the means of transport, while the amount of the contribution only
depended on the travel distance in kilometres. However, the Mid-term review study, which
contributed to the update of the levels of support, mainly used flight tickets as a reference for
market prices, while alternative means of transport (bus or train) were only included in the
analysis for distances below 500 km.
For the 2021-2027 programme, the reduction of the carbon footprint has become a horizontal
priority for all mobility activities. To this end, participants will be given the choice between
regular travel support, with the same amounts as defined in decision C(2017)6864, and “green
travel support” with increased levels of contribution when traveling by a low-emissions
means of transport such as train or bus.
In the case of “standard” travel support, the use of the same levels of contribution as defined
in 2017, without applying the inflation adjustment (6%), corresponds in real terms to a
reduction of the co-financing rate from about 80% to about 74%. Applying this reduction
reinforces the difference with the “green travel” option and make the latter more attractive, in
line with the political priority to reduce the carbon footprint of the programme. Only the
amount for the first travel band, corresponding to distances below 100 km, was increased by
15% (see explanation below) and brought from 20 to 23 EUR, assuming that air travel is not
used for such distances in most cases.
5
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?uri=COM:2018:50:FIN
14
Table 1: Travel support
Travel support - standard
Travel distances6 Amount
Between 10 and 99 KM: 23 EUR per participant
8000 KM or more: 1500 EUR per participant
The amounts defined in 2017 are increased by 15% and rounded to the closest multiple of 10
where the participant uses a low-emissions means of transport. Such increase is the result of a
combination of the 6% based on inflation and an additional 9% representing a higher level of
co-financing offered to activities with a higher impact on the carbon reduction objectives of
the programme.
As the original levels of funding, as defined in 2017, corresponded to an average level of co-
financing of 80%, in the case of green travel the average co-financing level is brought to 92%.
The “green travel” option is not available for the two highest travel bands, as it is considered
that in most cases such distances cannot be covered by low-emissions means of transport.
Table 2: green travel
Green travel support
Travel distances7 Amount
6 Based on the travel distance per participant. Travel distances must be calculated using the distance calculator supported by the European
7 Based on the travel distance per participant. Travel distances must be calculated using the distance calculator supported by the European
15
Green travel for Higher Education student mobility
The action “mobility projects for students in Higher Education” does not include a specific
contribution for travel, as the related costs are covered by the “individual support” unit
contribution, calculated on a monthly basis. However, in order to offer an incentive for the
use of more sustainable means of travel also for this category of participants, representing
57% of the total instances of mobility in the programme8, an additional support of 50 EUR
per participant is introduced.
The justification for this amount is based on data from the period 2014-2020. During this
programming period, the average grant amount requested for travel support, in the sectors
where this category was eligible, was 340 EUR9. This is also considered to represent the
average amount which Higher Education students allocated to travel expenses from their
mobility grant. In line with the method used for the determination of the amount of “green
travel” support presented above, it was concluded that the amount of the additional support
should be 15% of 340 EUR, which corresponds to 51 EUR. For the sake of simplicity, the
amount was rounded to 50 EUR.
3.1.2 Organisational Support
This category covers all costs directly linked to the implementation of mobility activities for
the organisation, excluding subsistence and travel for participants.
The table below summarises the amounts of Union contribution applicable to each action and
is followed by a detailed justification for the choice of each amount for each of the sectors.
Table 3: Organisational support
Action Amount of Union contribution (per mobility):
400 EUR per participant;

Mobility of higher education students and
staff 230 EUR per participant after 100 participants in
the same activity
400 EUR per participant with a minimum of 15

Blended Intensive Programmes in higher participants (not involved in the delivery of the
education programme) and a maximum of 20 funded
participants
- Group mobility of school pupils
- Group mobility of adult learners
- Staff mobility for courses and training
- Participation in VET skills
competitions
- Invited experts
- Hosting teachers or educators in
training
- Short-term learning mobility of VET 350 EUR per participant;
8
Source : Erasmus+ Dashboard
9
Source : Erasmus+ Dashboard
16
learners 200 EUR after one hundred participants in the
- Short-term learning mobility of pupils same type of activity
- Individual learning mobility of adult
learners
- Staff mobility for job shadowing and
teaching or training assignments
- Long-term learning mobility of VET
learners (ErasmusPro)
- Long-term learning mobility of pupils 500 EUR per participant
- Activities with non-associated
countries in the field of VET
- Mobility projects for young people
and youth workers 100 EUR per participant

i. Students and staff mobility
The main changes compared to decision C(2017)6864 are the update of the amounts on the
basis of inflation and of the policy priorities of the new programme.
The amounts of 350 EUR up to the 100th participant and 200 EUR per additional participant,
as defined in the Erasmus+ Programme Guide, were increased by 15% and rounded to the
closest multiple of 10, which corresponds to the two new levels of 400 EUR and 230 EUR.
The 15% increase is calculated as follows:
- 6% due to the inflation rate between 2017 and 2020, as described above;
- 9% due to the additional costs related with the implementation of new requirements from the
ECHE Erasmus+ Charter for the period 2021-2027:
- Digital mobility management: Implement the European Student Card Initiative:
joining the Erasmus Without Paper Network and adapting internal systems to its
technical standards, linking to the Online Learning Agreement, regularly feeding
information into the dashboard of the Erasmus+ Mobile App;
- Greening of Erasmus+: promoting environmentally friendly ways of mobility and
other activities, handling the proofs of green travel of participants to justify extra
funding, greening administrative procedures;
- Inclusion: promoting and encouraging the participation of individuals with fewer
opportunities, administratively handling the extra funding for these participants;
- Civic engagement of participants and alumni: identifying and promoting relevant

opportunities, matching persons to activities, monitoring activities.
- New mobility features: promoting and managing blended and/or international

mobility.
The 9% increase is based on the expert opinion of the Commission as to the estimated
additional costs that will be incurred by these new requirements, and after benchmarking
against feedback provided by the external stakeholders involved in implementation.
17
ii. Blended intensive programmes
Blended intensive programmes for students and staff learners is a new activity under the
Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027. They will comprise a short-term physical mobility abroad
combined with a compulsory virtual component facilitating a collaborative online learning
exchange and teamwork. The virtual component will bring the participants together online to
work collectively and simultaneously on specific assignments that are integrated in the
blended intensive programme and count towards the overall learning outcomes.
For Blended Intensive Programmes, as in the other actions in the field of Higher Education
the amount of organisational support is set at 400 EUR per participant, with a minimum
number of 15 and a maximum of 20 participants (not involved in the delivery of the
programme).
In this action, organisational support is intended to cover costs related to the preparation,
design, development, implementation and follow-up of the programme and delivery of
virtual/remote activities as well as the overall management and coordination. Costs may
include: production of documents or educational material, rental of rooms, rental of
equipment, field trips, excursions, communication activities, translation and interpretation,
preparatory visits and administrative tasks. The level of the administrative effort for the
organisation of such activities can be considered as similar to the organisation of a regular
mobility action. Therefore, the level of contribution under the category “Organisational
support” is the same as in the mobility activities for Higher Education students and staff, i.e.
400 EUR per participant.
The limitation in the number of funded participants is due to the high number of fixed costs in
the typical budget for the organisation of a blended intensive programme: it is considered that
an amount of 8 000 EUR, corresponding to 20 funded participants, can cover the costs for the
organisation of a programme even if the actual number of participants is higher.
3.1.2.2 VET, School Education, Adult Education
Compared to the 2014-2020 period, where there was one single amount for organisational
support, there will be differentiated amounts during the 2021-2027 period, taking into account
the different nature of organisational costs for each type of activity. The amounts were
determined on the basis of an analysis of the tasks that beneficiary organisations implement
for each type of activity.
Building on the experience acquired during the programming period 2014-2020, it has been
found that different levels of Union contribution are appropriate to reflect the nature and
complexity of the organisational workload required for each mobility type and to ensure the
good quality of organised activities and the capacity of organisations to operate
internationally and to acquire the necessary knowledge and experience.
As a result, as opposed to the period 2014-2020, with the same amount of 350 EUR per
participant attributed to all activities, the new scheme for the 2021-2027 programme includes
three different amounts, corresponding to the levels of organisational effort required for each
type of actions. An increased level of organisational support is applied to more complex
activities where there are fewer participants and less opportunity for economies of scale,
whereas a lower contribution is applied for courses and group activities where there is a large
number of participants and better potential for operational savings. As an overall result, the
expected total expenditure of the programme on organisational should be lower, while still
providing the correct funding across the board.
18
As detailed in Table 3: Organisational support above, the new amounts are 100 EUR, 350
EUR and 500 EUR. These amounts are based on the expert opinion of the Commission,
taking into account experience gained from implementing the actions in the previous
programming period and after benchmarking against feedback from stakeholders on the actual
costs incurred.
This has shown that lower costs per participant are associated with the organisation of group
activities, as in the case of school pupils’ mobility, due to the existence of economies of scale.
The costs are also lower when the purpose of the mobility is the participation to an activity
which was organised by external entity, as in the case of courses, or for the simple invitation
of an expert to an activity hosted by the beneficiary. The reduced level of support of 100 EUR
per participant was introduced for these three types of activities.
The basic amount used in the 2014-2020 period, 350 EUR per participant, is maintained for
activities requiring a medium organisational effort, such as short term mobility for VET
learners and school pupils, as well as for job shadowing and teaching and training
assignments.
ErasmusPro, long-term mobility of pupils and activities with Non-associated countries require
an additional organisational effort. Such activities require the definition of a very detailed
training plan, intense monitoring and generally higher efforts in terms of logistic
arrangements (such as, for instance, costs for visas and/or vaccines). These activities are also
highly individualised and involve fewer participants, which reduces the opportunities for
economies of scale. For this type of activities, the increased level of support of 500 EUR per
participant applies.
3.1.2.3 Youth
In the Erasmus+ 2014-2020 programme, organisational support was a contribution to costs
incurred by organisations related to the preparation, implementation and follow-up of
activities. Only in the case of activities in the field of youth, organisational support also
covered: subsistence and local transport of participants − renting of premises − training and
teaching materials - costs related to trainers, speakers, moderators, lecturers.
In substance, in the Youth field, one single contribution covered both the cost for the
organisation and for the mobility activities as such, as opposed to the other sectors where
those activities were covered by two separate budget categories/ contributions. The proposed
approach for the 2021-2027 period is to align the funding model to the other sectors and have
two categories/contributions, one covering preparation, implementation, follow-up,
trainers/facilitators costs, rental of rooms and one for subsistence. This approach will:
 Bring consistency across all KA1 Actions of the Erasmus+ Programme;
 Allow to finance blended activities10, where only organisational support is eligible for
the virtual components;
 Provide funding visibility for the activities implemented on top of the mobility
activities;
 Provide further flexibility in case of drop-outs;
 Bring in a simpler logic by reducing the complexity of eligible costs covered by the
grant item.
10
Blended learning: study type that involves learning in a combination of modes. Often used more specifically to
refer to courses which use a combination of traditional face-to-face teaching work-shops or seminars, and
distance learning techniques on-line (such as internet, television, conference calls).
19
Mobility activities in the field of youth are comparable in terms of complexity and
organisational effort to the group mobility activities in the fields of School Education, VET
and Adult Education. As explained in the section above, group activities in general are
associated with lower organisational costs and benefit from economies of scale. Therefore, the
level of unit contribution for youth mobility was harmonised to the contributions for group
mobility actions in the other sectors and fixed at the level of 100 EUR per participant.
3.1.3 Inclusion Support for Organisations
The inclusion support is a contribution to costs incurred by organising institutions related to
the preparation, implementation and follow-up of activities in support of (incoming and
outbound) participants with fewer opportunities. The individual activities may vary from case
to case but they essentially apply to supplementary tasks carried out by projects that aim to
actively involve participants with fewer opportunities (providing tailor-made preparation,
support and follow-up for them, such as reinforced mentorship).
The new cost category for inclusion support is composed of one unit contribution intended to
support the organisation in the extra costs incurred for the participation of people with fewer
opportunities and one component based on real costs, to cover the direct needs of those
participants.
The component intended for the organisation was set as a fixed amount of 100 EUR per
eligible participant for all sectors.
Typical examples of expenses covered by this category are the following:
- Administrative costs of determining the participant’s status, type of fewer
opportunities and individual needs
- Estimating and processing costs that need to be covered in non-standard ways (real
costs as opposed to unit costs)
- Individualised preparation / pre-departure training for the participant
- Dedicated assistance with logistical arrangements and possible accompanying persons
or assistants
- Identifying suitable hosting institutions (this is a standard organisational task but its
difficulty is significantly increased because not all potential hosting partner
institutions are able or willing to host participants that require stronger individual
engagement)
- Additional preparation of staff on hosting side to address the specific needs of the
participant
The actual costs of the activities listed above are strongly variable by nature and do not allow
to achieve economies of scale, as they depend on the specific situation and needs of each
eligible participant. As this cost category is introduced for the first time in the programme,
and in absence of statistical data supporting the analysis, the determination of the amount of
contribution was based on an expert judgment by the Commission, benchmarked against
feedback from National Agencies and other stakeholders. The amount of 100 EUR per
participant is considered to be a prudent choice and it will be subject to revision in the next
update of the present authorising decision, planned for 2022, with two years of
implementation providing a more solid statistical basis.
3.1.4 Individual Support
20
The category “Individual support” is intended to cover costs directly linked to the subsistence
of participants during the activity. In general, the amounts of support depend on the receiving
country for the mobility activity.
21
i. Long-term mobility of students and recent graduates
Regarding the cost category “individual support”, different updates were applied to the grant
levels for students and for staff. As pointed out by the “Study on the inclusiveness and
Programme”11, the overall EU grant (all cost categories included) covered between 34% and
42% of the overall mobility costs incurred by students in the period 2014-2020. One of the
scenarios presented by the study proposed to increase all grant levels by 5%, as an adjustment
to cumulative inflation during the period 2014 – 2018.
However, in order to make the update of the grant levels more relevant to the new
programming period, the adjustment took into account the inflation rate for the period 2017-
2020, corresponding to 6%12, as described in section 3 above. In addition, the results of the
study mentioned above showed that a further increase in the level of contribution would
improve the accessibility of the programme for all participants, but in particular for those who
have limited own resources to complement the Erasmus+ grants. Therefore, the levels of
individual support are increased by 15% in order to contribute to the objective to increase the
inclusiveness of the programme, while it is estimated that the Union contribution will remain
below 80% of the eligible costs (which themselves are only a part of the actual costs incurred
by students (see above)). The table below shows the updated grant levels for mobility to and
from the three categories of countries, grouped according to the average cost of living. After
the 15% increase, the amounts were rounded to the higher multiple of 10 (in favour of the
participant).
The increased level of “individual support”, combined with the cost category of “inclusion
support” is also intended to facilitate participation in the programme for participants who
cannot afford to cover a high proportion of the cost of mobility with own resources.
Table 4: Individual support for HE students and recent graduates
Group 1: Group 2: Group 3:

Denmark, Finland, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia,
Iceland, Ireland, Cyprus, France, Czech Republic,
Origin/ Liechtenstein, Germany, Greece, Estonia, Hungary,
Luxembourg, Italy, Malta, Latvia, Lithuania,
Destination
Norway, Sweden, Netherlands, Poland, Romania,
Portugal, Spain Serbia, Slovakia,
Slovenia, North
Macedonia, Turkey
Group 1:
Denmark, Finland,
Iceland, Ireland, Between 260 and Between 200 and Between 200 and
Liechtenstein, 540 EUR 490 EUR 490 EUR
Luxembourg, Norway,
Sweden,
Group 2:
Between 310 and Between 260 and Between 200 and
Austria, Belgium, 600 EUR 540 EUR 490 EUR
Cyprus, France,
11
Ares(2020)3694813
12
Source: Eurostat - Ref. footnote 4 above
22
Germany, Greece, Italy,
Malta, Netherlands,
Portugal, Spain
Group 3:
Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech
Republic, Estonia,
Hungary, Latvia, Between 310 and Between 310 and Between 260 and
Lithuania, Poland, 600 EUR 600 EUR 540 EUR
Romania, Serbia,
Slovakia, Slovenia,
North Macedonia,
Turkey
ii. Top up for students and recent graduates with fewer opportunities
month. As specified above, the average co-financing rate for Higher Education students in
mobility was estimated between 34% and 42% in the 2014-2020 period.
In the new programme, reflecting the horizontal priority of inclusion, the level of support for
this category of participants shall be increased. The general increase in the level of individual
support is already expected to raise the average co-financing to at least 50% for all students.
This additional top-up is expected to bring the level of co-financing above 60% for the
specific category of students with fewer opportunities, whose definition is set out in the
Programme Guide.
The amount is differentiated according to the duration of the activity:
- Long term mobility: the amount is increased to 250 EUR.
- Short term mobility: 100 EUR for a physical mobility activity period of 5-14 days and
150 EUR for a period of 15-30 days
iii. Top up for students and recent graduates in traineeships
month. In the new programme, in order to simplify and harmonise the approach for all
countries, a fixed rate is established at the middle value of 150 EUR per month.
iv. Students and recent graduates from outermost regions and OCTs
In line with decision C(2013)8550, students and recent graduates from outermost regions and
OCTs receive a higher amount of individual support due to geographical disadvantages. In
order to simplify the previous scheme, the distinction by Country group was eliminated and
the level of support is 700 EUR for all participants in this category, corresponding to the
middle value used in the previous programme
v. Short term mobility of students and recent graduates
The determination of the amount of support was based on the “study on the inclusiveness and
Programme” undertaken by the PPMI Group. The study itself used as a reference the rates
from the short-term blended mobility in the framework of “Learning, Teaching and Training
activities” (LTTs) under the Erasmus+ KA2 Strategic Partnerships action. In fact, those
activities are very similar in terms of logistic arrangements and related costs. The main
difference is that under LTTs, as for all KA2 activities, travel support is calculated separately.
In short term-mobility under KA1, instead, in order to ensure consistency within the action,
the costs of travel should be covered by the same category of individual support.
23
The levels of support for short-term blended mobilities under LTTs in KA2, as defined in
decision C(2017)6864, are the following:
- Up to the 14th day of activity: 58 EUR per day
- From 15th to the 30th day of activity: 42 EUR per day
During the 2014-2020 period, 10 719 Higher Education students participated in short-term
blended mobility activities. The average duration of an activity was 8 days, corresponding to
an allowance of 464 EUR, while the average distance travelled was 1 040 Km, corresponding
to an allowance of 275 EUR 13. Based on these data, the average incidence of travel on the
grant amount per mobility is about 60%.
KA2 short-term blended mobility 2014-2020

EUR per day
Level of support
Average distance 1 040 Km
Average travel support 275 EUR
Average individual support 464 EUR
As pointed out above, the average level of co-financing in mobility actions for students in
Higher Education was between 34% and 42% in the 2014-2020 period and the objective for
the new programme is to bring it to 50-60%, as opposed to KA2 actions, where co-financing
is generally estimated at 80%. The difference is due to the availability of additional sources of
funding from national and regional schemes in KA1, which are not available in KA2. To
reflect this difference, the new unit contribution for short term mobility is defined as follows:
KA1 short-term mobility 2021-2027

EUR per day
Level of support

(including travel and subsistence)
13
Source: Erasmus+ Dashboard
24
The average grant level is 26% lower than in the case of KA2 blended mobility, which is in
line with the targeted difference in the levels of co-financing between the two actions.
vi. Mobility between Programme and non-associated countries – students and recent
graduates
The rates determined by Decision C(2014)6158 , as amended by Decision C(2017)6863

and detailed in the Erasmus+ Programme Guide 2018 are confirmed.
From To Amount
EU Member States and third Third countries not associated

countries associated to the to the Programme from 700 EUR per month
Programme Regions 1-12.
As described above in
EU Member States and third Third countries not associated section “Grant support for
countries associated to the to the Programme from the mobility of students –
Programme Regions 13 and 14. Individual support for
physical mobility”
Group 1:
Denmark, Finland, Iceland,
Ireland, Liechtenstein, 900 EUR per month
Luxembourg, Norway,
Sweden,
Group 2:
Austria, Belgium, Cyprus,
Third countries not France, Germany, Greece, 850 EUR per month
associated to the Programme Italy, Malta, Netherlands,
from Regions 1-12. Portugal, Spain
Group 3:
Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech
Republic, Estonia, Hungary,
Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, 800 EUR per month
Romania, Serbia, Slovakia,
Slovenia, North Macedonia,
Turkey
The base rate of 700 EUR per month is maintained for all mobility activities from all EU
member states and countries associated to the programme to all third countries non-
associated to the programme, except for regions 13 and 14.
Mobility from and towards non-associated countries that are within the geographical zone
of Programme countries (regions 13 and 14), namely Andorra, Faroe Islands, Monaco,
25
San Marino, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and Vatican City is supported with the same
rates as intra-EU mobility14.
In particular, group 1 includes Faroe Islands by analogy with Denmark, Switzerland by
analogy with Liechtenstein, and the United Kingdom in continuity with the previous
programming period. Andorra, Monaco, San Marino and Vatican City are included in
group 2 by analogy with Spain, France and Italy.
Mobility activities from and to the countries listed above, by analogy with intra-EU
mobility, are not eligible for travel support.
Staff mobility
Evidence from the programming period 2014-2020 and feedback from stakeholders showed
that the considerations made for student mobility do not equally apply to staff mobility, where
the levels of funding are higher and sending institutions generally ensure that all sources of
funding combined (EU and national) cover the actual costs incurred by participants. In
addition, the existence of ranges allows the national authorities to adjust the actual grant
amounts to the specific needs. Therefore the funding levels were left unchanged for this
category of participants.
Table 5: Individual support for HE staff
Staff from
Staff from
Programme
Partner Countries
Countries
Methodology
Receiving country Min-Max (per
Amount (per day)
day)
Norway, Denmark,
Luxembourg, Iceland,
80-180 180
Sweden, Ireland,
Finland, Liechtenstein
Netherlands, Austria,
Belgium, France,
Germany, Italy, Spain, 70-160 160
Cyprus, Greece,
Malta, Portugal Same amounts as
in Decision
Slovenia, Estonia, C(2017)6864.
Latvia, Croatia, Therefore, no
Slovakia, Czech update of the
Republic, Lithuania, amounts was
Turkey, Hungary, 60-140 140 needed.
Poland, Romania,
Bulgaria, the Republic
of North Macedonia,
Serbia
Partner Countries 180 Not eligible
14
In addition to the geographical criterion, these countries are treated as an exception as they are not covered by
the External Action Instruments
26
3.1.4.2 Mobility projects for VET learners and staff, School education pupils and staff,
Adult education learners and staff
For VET learners and staff, School education pupils and staff, and Adult education learners
and staff, the amounts of contribution are based on Decision C(2013)8550, amended by
C(2017)6864.
The programme guides for the period 2014-2020 offered a minimum and a maximum level of
support and each National Agency selected its own actual level within that range, based on
factors such as number of beneficiaries, availability of other sources of funding and more
accurate estimates on the costs of living. The average grant level in the period was always
falling between 60% and 100% of the maximum value in the range15.
For the new programme, the range of contribution levels available to national agencies for
individual support was reduced by increasing the lower end of the range by 10%, while
leaving the higher end unchanged. This increased amount results from a combination of the
adjustment to inflation (6%) and an additional increase aimed to improve the inclusiveness of
the programme, as described above.
On the other hand, leaving the higher end unchanged reduces the risk of overpaying and
contributes to the objective of a more harmonized programme, more predictability of
individual grants, and potential savings.
The resulting update of the levels of support is presented below:
Category of participants Country group 116 Country group 2 Country group 3
Staff 90 - 180 EUR 80 - 160 EUR 70 - 140 EUR

VET learners 35 - 120 EUR 30 - 104 EUR 25 - 88 EUR
Adult education learners 35 - 120 EUR 30 - 104 EUR 25 - 88 EUR
School pupils 40 - 80 EUR 35 - 70 EUR 30 - 60 EUR
The above are base rates per day of activity. Each NA will decide on exact base rates based on
the allowed ranges.
The base rate is payable up to the 14th day of activity. From the 15th day of activity, the
payable rate will be equal to 70% of the base rate.
15 Source: Erasmus+ Dashboard

16 For Programme Countries
Country group 1: Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, Iceland, Sweden, Ireland, Finland, Liechtenstein
Country group 2: Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Cyprus, Greece, Malta, Portugal
Country group 3: Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia, Croatia, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Turkey, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, the Republic of North
Macedonia, Serbia
For non-associated Countries

Country group 1: Australia, Canada, Japan, Israel, South Korea, Georgia, Argentina, Armenia, Angola, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, United States, Bahrain, Azerbaijan,
Sudan, Saint Kitts & Nevis, St. Vincent & Grenadines, United Arab Emirates, Hong Kong, Lebanon, Vietnam, Mexico, Singapore, Thailand, Taiwan, Moldova,
Malaysia, Tanzania, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Faroe Islands, South Sudan, State of Palestine
Country group 2: India, Kazakhstan, Brazil, DR Congo, Chile, Nigeria, Uganda, Liberia, Djibouti, DPR Korea, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Dominican Republic,
Jamaica, Belarus, Libya, Syria, Cuba, Yemen, Kenya, Rwanda, Seychelles, Antigua and Barbuda, Brunei, Montenegro, Switzerland, Malawi, Barbados, Saint
Lucia, Grenada, Dominica, Uruguay, Albania, China, Philippines, Peru, Venezuela, Panama, Ghana, Chad, Guyana, Egypt, Morocco, Kiribati, Oman, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Iran, Mozambique, Senegal, Mauritius, Qatar, Andorra, Jordan, Indonesia, Laos, South Africa, Ethiopia, Bangladesh, Ecuador, Paraguay, Costa
Rica, Ivory Coast, Sierra Leone, Gabon, Haiti, Bahamas, Papua New Guinea, Micronesia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Vatican City State, Monaco, San Marino,
Andorra
Country group 3: Nepal, Maldives, Tajikistan, Nicaragua, Zambia, Guinea, Congo, Botswana, Belize, Samoa, Marshall Islands, Palau, Tuvalu, Nauru, Cook Islands,
Niue, New Zealand, Pakistan, Bhutan, El Salvador, Suriname, Guatemala, Honduras, Somalia, Trinidad and Tobago, Algeria, Columbia, Gambia, Fiji, Solomon
Islands, Vanuatu, Cambodia, Zimbabwe, Burundi, Mongolia, Cameroon, Timor-Leste, Sri Lanka, Madagascar, Mali, Togo, Sao Tome & Principe, Tonga, Bolivia,
Benin, Lesotho, Macao, Tunisia, Iraq, Burkina Faso, Equatorial Guinea, Central African Republic, Guinea-Bissau, Namibia, Comoros, Eritrea, Myanmar,
Afghanistan, Niger, Mauritania, Cabo Verde, Kosovo, Eswatini
27
Non-associated countries have been attributed to the three country groups in use for intra-EU
mobility, as detailed in footnote 16. The attribution was done by adding up the amount of
daily allowance and accommodation allowance calculated by the MIPS system for travel of
EU officials and applying 80% as an average co-financing rate.
i. Determination of the amounts of unit contribution for School pupils mobility

In the programme 2014-2020 the mobility of School pupils was allowed within the framework
of partnership projects under KA2. For the 2021-2027 period, in order to ensure more
coherence within the programme, these activities will be financed under KA1.
In order to harmonise the structure of the rules, the level of individual support, which was
presented as a single amount in the old KA2 School exchange partnerships, had to be
transformed into a range within which National Agency can choose their own level of
support, as in the typical KA1 mechanism.
The base for calculation, corresponding to the unit contribution for “individual support” for
the same type of activities under KA2 in the Erasmus+ programme 2014-2020, is 58 EUR.
This base is taken as equivalent to the average KA1 VET learner rate in a mid-income country
(group 2).
The average rate for country groups 1 and 3 is then calculated based on the same deviation
from country group 2 as used for VET learners (+/-18.06%)"
Avg. country Avg. country Avg. country

Step 1
group 1 group 2 (base) group 3
VET learners 85 (+18.06%) 72 59 (-18.06%)

School pupils 68 58 48
In the second step, the ranges are created for the three country groups to align the approach
with the other types of participants in Key Action 1. In order to take into account the
possibility to obtain economies of scale when large groups of pupils take part to a mobility
activity, as well as the existence of other sources of funding, the lower end of the range is
calculated as 40% less than the average rate, while the higher end is calculated as 15% more
than the average. This flexibility is important in case of pupil mobility activities because
pupils from different countries typically take part in activities at the same venue during
multilateral exchanges. In the final step, rates are rounded to the nearest 10.
Average
Step 2 Range Low High
(base)
- 40% ; + 15%;
rounded
- 40% ; + 15%;
rounded
- 40% ; + 15%;
rounded
28
3.1.4.3 Youth exchanges, mobility of Youth workers and Youth participation activities
The contributions are based on Decisions C(2013)8550, amended by C(2017)6864. The
funding mechanism was aligned with the other sectors, by separating the items
“organisational support”, covered in the dedicated secton above, and “individual support”.
i. Individual support for Youth exchanges, Youth workers and Youth participation
activities
As mentioned in the section on organisational support above, in the previous programming
period, the category “organisational support” in the field of youth included both the costs
related to the actual organisation of the activity and the subsistence costs for participants,
which were falling under the category “individual support” in all the other sectors of the
programme. As a result, the overall levels of support for activities in this field were
significantly lower than in the other fields. As the Interim report from the “Study on
Simplified Grants for the Future Humanitarian Aid Strand of the European Solidarity Corps
and Erasmus+ Youth Participation Activities” pointed out, “both beneficiaries and NAs
thought that the amount to support participants with accommodation and subsistence needs to
be increased to better reflect the increase in costs of living in many countries”17.
In a logic of harmonisation of the programme rules, the old category “organisational support”,
where the determination of the amounts of support was based on the cost of living in
receiving countries, was translated into “individual support” for the new programme.
Meanwhile, the component which is specifically intended to cover the organisational costs is
now covered by the category “organisational support” described in the dedicated section
above.
As a result, the levels of contribution under the category “individual support” for the 2021-
2027 are listed in the following table.
Table 6: Individual support for Youth exchanges and Youth workers
Youth
Mobility of
Exchanges and
Youth
Youth
Workers
participation
(euro per
activities
day)
(euro per day)
Austria 45 € 61 €
Belgium 42 € 65 €
Bulgaria 32 € 53 €
Croatia 35 € 62 €
Cyprus 32 € 58 €
Czech Republic 32 € 54 €
Denmark 45 € 72 €
Estonia 33 € 56 €
Finland 45 € 71 €
Republic of North
28 € 45 €
Macedonia
17
Ref. Ares(2020)1521596 for the request of services. Interim and final report not published yet.
29
France 38 € 66 €
Germany 41 € 58 €
Greece 38 € 71 €
Hungary 33 € 55 €
Iceland 45 € 71 €
Ireland 49 € 74 €
Italy 39 € 66 €
Latvia 34 € 59 €
Liechtenstein 45 € 74 €
Lithuania 34 € 58 €
Luxembourg 45 € 66 €
Malta 39 € 65 €
Netherlands 45 € 69 €
Norway 50 € 74 €
Poland 34 € 59 €
Portugal 37 € 65 €
Romania 32 € 54 €
Serbia 29 € 45 €
Slovakia 35 € 60 €
Slovenia 34 € 60 €
Spain 34 € 61 €
Sweden 45 € 70 €
Turkey 32 € 54 €
Neighbouring
29 € 48 €
Partner Countries
3.1.5 Preparatory Visits

In the 2014-2020 programme, organisations taking part in actions in the fields of VET and
Youth had the possibility to carry out “Advance planning visits” to the country of the
receiving organisations, with the purpose to ensure high quality activities by facilitating and
preparing curricular and administrative arrangements, building trust and understanding and
setting-up a solid partnership between organisations involved. Such activities receive
contributions calculated on the basis of the applicable unit costs, namely travel and individual
support in the case of VET, travel and organisational support in the case of Youth.
For the programme 2021-2027, this activity – under the simpler title of “Preparatory visits”
will be available for VET, School Education, Adult Education and Youth.
In order to reduce the administrative burden for organisations taking part in such visits, the
contribution will take the form of a fixed amount per participant, covering all categories of
expenses.
The method for the determination of the amount of contribution is based on the budget item
“Transnational project meetings” for Strategic Partnerships under KA2 in the Erasmus+ 2014-
2020 programme. This category in KA2 covers the participation in meetings between project
partners for implementation and coordination purposes. The contribution is intended to cover
both travel and subsistence costs.
30
Preparatory visits in KA1 are a similar activity with a comparable cost structure, as they
consist in short stays abroad of the staff of beneficiary organisations with the purpose to meet
partners in a transnational project.
In KA2 Strategic partnerships, the amount of contribution for transnational project meetings
was 575 EUR per participant. The same amount of contribution is therefore established for
preparatory visits in the fields of VET, School Education, Adult Education and Youth.
3.1.6 Course Fees
Based on contribution set in Decision C(2013)8550. Increased by 6% due to the inflation rate,
as described above, and an additional 8% to increase the level of co-financing in favour of
beneficiaries, in line with the inclusion priority of the new programme.
New rate: 80 EUR per day, with a maximum of 800 EUR.
3.1.7 Linguistic Support
The Erasmus+ Online Language Support (OLS) will allow participants in mobility activities
to assess, practice and improve their knowledge of the language to be used during their
experience abroad. The platform will provide features such as assisted and blended learning
tools to enable teachers and youth workers to provide extra support to their learners and social
networking to enable collaborative learning. The Erasmus+ Online Linguistic Support (OLS)
will also provide free language learning material.
The cost category “Linguistic support” is intended for participants who are eligible to benefit
from the OLS tool, but whose learning needs are not met by this tool as the required language
or level is not available.
The amount of contribution is the same as defined in Decision C(2013)8550: 150 EUR per
participant eligible for Online Language Support that cannot receive it, excluding staff in
mobility up to 30 days of duration. For learners, the availability of the support is not linked to
the duration of the mobility, as it is assumed that all periods of mobility require a linguistic
support.
For the 2021-2027 period, a higher level of contribution is introduced for participants in
ErasmusPro and long-term individual mobility of school pupils, in consideration of the higher
complexity of the activities carried out during the mobility. In the case of ErasmusPro, this
entails a period learning abroad at a partner VET provider, in a company, or in another
organisation active in the field of VET or the labour market. The learning period must include
a strong work-based component and an individual learning programme must be defined for
each participant.
In the case of school pupils on long-term mobility, participants spend a period abroad to study
at a partner school or perform a traineeship at another relevant organisation abroad. Also in
this case, an individual learning programme must be defined for each participant to enable
them to follow the curriculum and integrate at their host school.
In view of the above, linguistic support for participants in ErasmusPro and long term
individual mobility of school pupils will be supported with an additional 150 EUR per
participant. The determination of this amount was based on the expert judgment of the
Commission, benchmarked against feedback from stakeholders. It is intended to cover the
additional needs of participants who are minors or very young adults starting from a lower
level of proficiency (compared to e.g. higher education students) and need a strong,
individualised linguistic preparation in order to be able to undertake their mobility. In case
31
OLS is not available, these learners will receive both the regular linguistic support grant to
replace OLS and the additional 150 EUR grant to cover their specific needs.
3.1.8 Categories only applicable to Youth Participation Activities
Youth Participation Activities are non-formal learning activities revolving around active
participation of young people. Such activities aim to enable young people to experience
exchanges, cooperation, cultural and civic action. Supported activities should help the
participants strengthen their personal, social, citizenship and digital competences and become
active European citizens.
Supported activities can take the form of (or a combination of): workshops, debates, role-
plays, simulations, use of digital tools (e.g. digital democracy tools), awareness raising
campaigns, trainings, meetings and other forms of online or offline interaction between young
people and decision-makers, consultations, information events etc.
As the mobility component is central in the structure of this action, it is financed under Key
Action 1 of the program. However, the action also supports a dimension of transnational
cooperation, which results in similarities with the structure of Key Action 2 actions. To reflect
such characteristics of this action, three new budget categories are introduced, replicating
similar categories already existing in KA2:
 Project management
 Coaching costs
 Physical events support
3.1.8.1 Project management

The organisation of Youth participation activities does not only consist in setting up the
logistic arrangements for a mobility, but involves preparation, implementation, of activities,
evaluation, dissemination and follow-up. In this respect, the typical KA1 “organisational
support” unit contribution, based on the number of participants, does not reflect the nature of
the funded activities and a contribution based on the duration of the project in months was
found to be more adequate.
The cost category “Project management and implementation” under KA2 cooperation
partnerships is intended to cover coordination and communication between partners,
learning/teaching/training materials, tools, approaches etc. Virtual cooperation and local
project activities. Its scope is very similar to project management in Youth participation
activities and the rule of allocation is based on the project duration in months.
Based on these considerations, the amount of unit contribution for project management in
Youth participation activities is defined as the same amount set out in decision C(2013)8550,
as amended by C(2017)6864 for “Project management and implementation” in KA2 and it is
set at 500 EUR per month.
3.1.8.2 Coaching costs
This cost category covers the costs linked to the involvement of a coach in the project.
In this element too, the action presents a similarity with KA2 cooperation partnerships. The
participation of a coach to the activity constitutes a staff cost, whose structure is compatible
with the cost category “intellectual outputs” in the 2014-2020 programme, renamed as
“project results” in the new programme.
32
The Erasmus+ Programme guide defines a Youth worker as “a professional or a volunteer
involved in non-formal learning who supports young people in their personal socio-
educational, and professional development” and a coach as “a resource person who could
have youth work experience to accompany groups of young people (especially those with
fewer opportunities), helping them put their idea in practice, supporting them in the
preparation, implementation and evaluation of their project”. Based on these definitions, the
responsibilities of the two profiles can be considered as similar and the same unit contribution
per day can be applied, corresponding to the category “Teacher/Trainer/Researcher/Youth
worker” in KA2 cooperation partnerships.
Table 7: Coaching costs
Teacher/Trainer/Researcher
/
Youth worker
Unit contribution per day
Denmark, Ireland,
Luxembourg, Netherlands,
241
Austria, Sweden,
Liechtenstein, Norway
Belgium, Germany, France,

214
Italy, Finland, Iceland
Czech Republic, Greece,

Spain, Cyprus, Malta, 137
Portugal, Slovenia
Bulgaria, Estonia, Croatia,

Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary,
Poland, Romania, Serbia, 74
Slovakia, the Republic of
North Macedonia, Turkey
3.1.8.3 Youth participation events support

This cost covers the organisation of national and transnational conferences, seminars and
events in presential format.
The category Multiplier events in KA2, defined in decision C(2013)8550, as amended by
C(2017)6864, provides a contribution to the costs linked to national and transnational
conferences, seminars, events sharing and disseminating the results of the project (excluding
costs for travel and subsistence of representatives of participating organisations involved in
the project). The rule of allocation assigns a contribution of 100 EUR per local participant and
200 EUR per international participant.
In Youth participation activities, the scope of project events is very similar to the Multiplier
events category described above. The only substantial difference is that the events are
attended by participants who may already be in the location where the activities take place
and/or who are also eligible for travel and individual support insofar as they are involved in a
33
mobility activity. Therefore, for this action, the funding mechanism for “Multiplier events”
can be modified by considering all participants as local.
In light of the above, based on the amounts defined in decision C(2013)8550, as amended by
C(2017)6864, the amount of contribution for Youth participation events is set at 100 EUR
per participant.
3.1.9 DiscoverEU Inclusion action

The DiscoverEU Inclusion action offers young people who are 18 years old a chance to have
a short-term individual or group experience travelling across Europe by rail or other modes of
transport where necessary. Participants are provided with a travel pass of seven days within
one month and an individual support contributing to subsistence costs during the activity. In
addition, organisations are entitled to claim inclusion support (see paragraph 3.1.3 above) for
participants with fewer opportunities.
The amount of individual support is set at 62 EUR per participant per day for a maximum
of 21 days. This amount is determined as the average of the rates for youth workers mobility
(Table 6 above). This choice is justified by the fact that the profile of participants and the
modalities of the mobility are similar, however the activity is intended to take place across
different countries and therefore a MS-specific rate would not be appropriate. The choice of
the same rate as in youth workers mobility also reflects the fact that, as in that action,
DiscoverEU participants have to pay for their accommodation and choose freely on the
market, as opposed to youth exchanges where the organisation negotiates the price of
accommodation in the same structure for all participants.
In case they need additional travel in order to reach the location where the activity starts,
participants are also entitled to travel support, including “green travel” where applicable (see
paragraph 3.1.1 above).
3.2 Key Action 2

In the Erasmus+ programme 2021-2027, the action “Partnerships for cooperation” represents
the continuaton of the “Strategic partnerships” under the 2014-2020 programme.
The main novelty for the new period is the introduction of the new action “small scale
partnerships”, aimed at reaching smaller organisations and newcomers, while the action
“Cooperation partnerships” presents a substantial continuity with its predecessor. In line with
this principle of continuity, the funding model for Cooperation partnerships is largely based
on the one of “Strategic partnerships” as defined in decision C(2013)8550 and amended by
C(2017)6864.
3.2.1 Cooperation Partnerships
The determination of the amounts of contribution in the form of single lump sums was based
on an analysis of project budgets financed under the Strategic partnerships action in the period
2014-2020.
34
As shown by the graph below, the highest concentration of projects, about 64%, was in the
range between 100.000 and 300.000 EUR18, while project budgets comprised between
300.000 and 450.000 EUR represented about 16% of the total19.
The 20% of projects with a budget below 100.000 EUR will be covered by the action Small
Scale partnerships, described above, with a funding mechanism based on two single lump
sums with pre-defined amounts of 30.000 and 60.000 EUR. The two actions, small-scale and
cooperation partnerships, should in fact be considered as complementary, as they aim at
supporting similar activities but with different levels of complexity, number of partners and
involved and expected results.
Figure 1- Distribution of KA2 2014-2020 project budgets
All KA2 - 2014 - 2020

2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
< 60,000 60,000 <X< 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000
100,000 <X< <X< <X< <X< <X< <X< <X<
150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000
Table 8: Distribution of KA2 2014-2020 project budgets
SE VET HE AE YOUTH TOT %

< 60,000 129 139 2 327 632 1,229 10%
60,000 <X< 100,000 311 233 16 324 409 1,293 10%
100,000 <X< 150,000 530 369 70 464 419 1,852 15%
150,000 <X< 200,000 499 512 190 517 291 2,009 16%
200,000 <X< 250,000 473 549 279 486 179 1,966 16%
250,000 <X< 300,000 430 700 383 473 106 2,092 17%
300,000 <X< 350,000 166 234 218 107 20 745 6%
350,000 <X< 400,000 142 170 207 86 6 611 5%
400,000 <X< 450,000 134 159 238 64 5 600 5%
2,397
Based on the experience from the previous programming period, it is considered that three
predefined amounts of 120.000, 250.000 and 400.000 EUR will constitute an adequate and
representative menu of funding levels. Combined with the small scale partnerships, this will
18
Awarded grant amounts
19
Source: Erasmus+ Dashboard. The analysis did not take into account school exchange partnerships, which had
a stronger focus on mobility compared to the other KA2 actions, and therefore has more significant differences
with the 2021-2027 cooperation partnerships.
35
offer applicants a clear and simple set of choices for their projects, allowing them to apply for
a level of grant which is in line with the scale of their proposed activities. Given the diverse
nature of all the fields covered in the programme, reaching from Education to Training to
Youth and Sport, the needs and type of activities will differ. It is therefore left to the
applicants to describe the planned activities adequate for their respective objectives and
within the funding level chosen. Therefore, the expected outputs corresponding to the
amounts are not predefined: on the contrary, a high degree of flexibility is left to applicants to
define their targets in line with the programme objectives and build their project around the
requested budget.
Based on the table above, the single lump sum of 120.000 EUR targets the type and scope of
projects which obtained between 100.000 and 150.000 EUR in the previous programme; the
lump sum of 250.000 EUR will target the main bulk of projects which obtained between
150.000 and 300.000 EUR, while the projects requiring a higher level of funding will be
targeted by the 400.000 EUR lump sum. Projects which received a grant between 350.000 and
450.000 EUR in the previous programming period represented 10% of the total number and
15% of the budget. Apart from its statistical representativeness, offering this amount also
constitutes a strategic policy choice, allowing to finance the most innovative and ambitious
partnerships.
As the list of eligible activities and the award criteria for the action are the same for all the
three fixed amounts, applicants will choose the desired level of funding based on the level of
complexity and ambition of their proposal, taking into account elements such as the number
of partners, the duration of the project and the number and type of proposed activities.
In particular, applicants are required to provide evidence for the elements of value for money
in their application, showing that the amount requested is adequate to the content and
objectives of their proposed activities. Such elements are then assessed by experts in the
evaluation phase and influence the position of each proposal in the ranking list, so that
proposals which are found to offer poor value for money will have a lower score and fewer
chances to be selected for funding. It is therefore expected that projects will rather target a
high level of activities with high European added value in order to be successfully selected
within their chosen group.
The experts involved in the evaluation of proposals will also be supported by specific
guidelines, providing a common methodology to use the information from projects financed
in 2014-2020 as a reference for the evaluation of new proposals.
A quality assessment will also be carried out ex-post, based on the information presented in
the final reports, with a view to determine the level of achievement of the project objectives
stated in the application forms. Insufficient quality, corresponding to a low score in the final
assessment, will constitute the basis for the application of grant reductions for poor or partial
implementation.
3.2.2 Small Scale Partnerships
i. Determination of the amounts of Union contribution
The funding mechanism for this action will be based on single lump sums of predefined
amounts.
In the programming period 2014-2020, the action “Strategic partnerships” funded over 3 550
projects with grant amounts lower than 100 000 EUR, for a total value of 220 million EUR,
out of a total of 12 500 projects (28%) and a total budget of 2.1 billion eur (10%).
36
Within this portion of the projects population, about 2 700 had grant amounts comprised
between 50 000 and 100 000 EUR (21% of the total). Their average value was 76 000 EUR,
with a duration of 22 months and 4 partners involved. Based on the funding rules applicable
in the previous programming period, the typical budget structure was the following:
Category Amounts
1 Coordinator 11 000
Project management
3 Partners 16 500
and implementation
Total 27 500
Project meetings 10 600
Intellectual outputs 32 700
Multiplier events 5 200
As the figures show, more than a third of the average grant amount was already determined in
the form of a lump sum on the basis of the number of partners and project duration (Project
management and implementation), while the remaining part, determined on the basis of unit
contributions, was used for project meetings, events and intellectual outputs (staff costs).
In the same period, the number of grants with amounts lower than 50 000 EUR was about
850, with an average value of 35 000 EUR, a duration of 16 months and 3 partners.
The first group of grants, with amounts comprised between 50 and 100 thousand EUR,
already represented a relevant portion of the population in the Erasmus+ 2014-2020
programme, while the second group with amounts below 50 000 EUR, could be considered as
marginal. However, in the Erasmus+ 2021-2027 programme, the objective of the new action
“Small scale partnerships” is to increase the involvment of smaller organisations and
newcomers to the programme, which translates into a higher number of grants of small
amounts. This motivates the choice to propose a standard amount below 50 000 EUR to
attract this specific group of beneficiaries.
Based on the analysis above, the average values which would allow to cover the typical costs
of projects under the 2014-2020 funding rules are 35 000 and 75 000 EUR. However, in order
to stimulate participants to achieve efficiencies and seek the best value for money in their
projects, the predefined amounts for the lump sum contributions will be respectively 15% and
20% lower than the average value calculated above. The predefined amounts are therefore the
following:
a) 30 000 EUR
b) 60 000 EUR.
Applicants will select the requested amount between the two options above, based on the
proposed level of complexity, ambition and duration of their project.
The minimum requirements for both budgets are the presence of two partners and the
definition of a plan of eligible activities. The completion of the project activities constitutes
the condition for the payment of the lump sum contribution.
37
The adequacy of the selected amount to the proposed project activities and their value for
money will be a central element of the quality assessment in the evaluation of proposals at
selection stage. Only proposals obtaining a sufficient score in these aspects will be selected
for funding.
3.3 Support and network functions of the National Agencies
Apart from their role in the implementation of the programme under a contribution
agreement, some National Agencies receive specific Union contributions for the following
support and networking functions:
- National VET Team:
- Eurodesk: European youth information network providing information on learning
mobility for young people.
- SALTO (Support, Advanced Learning and Training Opportunities): network of
resource centres organising trainings for organisations and agencies involved in the
Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps programmes.
The EU contribution to these activities implemented by National Agencies will take the form
of a single lump sum.
The amount of the single lump sum will be determined for each contribution based on the
estimated budget of the action proposed by the Agency. The Commission will fix the lump
sum of each contribution based on the proposal, evaluation result, funding rates and the
maximum contribution amount set in the work programme.
Based on these principles the following steps will be taken to calculate the amount of the
lump sum contribution:
3.3.1 EU contribution proposal

National Agencies will provide an estimated budget for the work to be carried out under the
action (using the submission form template). The budget can be split into work packages and
eligible cost categories.
a) The National Agencies must provide their proposals in form of activity plans, with a
breakdown of the lump sum showing the share per work package (where applicable);
c) Proposals for lump sum contributions must contain the resources and a detailed cost
estimate per work package;
d) The co-financing rate will be applied to the total estimated eligible costs, using the funding
3.3.2 Evaluation
a) Proposals will be evaluated according to the standard evaluation procedures with the help
of internal and/or external experts. The experts will assess the quality of the proposals, against
the requirements defined in the work programme and the expected impact, quality and
efficiency of the action.
b) For each work package, the estimated budget will be assessed for accuracy and if the
appropriateness of the resources proposed and the split of lump sum shares allows achieving
the activities and expected outputs, to be achieved in the light of the proposed resources.
38
To ensure equal treatment and benchmark the estimated activities and costs, the experts will
c) They will propose to remove some ineligible costs and/or actions from the proposal, as e.g.
cost of activities outside the eligibility period, costs not permitted in the action.
d) They will check that the costs proposed are in line with the National Agency’s work
programme specifications, the appropriateness of the split of the work packages and the
quality of the outputs

a) Following the activity plan evaluation, the authorising officer will establish the amount of
the lump sum, taking into account the findings of the assessment carried. If cost or activities
items are adapted, the lump sum and the lump sum breakdown are modified accordingly.
b) The final lump sum is included in the contribution agreement as the maximum contribution
amount. It is calculated by the Commission by applying the co-financing rate set out in the
work programme specifications to the total estimated eligible costs in the budget table.
c) The maximum amount established for the country allocations in the Commission’s Annual
work programme will be respected.
4 Sound financial management, co-financing principle and absence of double

financing
All methodologies described above and the previous Commission authorising decisions
C(2013)8550 and C(2017)6864 comply with the principles of sound financial management,
co-financing and absence of double financing as required by the Financial Regulation.
4.1 Reasonable compliance with the principle of co-financing

The amounts set out in this decision are unit and lump sum contributions, meaning that the
principle of co-financing has been taken into account in setting the amounts. A maximum rate
of co-financing is foreseen for all the actions of the Programme. Notwithstanding the
principle of co-financing, the maximum funding rate can be up to 100%, as the beneficiaries
will bear additional costs which are not captured by the Union contribution.
The majority of the amounts set in this Decision are based on amounts authorised for the
2014-2020 period. As explained in the authorising decisions for that period, the contribution
amounts have been defined so as to ensure they are below, or at least close to, the actual cost
of the actions. For example, for the cost category “individual support”, the “Study on the
inclusiveness and adequacy of support for student mobility in higher education under the next
Erasmus+ Programme”, calculated that Union contribution covered between 34% and 42% of
the overall mobility costs incurred by students. As part of the 2013 assessment for defining
the methodology and levels of contribution, the proposed amounts were compared to past
grants awarded as well as to the real costs reported. This analysis indicated that amounts are
close to the real grants previously awarded on a global basis. Moreover, an analysis of the
typical budget structure of similar projects in the past showed that the costs represented by the
39
unit contribution is normally the largest element (average 75% of total eligible costs) of the
eligible cost and that other (ineligible) costs are systematically necessary for achieving the
objective of the action. This ensures that even if the unit contribution represents 100% of the
eligible costs it covers, the presence of other costs ensure that, overall, the co-financing
principle is respected.
Simulations were carried out for each contribution individually, but also by country and by
sector (where several sectors are concerned by the same unit cost), to ensure that structural or
significant isolated deviations from the historical levels of grant are limited when balanced
with the overall goal of a simplicity and attractiveness for beneficiaries, thus ensuring the co-
financing principle is respected on an overall basis.
Furthermore, a cap is set for contributions to costs of actions such as Jean Monnet Projects or
Key Action 2 Cooperation partnerships to add further assurance to ensuring co-financing on
an overall basis, but not necessarily in all projects. The cap has been set with reference to
simulated budgets compared to past budgets at a lower level than the simulated total costs.
Indeed, the simulations indicate that the average amount of the Union contribution under all
grant items achieves the relevant Union co-financing rate as defined in the work programme,
thus ensuring the respect of the co-financing principle on an overall basis. The overall co-
financing rate of overall grants by action is lower than the individual ones because it takes
account of eligible costs which do not receive a contribution (e.g. under the project results
support a contribution to staff cost shall be made, but the eligible communication costs shall
not be taken into account).
Moreover, it can be verified during assessment stage that for any individual grant there are
additional resources necessary for the implementation of the action above that provided by the
EU contribution. Detailed guidelines and additional training in this respect shall be provided
to the national agencies.
4.2 Sound Financial Management

Sound financial management is ensured because the methodology used to calculate the
amounts set out in the decision ensure they are a proxy of the real costs. Moreover,
simulations have shown that the proposed methodologies result in amounts that are on
average comparable to but below the current real costs and/or real grants given (taking
account of at most the maximum level of co-funding), which ensures that the grants remain
attractive while respecting sound financial management.
In some cases there will be complementary sources of financing to that of the Union (e.g.
some individual mobility actions). When the Union contribution is set within a range (e.g.
Individual support), the overall external sources of financing are one of the factors which shall
be specifically taken into account when setting the contribution amount within the defined
range specified by the Commission. For example, in sending countries where little or no
external co-funding is available, the agencies can apply higher ranges than in countries with
greater external co-financing sources. In addition, the nature of the actions as detailed in the
Work Programme excludes the possibility of generating revenues through the action.
By nature, simplified forms of grant are a proxy of the underlying costs and not an exact
reimbursement of real costs. While great efforts have been invested to minimise negative
40
impacts on any country associated to the programme20, it cannot be avoided that the new
approach for 2021 - 2027 might result in different consequences for different countries. As
required by the Financial Regulation the impact of the new amounts shall be closely
monitored in order to be able to address any undesirable side effects. Intermediate reviews
and check-up/control mechanisms are foreseen in order to ensure that the approved
methodology is up to date throughout the whole programme period.
Lump sums for small-scale partnerships in KA2
In the case of small-scale partnerships under KA2, lump sum contribution amounts have been
set using data from projects implemented in the 2014-2020 period, which themselves were
funded using simplified forms of contributions. The amounts can therefore be expected to
represent a proxy of the real costs. However, to ensure sound financial management, a further
reduction of 15% was applied to the amounts.
4.3 Reasonable compliance with the principle of no double funding

There is no overlap between eligible costs. Unit costs refer to specific individual eligible costs
in many cases (e.g. travel, staff costs). Where this is not the case, the funding model ensures
that double funding is avoided by requiring additional outputs.
In the present Programme, double funding is prevented already effectively by preventive

controls at selection stage, by national and executive agencies and the Commission. The
Programme draws clear division lines between actions which reduces the risk that similar
activities can be undertaken under different actions by the same participants. Furthermore,
double funding is avoided by identifying all categories of eligible and ineligible costs related
to the supported activities.
In this respect, as from 2014 applicant organisations have been registered and controlled in
order to achieve unique identification and assist monitoring. Use of this unique identity
facilitates checking of multiple applications and reduce the potential for double funding.
Other tools are also available for national agencies to cross check the content of applications
to avoid that the same action is funded twice.
Control of participants in learning mobility will also be possible via the Beneficiary module
application that contains details of all mobility participants in mobility projects of the
Erasmus+ Programme.
41
for the following actions under the Erasmus + programme
1.1.1 Education and training
a) Key action 1: Learning Mobility
 Erasmus+ Virtual Exchanges
b) Key action 2: Cooperation among organisations and institutions

 Partnership for Excellence: Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Design Measures
 Partnerships for Innovation: Alliances
 Partnerships for Innovation - Forward Looking Partnerships
 Partnership for Excellence - Centres of Vocational Excellence
 Partnerships for cooperation in the field of Education and Training: European
NGOs
 European Universities
 EPALE - Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in Europe
 eTwinning - National Support Organisations
 Capacity Building in the field of VET
 Capacity Building in the field of Higher Education
c) Key action 3: Support to policy development and cooperation

 European Higher Education Area (EHEA) – Initiative to support to the
 Implementing renewed priorities for the European Agenda for Adult Learning
 The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement
(IEA) - International Civic and Citizenship Education survey (ICCS)
 The International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS)
 EUROSTUDENT VIII - Social dimension of European Higher
 Eurydice: Network of National units
 Support to the European Quality Assurance in Vocational Education and Training
National Reference Points EQA(VET)-NRP
 Support for further implementation of the graduate tracking initiative
 National Academic Recognition Centres (NARIC)
 Support to better knowledge in youth policy
 TALIS - Teaching and Learning International Survey
 PIAAC - Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies
 Policy Networks (EQF, EUROPASS, EUROGUIDANCE)
 National Erasmus Offices (NEOs)
 Social Inclusion and Common Values
 European policy network on teachers and school leaders
 European policy network in the field of education of children and young people
with a migrant background
 Civil Society Cooperation in the field of Education and Training
42
d) Jean Monnet actions
 Jean Monnet Actions in the field of Higher Education: Chairs, Modules and
Centres of Excellence
 Jean Monnet Policy Debate: Networks in the field of Higher Education and in
other fields of education and training
 Jean Monnet in other fields of education and training: Teachers Training and
Learning EU Initiatives
1.1.2 Youth
 Capacity building in the field of youth
 Partnerships for Cooperation in the field of Youth : European NGOs
 European Youth Together (Large and Small scale)
 EU Youth Dialogue: support to National Working Groups
 Civil society cooperation in the field of Youth
1.1.3 Sport
 Not-for-profit European sport events
 Small scale partnerships
 Cooperation partnerships
 Capacity Building in the field of Sport
 Dialogue with stakeholders - National Activities
The categories of eligible costs covered by the lump sum contribution are the following:
a) Personnel costs,
b) Travel and subsistence
c) Subcontracting cost,
d) Purchase costs,
e) Other cost categories,
f) Financing support to third parties
g) Indirect cost
The amounts of the lump sum contributions to be used shall be calculated in accordance with
point 3.
following actions under the Erasmus+ Education and Training - Key action 2
 Partnerships for Excellence: Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters, including Erasmus
The categories of eligible costs covered by the unit contributions are the following:
a) Student scholarships to individuals covering travel and installation costs and
subsistence costs,
43
b) Institutional costs covering staff costs (teaching), staff travel costs, invited guest
lecturers, promotion, dissemination, organisational costs (including insurance
for the students, financial support to students special needs , assistance with
accommodation, and other student services), administrative costs, and all other
costs necessary to implement a successful master programme,
c) Cost for special needs for the enrolled students
The amounts of the unit contribution to be used shall be calculated in accordance with point 3.
2 Justification
The use of lump sum and unit contribution will reduce the administrative burden and reduce
the scope for error in the cost claims, will speed up the payment process and will ensure an
effective risk control, while focusing on the quality of the results
The high number of actions and applications together with average amount of the grants
justify the use of simplified cost options.
This sytem will facilitate a wider access to the grants as the rules for participation,
implementation and reporting, are simpler and easier of understand for beneficiaries than the
classical budget based mechanism. It provides legal certainty to the beneficiaries and ensures
a better quality of the applications.
The diversity of actions and beneficiaries (profit making companies, public bodies, cultural
associations, universities, designated bodies…) within this programme, makes the use of lump
sum appropiate to facilitate the correct and complete implementation of the action.
The outputs of individual co-financed projects are tangible, qualifiable, and quantifiable (they
include scholarships, trainings, traineeship for students, mobilities, lectures, events…).
Finally, the use of lump sum and unit contributions can reduce the administrative costs for
participation in the programme and contribute to the prevention and reduction of financial
errors (i.e staff cost calculations…). It also simplifies the calculation of grant amounts, while
decreasing significantly the workload of both the beneficiaries and the granting authority (i.e
complexity of verification of real costs through underlying supporting documents…). As a
consequence, the payment procedures are accelerated
Erasmus+ is the EU Programme in the fields of education, training, youth and sport for the
period 2021-2027. Education, training, youth and sport are key areas that support citizens in
their personal and professional development. High quality, inclusive education and training,
as well as informal and non-formal learning, ultimately equip young people and participant of
all ages with the qualifications and skills needed for their meaningful participation in
democratic society, intercultural understanding and successful transition in the labour market.
The Erasmus+ programme is subdivided in 3 key actions and Jean Monnet actions under
Education and Training, Youth and Sport.
This Annex II part of the decision applies to centralised actions managed by the Agency
2.1.1 Key Action 2: Cooperation among organisations and institutions
The actions supported will bring positive and long-lasting effects on the participating
organisations, on the policy systems in which such Actions are framed as well as on the
organisations and persons directly or indirectly involved in the organised activities.
44
This Key Action is expected to result in the development, transfer and/or implementation of
innovative practices at organisational, local, regional, national or European levels.
 strengthened cooperation between organisations and institutions active in the
fields of education, training, youth and sport;
 development of innovative and inclusive approaches in addressing and reaching
out to target groups of education, training, youth and sport policies;
 increased participation of individuals with fewer opportunities in education,
training, youth and sport activities.
 increased digital capacity and readiness of organisations and institutions; a more
strategic and integrated use of digital technologies and support for support digital
transformation plans, open educational resources and open practices in education,
training, youth and sport;
 more modern, dynamic, committed and professional environments inside the
participating organisations: ready to integrate good practices and new methods
into daily activities; open to synergies with organisations active in different fields
or in other socio-economic sectors; strategic planning of professional
development for staff in line with individual needs and organisational objectives;
 increased capacity of organisations and institutions to work and cooperate at
EU/international level.
 improved sharing of good practices among organisations and institutions.
2.1.2 Key Action 3: Support for Policy Reform
Provides support to policy cooperation at European Union level, thereby contributing to the
development of new policies, which can trigger modernisation and reforms, at European
Union, and systems' level, in the fields of education, training youth and sport.
The actions implemented through Key Action 3 are intended to produce the main following
results:
 improved quality, equity and inclusiveness education and training systems as well
as youth and sport policies;
 higher degree of transnational cooperation and mutual learning between
competent authorities and policy makers in the fields of education, training,
youth and sport;
 increased knowledge and analytical capacity to support evidence-based policies
in the fields of education, training, youth and sport;
 availability of sound comparative international data and appropriate secondary
analyses for European and national policy making;
 improved tools for assessment, transparency and recognition of skills and
qualifications acquired through formal, non-formal and informal learning;
 good functioning of European networks in charge of guidance and implementing
tools that foster the transparency and recognition of skills and qualifications
acquired through formal, non-formal and informal learning;
 active involvement of civil society networks and non-governmental organisations
45
in policy implementation;
 increased participation of young people and youth stakeholders in the EU Youth
Dialogue;
 increased levels of participation of individuals in sport and physical activity
 higher degree of exchanges of good practices, dialogue, mutual learning and
cooperation among policy makers, practitioners and stakeholders from
Programme and Partner Countries;
 increased public awareness about European policies in the fields of education,
training, youth and sport as well as increased awareness about the results of the
Erasmus+ Programme;
 greater synergies with other EU Programmes, such as the European Structural
and Investment Funds, as well as with funding schemes at national or regional
level.
2.1.3 Jean Monnet
a) Jean Monnet actions in the field of higher education enable higher education
institutions inside and outside the EU to promote teaching and research on European
integration and promote policy debate and exchanges involving the academic world
and policy-makers on Union policy priorities. The following actions are supported:
 Jean Monnet Modules: short teaching programmes in one or more disciplines of
European Union studies;
 Jean Monnet Chairs: longer teaching posts with a specialization in European
Union studies for individual university professors, including Honorary Jean
Monnet Chairs (without grant);
 Jean Monnet Centres of Excellence: focal points gathering knowledge of high-
level experts in various disciplines of European studies, as well as developing
transnational activities and structural links with academic institutions in other
countries;
b) Jean Monnet actions in other fields of education and training supports learning about
the objectives and the functioning of the European Union and promotes active
citizenship and the common values of freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination
institutions in other fields of education. The following actions are supported:
 Jean Monnet Teacher Training: enables teachers in schools to develop new skills
and to teach and engage on EU matters, thus empowering them through a better
understanding of the EU and its functioning. It will offer opportunities to
education providers to develop content (teaching and training modules, materials
for teachers and trainers, etc.) and innovative tools as well as to carry out
activities within education and training institutions, to raise awareness and
exchange views about the European Union matters and subject studies;
 Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives: addresses schools and VET institutions the
current widespread lack of knowledge of the EU, its basic functioning and
objectives by promoting critical awareness of the EU. They will help young
Europeans become active and informed citizens, engaged in the democratic
processes that shape their future and that of the EU. The Learning EU initiatives
will enable teachers in schools and VET institutions to develop activities bringing
facts and knowledge on the European Union to a broad spectrum of learners, also
46
reaching out to their community (parents and families, local actors and
authorities).
c) Jean Monnet policy debate
 Jean Monnet networks in Higher Education: have as primary objective to collect,
share and discuss among the partners research findings, content of courses and
experiences, products (studies, articles, etc.).
 Jean Monnet networks in other fields of education: promotes an international
aspect to school education and exchange of good practices and co-teaching within
a group of countries. It will promote a common understanding on learning
methodologies relevant to EU issues among practitioners working under different
constraints such as differing national legislations and curricula structures.

The use of lump sum and unit contributions is essential for the actions where activities and
outputs are evaluated and approved by an ex-ante evaluation, based in objective and reliable
information (historical, statistical data…).
The risk of errors or irregularities is lower than when using real costs because there is no
reporting of actual costs. Moreover, beneficiaries have no obligation to provide documents to
the granting authority on the costs incurred. Notwithstanding this, they remain subject to
applicable accounting rules and the specific eligibility rules of the programme.
The lump sum and unit contributions are output-based, meaning the main condition for
payment is achievement of the pre-defined outputs. In terms of control, the granting authority
will undertake checks at the time of preparation of the grant, during the implementation of the
action and at the completion of the actions (through reports from funded projects, checks on
milestones and deliverables, reviews and/or audits).
The risk of fraud and the cost of controls of the triggering event, for the lump sum or unit cost
payment, are limited, since the proper implementation of the action is clearly defined and
output-based. If the conditions for payment of the lump sum or unit cost have not been met,
(e.g. a particular work package has not been completed or not as defined), or if the action that
entitles the unit cost has not been carried out (e.g. not travel made, not scholarship
implemented) and an undue payment was made to a beneficiary, those costs will become
ineligible and the granting authority will be entitled to reduce the grant and consequently
recover the undue paid amounts. All of this can be verified in the context of the granting
authority’s control and anti-fraud strategy, (AFS)21 that together with a long experience of
controlling simplified cost options will ensure a reasonable level of assurance,.
contributions
3.1 Method to determine the amount of the Union contribution in the form of lump
sums contributions for the following actions:
- Not-for-profit European sport events,
- Dialogue with stakeholders - National Activities,
21
The EACEA Anti-Fraud Strategy (AFS) and its related action plan 2018-2020 were adopted on 9 July 2018 by the Steering Committee
and approved by the college on 29 April 2019
47
- Jean Monnet Modules and Chairs,
- Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiative,
- Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Design Measures,
- Sport - Small scale partnerships,
- Sport - Cooperation partnerships,
- European NGOs Partnerships for cooperation in the field of Education and Training and in
the field of Youth
- Civil Society Cooperation in the field Education and Training and in the field of Youth
3.1.1 Not-for-profit European sport events
This action will support the preparation, organisation and follow up of not-for-profit sport
events, organised either in one single country or in several countries by not-for-profit
organisations or public bodies active in the field of sport.
The EU grant covers the following activities (non-exhaustive list): preparation and
organisation of the event, organisation of educational activities for athletes, coaches,
organisers and volunteers in the run-up to the event; organisation of side-activities to the
sporting event (conferences, seminars); training of volunteers; implementation of legacy
activities (evaluations, drafting of future plans); communication activities linked to the topic
of the event.
Each year the Agency receives 80-100 applications under this action with a result of 11 to 18
grants agreement signed.
The calculation of the lump sum contributions is determined based on an internal expert
judgement based on historical data of the total reimbursed cost of the financed projects.
A sample of 27 financed projects of 2016/2018 of the previous MMF (2014-2020), were pre-
selected for this analysis.
From this 27 financed projects we took out 4 projects with an average funding of 57 000, and
3 projects above 1 000 000 EUR that would be financed during the period 2021-2027 via
another funding mechanism.
Of the 20 projects (representing 70% of the total number of financed projects) covering 2
years of calls, the analysis identifies two types of events with clear different categories of
costs:
i. European local events where national events were replicated/organised in
different countries (e.g. Special Olympic football) event across 21
countries.
ii. European wide events in one programme country: one major event
organised with the participation of organisations from at least 10 different
countries (e.g. opening of the Women World Football cup in Copenhagen).
These two types of events have specific characteristics in terms of funding:
48
i. The European wide events were awarded a Union contribution ranging between 400 000
and 500 000 EUR and while European local events were awarded a Union contribution
between 200 000 and 300 000 EUR.
The correlation of the grant awarded with the number of events being higher than the one with
the number of countries (0,93 vs 0,63) it was decided to use the former as parameter to
generate the lump sum.
ii. For European local event actions, each event must be held in each of the Programme
countries of the participating organizations. The grant requested will correspond to the
amount assigned to the number of participating events/organisations .
Based on the data at hand, a distinction should also be made between events replicated in less
than 6 countries, and larger scale replication (from 6 territories).
Programme countries to a maximum of 5 organisations coming from 5 different
Programme countries could request 200 000 EUR
Programme Countries could request 300 000 EUR
Simulations of these lump sums show that it would entail a global funding reduction of ~5%.
It can therefore be accepted as a reliable proxy of the actual cost.
The European wide event, are mono event with at least the participation of 10 organisations
from 10 different Programme countries. The activities must take place in the Programme
country of the applicant organisation involved.
The strand proposed will be set one event organised and the corresponding action will involve
10 or more countries at 450 000 EUR
The final payment will correspond to the completed work packages, with the limit established
in the maximum grant amount set in the grant agreement, and, without prejudice to the
application of the articles specifically related to payment conditions and grant reduction.
Simulations of this lump sum applied to actions implemented in the past show that it would
entail a global funding reduction of ~4%. It can therefore be accepted as a reliable proxy of
the actual cost.
i. European local events
Number events Funding

3 to 5 200 000 EUR
>or = 6 300 000 EUR
ii. European wide events
Number countries Funding

>or = 10 450 000 EUR
3.1.2 Dialogue with stakeholders - National Activities
49
The European Week of Sport initiative is part of an overall policy aiming at increasing the
level of participation in sport and physical activity in the EU. The main objective of the action
is to help to ensure that the European Week of Sport initiative is implemented and gets
visibility in the participating countries and that the messages of the Week reaches out to as
many Europeans as possible and encourages them to be active. To this end, the competent
ministries of each Member State appoints each organizing entities, National Coordinating
Bodies (NCB) that will perform three main tasks:
i. Event(s) organisation: each National Coordinating Body (NCB) must organise at least
one national event in their country, preferably during the European Week of Sport (23-
30 Sept.);
ii. Coordination: Ensure close links with national key players (e.g. National Olympic
Committees, sport federations and confederations, education institutions and schools,
etc.) who can play a role for the action before, during and after the European Week of
Sport;
iii. Communication: Ensure visibility for the European Week of Sport through national
and European campaigns.
The outputs are the sport events themselves and the communication campaign(s) with the
#BeActive message “let’s do sport”, as well as the network of stakeholders.
lump sum contributions
a) Data sources and sample
This action began in 2015 and since then has been modified and adapted to the needs of the
action. The level of funding has varied as more activities have been added and more needs have
been met. Therefore, the data selected was obtained from the latest implemented projects; 32
grant agreements signed in 2018 for actions implemented up to 2019.
For the following analysis we have considered the EU grant awarded after the co-financing rate
of 80% was applied .
b) Analysis
Most actions are concentrated between 150 000 and 200 000 EUR, with an average of 176
000 EUR.
Simulations have been carried out to verify the effect on the actual funding levels of applying
a number of amounts :
- an amount of 150 000 EUR results in an overall reduction in funding of 13,5%;
- an amount of 160 000 EUR results in an overall reduction in funding 8,3%;
- an amount above 160 000 EUR, although diminishing this funding gap, results
in overfunding of some smaller project by up to 14% (for 165 000 EUR) or to
18% (170 000 EUR) in some regions.
Based on this, and in order to ensure the principle of co-financing, the lump sum contribution
for this action is set at 160 000 EUR.
3.1.3 Jean Monnet Modules and Chairs
50
This action has used simplified cost options since 2010 and therefore the beneficiaries are
familiar with these methdologies. The new lump sums will be based on the previously used
unit costs and flat rates and will further simplify the implementation of the action.
 Jean Monnet Chair - a teaching post with a specialisation in European Union
studies for university professors or senior lectures. Only one professor may hold
the Chair and must provide a minimum number of teaching hours per academic
year.
 Jean Monnet Module - a short teaching programme (or course) in the field of
European Union studies at a Higher Education Institution. Each Module has a
minimum duration of teaching hours per academic year. Modules may concentrate
on one particular discipline in European studies or be multidisciplinary in
approach and therefore call upon the services of several professors and experts.
A significant added value of this system is the possibility to differentate the lump sum to
correspond to countries with similar teaching hour costs. This methodology will allow the
of each applicant and the teaching hours that they have declared in the application.
Moreover, simulations have shown that the proposed methodologies result in similar amounts
to the current use of flat rates and unit costs, which ensures that the grants remain attractive
while respecting sound financial management
a) Data sources
The simplified funding model for the Lifelong Learning Programme Jean Monnet was
established after a study carried out by EACEA and approved for the previous MMF period
2014-2020.
For the purposes of this new methodology, historical data from Jean Monnet Chairs and
Modules selected between 2014 and 2020 was extracted.
b) Sample
Data was extracted from the final activity reports of 203 projects from a population of 299
financed projects, specifically, 142 out of 227 for Jean Monnet Chair and 61 out of 72 for
Jean Monnet Modules.
c) Analysis
The lump sum has been estimated using the following information :
Unit cost for teaching costs per country approved in the previous MMF22, where the
minimum hourly teaching cost was set at 80 EUR and the maximum at 200 EUR. The
Jean Monnet Programme is open to participants and beneficiaries from all over the world.
Country teaching rate: is a flat rate for costs not associated with the preparation and
delivery of teaching programme (10% for a Chair and 40% of a Module) including non-
22
The system was introduced for these project types under the 2010 Call for proposals following the European
Commission’s approval of the 2010 EAC Annual Work Programme (C(2009)7734) of 7 October 2009 and
C(2013)8550 of 4 December 2013
51
teaching staff costs (for assistants, administrative staff, etc.), travel and subsistence costs,
dissemination costs, interpretation costs and other costs linked to event organisation,
teaching materials, etc. This top-up enables the beneficiary to implement the action
properly.
 The country teaching rate: flat rates of 10% and 40% are calculated as
percentages of the national teaching costs;
 The top-up percentage is higher for Module as more additional
(accompanying) activities are organised, and, several teachers/professors are
involved in the delivery of the teaching programme, whereas for a Jean
Monnet Chair only one staff member is responsible for the delivery of the
entire teaching programme;
In both cases, for the Module and the Chair, the top-up percentages have been set to reflect
the real costs typically incurred for each type of activity over the lifetime of the programme
and as such are based on actual expenditure.
The final payment will correspond to the hours finally implemented, with the limit established
in the maximum grant amount set in the grant agreement and without prejudice to the
application of the grant reduction articles in this regard.
In addition, using this lump sum the risk of irregularity on adding teaching hours without a
maximum limit is limited.
 Methodology for Jean Monnet Chairs
From a population of 227 financed projects belonging to the 2014-2020 MFF, a selection of
142 projects has been made through the following steps:
period* country teaching rate (110%) *75% co-financing;
b) After a screening of these projects, the non-compliant projects with the 100%
teaching rate (not 100% match between grant awarded and ex-post checked) were
removed;
c) In order to focus on countries having a specific teaching cost amount, projects from
“Other countries” were taken out of the sample.
Applying these parameters, a population of 142 projects is obtained amounting to EUR 6 624
898, covering actions from Programme and Partner countries
75% of the population is within the range 270-450 hours for teaching hours over the 3 year
period.
Using these results, a reference grid has been developed establishing different tranches with
the ratios of teaching hours and groups of countries (see Tables 1 and 2 below). The starting
point has been set to 270 hours (minimum requested hours) and it is increased by 30 hours for
each tranche with a maximum amount of the grant set at 50 000 EUR. The beneficiary will
request the amount corresponding to the number of hours they intend to teach over the 3 year
period. If at the final payment, those hours are not delivered, the amount of the grant will be
reduced to the amount corresponding to the tranche below, and without prejudice to the grant
reduction articles set in the grant agreement. The maximum grant amount set in the grant
agreement may not be exceeded.
52
application of the grid amounts ensures the best proxy to the reality of each action and
country, and the rule of non-profit is ensured.
The tranches are designed covering the 100% of the analysed population.
opportunity to reach the maximum lump sum contribution of 50 000 EUR.
Financial result of the simulation with this method: new budget within error margin (<1%):
6.597.00 vs 6.624.898 EUR.
 Methodology for Jean Monnet Modules
From a population of 72 financed projects belonging to the 2014-2020 MFF, a selection of 61
projects has been made through the following steps:
period* country teaching rate* (140%) *75% co-financing;
b) After a screening of these projects, the non-compliant projects with the 100%
teaching rate (not 100% match between grant awarded and ex-post checked) were
removed.
Applying these parameters gives a population of 61 projects amounting to EUR 1 544 867,
covering actions from Programme and Partner countries.
75% of the population is within the range 120-240 hours for the teaching hours over a 3 year
period.
Following this, a reference grid has been developed establishing different tranches with the
has been set to 120 hours (minimum numero of hours required) and it is increased by 30 hours
for each tranche with a maximum amount of the grant set at 30 000 EUR. The beneficiary
will request the amount corresponding to the number of hours they intend to teach over the 3
year period. If at the final payment, those hours are not delivered, the maximum amount of the
grant will be reduced to the amount corresponding to the tranche below and without prejudice
to the grant reduction articles set in the grant agreement. The maximum grant amount set in
the grant agreement may not be exceeded.
application of the grid amounts ensures the best proxy to the reality of each action and
country and the rule of non-profit is ensured.
The tranches are designed to cover the 100% of the analysed population.
opportunity to reach the maximum lump sum contribution of 30 000 EUR
Financial result of the simulation with this method: new budget within error margin <1%: 1
547 000EUR (vs 1 544 867 EUR).
53
Table 1: Lump sum for Jean Monnet Chair for Programme countries
Teaching hours over the 3 years period (Min 90/Year)
COUNTRY 270 - 300 301 - 330 331 - 360 361 - 390 391 - 420 421 - 450 451 - 480 481 - 510 511 - 540 541 - 570 571 - 600 601 - 630 631 - 660 661 - 690 691 - 720 721 - 750 > 750
Bul ga ri a , Roma ni a
Republ i c of North Ma cedoni a
18.000 € 20.000 € 22.000 € 24.000 € 26.000 € 28.000 € 30.000 € 32.000 € 34.000 € 36.000 € 38.000 € 40.000 € 42.000 € 44.000 € 46.000 € 48.000 € 50.000 €
Li echtens tei n
Serbi a
Turkey
19.000 € 21.000 € 23.000 € 25.000 € 27.000 € 29.000 € 31.000 € 33.000 € 35.000 € 37.000 € 39.000 € 41.000 € 43.000 € 45.000 € 47.000 € 49.000 € 50.000 €
Croa tia
La tvi a
Hunga ry
Pol a nd
Li thua ni a
25.000 € 28.000 € 31.000 € 34.000 € 37.000 € 40.000 € 43.000 € 46.000 € 49.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Czech Republ i c
Es toni a
Sl ova ki a
Portuga l
Greece
31.000 € 34.000 € 37.000 € 40.000 € 43.000 € 46.000 € 49.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Sl oveni a
Ma l ta
Cyprus
Icel a nd
37.000 € 41.000 € 45.000 € 49.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Spa i n
Ital y
Irel a nd
Fra nce
43.000 € 47.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Fi nl a nd
Bel gi um
Denma rk
Germa ny
Luxembourg
47.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Netherl a nds
Aus tri a
Sweden
Norwa y
54
Table 2 Lump sum for Jean Monnet Chair for Partner Countries
270 - 300 301 - 330 331 - 360 361 - 390 391 - 420 421 - 450 451 - 480 481 - 510 511 - 540 541 - 570 571 - 600 601 - 630 631 - 660 661 - 690 691 - 720 721 - 750 > 750
Partner Countries
Chile
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Mexico
Libya 21.000 € 23.000 € 25.000 € 27.000 € 29.000 € 31.000 € 33.000 € 35.000 € 37.000 € 39.000 € 41.000 € 43.000 € 45.000 € 47.000 € 49.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Antigua and Barbuda
Barbados
Other countries
Territory of Russia as recognised byinternational law
Bahrain 24.000 € 27.000 € 30.000 € 33.000 € 36.000 € 39.000 € 42.000 € 45.000 € 48.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Trinidad and Tobago
Saudi Arabia
Seychelles
Equatorial Guinea 31.000 € 34.000 € 37.000 € 40.000 € 43.000 € 46.000 € 49.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Oman
Israel
Korea, Republic of
37.000 € 41.000 € 45.000 € 49.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
New-Zealand
Japan
United Kingdom 43.000 € 47.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Brunei
Canada
Hong Kong
Kuwait
47.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 € 50.000 €
Qatar
Singapore
Switzerland
United Arab Emirates
United States of America
The series of simulations performed has shown that the difference between the total grant paid for all projects from the previous financing system and
the new lump sum system is lower to 1% .The average amount of the tranches already embeded the impact of the inflation for the period.
55
Table 3 Lump sum for Jean Monnet Modules for Programme countries
COUNTRY 120-150 151-180 181-210 211-240 241-270 271-300 301-330 331-360
Bul ga ri a , Roma ni a
Re publ i c of North Ma ce doni a
11.500 € 14.000 € 16.500 € 19.000 € 21.500 € 24.000 € 26.500 € 30.000 €
Li e chte ns te i n
Se rbi a
Turke y
Croa ti a
13.500 € 16.500 € 19.500 € 22.500 € 25.500 € 28.500 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
La tvi a
Hunga ry
Pol a nd
Li thua ni a
15.000 € 18.500 € 22.000 € 25.500 € 29.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Cze ch Re publ i c
Es toni a
Sl ova ki a
Portuga l
Gre e ce
19.000 € 23.000 € 27.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Sl ove ni a
Ma l ta
Cyprus
I ce l a nd
22.000 € 27.500 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Spa i n
I ta l y
I re l a nd
Fra nce
26.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Fi nl a nd
Be l gi um
De nma rk
Ge rma ny
Luxe mbourg
28.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Ne the rl a nds
Aus tri a
Swe de n
Norwa y
56
Table 4 Lump sum for Jean Monnet Modules for Partner countries
120-150 151-180 181-210 211-240 241-270 271-300 301-330 331-360
Partner Countries
Chile
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Mexico
Libya 11.500 € 14.000 € 16.500 € 19.000 € 21.500 € 24.000 € 26.500 € 30.000 €
Antigua and Barbuda
Barbados
Other countries
Territory of Russia as recognised
by international law,
Bahrain,
Trinidad and Tobago 15.000 € 18.500 € 22.000 € 25.500 € 29.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Saudi Arabia
Seychelles
Equatorial Guinea 19.000 € 23.000 € 27.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Oman
Israel
Korea, Republic of
22.000 € 27.500 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
New-Zealand
Japan
United Kingdom 26.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Australia
Brunei
Canada
Hong Kong
Kuwait
28.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 € 30.000 €
Qatar
Singapore
Switzerland
United Arab Emirates
United States of America
57
3.1.4 Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives
The Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives is a short teaching programme (or course) in the
field of European Union studies at schools or VET providers at level ISCED 1-4. Each
Learning EU initiative action has a minimum duration of 40 teaching hours per school year
over 3 years period. The Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives action concentrates on the
creation of experiences with a focus on learning outcomes about the European Union and its
policies for pupils in both primary or secondary schools. Schools will create the learning
content and must provide a minimum number of learning hours per school year. Learning EU
Initiatives cover only programme countries.
This action follows a lump sum funding model for grants. This funding scheme will allow
putting the focus on the outputs rather than the inputs, thereby placing emphasis on the quality
and level of achievement of measurable objectives.
A significant added value of this model is the possibility to differentiate the lump sum
according to groups of countries with similar teaching hour costs. Doing so will allow the
of each applicant.
This action is a mirror action of Jean Monnet Modules23 but with different actors. Jean
Monnet Modules are developed by Higher Education Institutions while Jean Monnet Learning
EU initiatives is to be developed by schools and VET providers at level ISCED 1-4.
Jean Monnet Modules have been implemented with simplified cost options since 2010. For
the new MFF 2021_2027, a new simplified cost – based on a lump sum approach- was
developed (see 3.1.3).
The amounts of the grants for each tranche have been set according to the country of the
applicants, which are grouped by similar standards of living. It ensures that the grants remain
attractive while respecting sound financial management. In addition, using this lump sum the
risk of irregularity on adding teaching hours without a maximum limit is limited.
Learning EU initiatives is built on the existing methodology for Jean Monnet Modules, which
is developed based on two factors: a) the unit value of teaching hours per country and b) the
flat rate for additional costs not associated with the preparation and delivery of teaching
programs.
As a basis:
 Minimum of learning hours is set at 40 hours per year over a 3-year period, exactly
like for Jean Monnet Modules;
 Five tranches of learning hours have been established over a 3-year period while for
Jean Monnet Modules there are eight tranches;
23
Jean Monnet Module being a short teaching program (or course) in the field of European Union studies at a
Higher Education Institution. Each Module has a minimum duration of teaching hours per academic year.
Modules may concentrate on one particular discipline in European studies or be multidisciplinary in approach
and therefore call upon the services of several professors and experts.
58
 The grouping of countries, having a similar living cost, is the same as for Jean
Monnet Modules;
 The value of teaching hours was established based on historical data in projects
showing the actual remuneration of professors within the same group of countries;
 A correction of 15 % was applied due to the difference in salaries between academic
staff and teachers;
 A 40% flat rate was applied as a top-up for costs that are not associated with the
preparation and delivery of teaching programs, such as non-teaching staff costs (for
assistants, administrative staff, etc.), travel and subsistence costs, dissemination costs,
interpretation costs and other costs linked to event organization, teaching materials,
etc., - like for Jean Monnet Modules.
 Unit value of teaching hours

For Jean Monnet Modules, the unit value of teaching was built on the basis of unit cost for
teaching costs per country from historical project data.
For Jean Monnet Learning EU Initiatives, a difference of 15% has been applied to reflect a
salary difference between academic staff and teachers in school.
This was based on the following elements:
 ISCED 1-4 covers schools while ISCED 6-7-8 covers universities.
 There are only data for 9 European countries.
 The teachers’ salaries are taken from Eurydice study « Teachers’ and School Heads’
Salaries and Allowances in Europe 2018/19» and, more specifically, on page 25
Figure 7: Average annual gross actual salaries (EUR) of teachers aged 25-64 in public
schools, 2018/19.
 Information about remuneration of professors was taken from pages 75-76 in Eurydice
study «Modernisation of Higher Education in Europe: Academic staff - 2017 ». This is
based on surveys including self-reported pay.
59
Based on the above analysis, the average teacher’s remuneration for these countries is about
84% of the average remuneration of senior staff at university.
Staff at universities progress rapidly to higher pay scales whereas they can have about 10%
income from other sources. Assuming 70% at senior staff at university times €54,000 and
30% at junior staff level at university times €32,400 multiplied by 1,10 for other
compensation, the end result indicates again a ratio of about 84% between the average teacher
salary of €45,168 in these 9 countries and the average remuneration of senior staff at
university.
Therefore, this analysis reflects that school teachers’ salaries are about 15% lower than
academic staff.
 The flat rate for costs not associated with the preparation and delivery of teaching
programs
The lump sum includes a flat rate for costs not associated with the preparation and delivery of
teaching programs. Learning EU initiatives is the same action than a Jean Monnet Module.
Therefore, the flat rate covers exactly the same activities including the non-teaching staff
costs (for assistants, administrative staff, etc.), travel and subsistence costs, dissemination
costs, interpretation costs and other costs linked to event organisation, teaching materials, etc.
Consequently, the flat rate proposed for EU learning initiatives will re-use the 40 % top up
used in Jean Monnet Modules.
In summary, the following formula has been applied: “Total number of teaching hours for a 3
years period* country teaching rate from Jean Monnet modules country teaching rate*(85% to
reflect salary difference between university staff and school teachers * (140%) top-up *80%
co-financing”
This gives the following end result for the lump sums:
Learning EU initiatives
Groups of countries24 Tranche 1 Tranche 2 Tranche 3 Tranche Tranche

4 5
120-150 151-180 181-210 211-240 ≥241
Bulgaria, Romania, 10.250 12.500 14.750 17.000 19.250

Republic of North
Macedonia, Liechtenstein,
Serbia
Turkey, Croatia, Latvia 12.000 14.750 17.500 20.000 22.750
24
If new countries will join the program, their participation would be included in the same group of living
conditions as the one established for Jean Monnet Modules
60
Hungary, Poland, 13.500 16.500 19.750 22.750 26.000
Lithuania, Czech Republic,
Estonia, Slovakia
Portugal, Greece, Slovenia, 17.000 20.500 24.000 27.750 30.000

Malta
Cyprus, Iceland, Spain, 19.750 24.500 29.000 30.000 30.000

Italy
Ireland, France, Finland 23.250 28.500 30.000 30.000 30.000
Belgium, Denmark, 25.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 30.000

Germany, Luxembourg,
Netherlands, Austria,
Sweden, Norway
3.1.5 Erasmus Mundus Joint Master -Design Measures

The Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Design Measures (EMJM-DM) is a new independent
action aiming to facilitate the setting up of new joint master programmes in the framework of
new partnerships and to involve Erasmus Mundus underrepresented regions, institutions and
thematic areas.
Under the former Erasmus+ Programme, there were no design / accompanying measures
linked to the Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Degrees. In this sense, the EMJM – Design
Action is a new initiative. However, similar actions (‘accompanying measures’) have been
running under the earlier funding generation (2007-2013).
 The grants awarded (based on real costs) under the Lifelong Learning Programme
– Accompanying Measures Erasmus action (2007 – 2013, LLP-AM) have been
taken as reference action for the following reasons: Similar target field (higher
education) and beneficiaries (mainly higher education institutions);
 Similar objectives, namely contributing to the modernisation agenda of Higher
Education and enhancing the implementation of Erasmus Mobility. The LLP-AM
Erasmus gathered different European higher education institutions (HEIs) into
small consortia (consortium size between 2 to 25 partners) to discuss cooperation
on concrete topics in an academic setting25;
 Comparable duration of the agreement (12 to 18 months);
 Same range of eligible activities and related cost items. Both actions consider as
eligible academic staff costs (for preparation time and course revisions),
25
LLP-Accompanying Measures: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/sites/2007-2013/lifelong-learning-programme_en
61
international travels (to consortium meetings, e.g.), small equipment (promotion
material), subcontracting (experts, website designer, ad hoc studies) and indirect
costs.
As for the EMJM-DM, in the LLP-AM, beneficiaries were expected to identify a number of
work packages, to which they could allocate different costs. An analysis of the (real) costs
reported by the 45 beneficiaries shows a large variation between the costs reported (see last
column of the table below). This variation reflects the different needs and situation of the
partner institutions and is expected to be comparable for the EMDM.
Indeed, some consortia may already have had a prior (research, teaching) cooperation or may
be already advanced in some aspects of their cooperation (e.g. curriculum development).
Therefore, they need to have the flexibility to focus on specific topics, which may generate
different costs.
In the table below, an overview of all 45 projects grants (funded between 2007 and 2013
under LLP-AM) per cost category is provided, on the basis of which the average grant amount
per project was calculated.
Total paid LLL- Average grant Range (€, minimum

AM- Erasmus contribution per and maximum
(€, 45 projects) project (€) across 45 projects)
Staff costs 3 223 769 71 639 22 000 to 123 200
Travel and subsistence costs 894 110 19 869 0 to 63 188
Equipment 7 254 161 0 to 1 185
Subcontracting 357 036 7 934 0 to 34 494
Other costs 1 120 736 24 905 0 to 81 485
Indirect costs 317 731 7 061 0 to 9 813
Total 5 920 635 131 570 70 000 to 150 000
The average grant amount per project for the LLP-AM Erasmus was thus € 131 570, whereby
the Union grant contribution covered maximum 75% of the total eligible costs. The actual
total costs for one LLP-AM project can be estimated at € 175.427.
Furthermore, an indexation of 6.77%26 is applied in order to adapt the costs to the current
price levels, which leads to an average cost of € 187.303 per project.
The EMJM-DM action is intended as an incentive to further cooperation and
internationalization, but not as a full-fledged funding scheme of these activities. The aim is to
cover specific activities related to the preparation of a joint programme, but it can be
reasonably expected of the higher education institutions involved to co-finance most of the
26
Eurostat, Harmonized Consumer Price Index for EU-27, 2015 = 100; whereby 2013 MTH1 = 98.34 and 2020
MTH5 = 105.00; https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do
62
activity cost. This applies in particular to the staff costs, comprising also regular academic
tasks related to e.g. curricular activities, developing student monitoring mechanisms and joint
teaching approaches. Moreover the agreement of the institutions to cover a substantial part of
the costs will be a sign of their commitment and therefore a guarantee for the long term
sustainability of the endeavor.
The Union contribution to the grant will therefore be set at 55.000 EUR per project, which is a
funding rate of 29.36 %.
Erasmus Mundus Joint Master Design Measures
LUMP SUM 55.000
3.1.6 Sport - Small scale partnerships

(European NGOs)
This is the part managed by EACEA of the action Cooperation partnerships, described under
paragraph 3.2.1 in Annex 1 above.
The primary goal of this action is to allow organisations and institutions to increase the
quality and relevance of their activities and/or develop and reinforce their networks of
partners, thus increasing their capacity to operate jointly at transnational and international
level, boosting internationalisation of their activities, exchanging new practices and methods,
as well as sharing and confronting ideas.
Youth
The Civil Society Cooperation (CSC) actions in the fields of Education and Training (E&T),
and in Youth are operating grants for organisations working in the areas specified. The
objective of the action is to support the functioning of these organisations. These
organisations aim at facilitating cross-country cooperation to promote knowledge and policy
transfers for learning and supporting EU objectives and priorities among the relevant
stakeholders as well as relay their views to the Commission.
The CSC action provides structural support to 2 categories of stakeholders in the fields of
Youth and E&T:
 European non-governmental organisations (ENGOs);
 EU-wide networks (formal for E&T; informal for Youth)
63
The Civil Society Cooperation actions existed in both the 2007-2013 and the 2014-2020
Erasmus+ programmes. In 2014-2020, the funding model was unit cost based with two unit
costs defined (staff costs and statutory meetings)27. This model facilitated the execution of the
grants for the stakeholders because of their simple set-up and support of essential functions
within the organisations. A move to lump sum funding model for future operating grants
would simplify even more the applicants’ and beneficiaries’ project management: the
previous use of unit costs entailed extra calculation for the final grant (number of staff and
number of meetings). The new lump sum model will be based mainly on staff costs and would
simplify the implementation of the action by reducing the administrative burden of the
recipients which are largely small sized organisations doing work directly with education and
training, and youth target populations. As a knock-on effect, it would also simplify the
reporting and payment analysis for the EU services allowing a faster delivery of grant for the
benefit of the stakeholders.
The main cost category of organisations working on civil society cooperation is ‘staff costs’
as confirmed by the real cost data supplied for the 2022 CSC selection funded with budget-
based model. Data collection at reporting and submission stage shows that staff costs make up
between 65 and 80% of total costs. The remaining costs are to be classified as ‘other eligible
costs’ (subcontracting, travel and subsistence, equipment and other goods, works and
services). In order to cover the main driver of eligible costs, and in order to ensure respect of
sound financial management, the lump sum funding will be essentially based on ‘staff costs’.
The data used in order to determine the lump sum was collected from final reports of projects
selected in 2020 (ENGOs and EU-wide Networks). Even though the action was funded with
unit costs, the final reports provided documentation on real staff costs incurred (payslips of
staff in education, training and youth organisations). In addition, the reports provided data on
number of employees per organisation.
The analysis of data reveals that there is a wide spread in salary levels. The average yearly
salary level in the sample for the CSC E&T employees was approximately EUR 37.000 and
EUR 27.000 for youth, with the average number of staff being respectively 5.05 and 4.1.
The table below shows the basic information used for the lump sum funding levels.
Field Sample Average salary Standard deviation
(rounded)
E&T 106 37.000 17.000

Youth 329 27.000 15.000
As the data collection of salaries showed a wide variation, it is proposed to:
 Differentiate the funding of Youth organisations from the Education and Training
organisations,
 Set three lump sum amounts depending on the number of staff (between one and two,
between three and four, and five or more) for ENGOs and informal networks,
27
C(2014) 6145 final: Commission Decision authorising the use of reimbursement on the basis of unit costs for the Civil
Society Cooperation actions under the Erasmus+ Programme
64
 Distinguish between ENGOs and EU-wide formal networks for E&T (an umbrella
organisation of European non-governmental organisations (ENGOs).
The average total costs of the 2022 E&T projects was EUR 155.00028. Applying the co-
financing rate for this action of 90% results in a lump sum contribution of EUR 140.000.
Taking into account the average salary level of EUR 37 000, the contribution of EUR 140.000
is set as the middle value lump sum of between 3 and 4 staff.
E&T (figures in EUR)

155.000 140.000 37.000 3,78
From this, regression analysis is used to determine the amounts for the other contributions for
actions with one to two staff (EUR 105.000), or more than five (EUR 175.000).
Based on the 2020-2021 data of the selected organisation, the average costs after applying the
90% co-financing for EU-wide formal Networks was EUR 530.000. However, due to the
maximum amount of the grant set in the work programme, this is limited to EUR 330.000.
The methodology of this specific category has been therefore based on the multiplication of
the average staff costs (EUR 37.000) by the number of staff.
Consequently, the maximum grant allowed by the call being EUR 330.000 the same
extrapolation has been used to determine the amount for the other contribution with seven to
eight staff.
Education and Training
ENGOs
CSC
and For EU-wide formal From 7 to 8 staff members EUR 280.000
Training Networks 9 or more staff members EUR 330.000
Youth
Applying a similar method for youth, the total average cost for 2022 projects was found to be
EUR 126.000. Applying the co-financing rate of 80% resulted in a lump sum contribution of
EUR100.000. Taking into an average staff cost of EUR 27.000, this lump sum contribution
corresponds to the middle lump sum value for between 3 – 4 staff.
Youth (figures in EUR)
126.000 100.000 27.000 3,70
28 The budget higher than EUR 200.000 have been excluded for this calculation since they result in a grant largely above the
maximum grant amount set by the Call.
65
Again, applying regression analysis and the maximum amount of the grant to this contribution
of 100.000 leads to amounts of EUR 75.000 and 125.000 for the other lump sums of between
1 and 2 and more than 5 staff:

ENGOs and EU-
EUR 100.000
In order to assess the reliability of these lump sum contributions, a simulation based on 2022
selected ‘projects’ with this methodology shows:
 Youth: new budget within error margin (<3%): EUR 4.450.000 vs EUR 4.262.007.
 E&T: new budget has increased due to both the new co-financing rate of 90%
(i/o80%) and the global increase of the maximum amount (EUR 125.000 to EUR
175.000) EUR 2.614.668 vs EUR 3.725.000.
The table below shows the global view of the lump sum funding levels for CSC E&T and
Youth for 2023-2027.

ENGOs
CSC From 3 to 4 staff members EUR 140.000
and
Training For EU-wide formal
Networks 9 or more staff members EUR 330.000
ENGOs and EU-
EUR 100.000
The number of staff employed per organisation will be checked by the Agency at final report
stage.
3.2 Method to determine the amount of the Union contribution in the form of lump
sums contributions for the following actions
 European Higher Education Area (EHEA) – Initiative to support to the
 Jean Monnet Centres of Excellence in the field of Higher Education
 Jean Monnet Policy Debate: Networks in the field of Higher Education and in other
 Jean Monnet Teachers Training in other fields of education and training
 National Academic Recognition Centres (NARIC)
 European Universities
66
 Support for further implementation of the graduate tracking initiative
 Partnerships for Innovation: Alliances
 EPALE - Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in Europe
 Support to better knowledge in youth policy
 eTwinning - National Support Organisations
 EQAVET - European Quality Assurance in Vocational Education and training -
designated bodies
 Partnerships for Innovation: Forward looking
 The International Computer and Information Literacy Study (ICILS)
 National units for the Eurydice network
 Implementing renewed priorities for the European Agenda for Adult Learning
 TALIS - Teaching and Learning International Survey
 PIAAC - Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies
 EUROSTUDENT VIII - Social dimension of European Higher
 The International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) -
International Civic and Citizenship Education survey (ICCS)
 European Youth Together (Large scale and small scale)
 Capacity building in the field of youth
 Capacity Building in the field of VET
 Capacity Building in the field of Higher Education
 Capacity Building in the field of Sport
 EU Youth Dialogue: support to National Working Groups
 Partnership for Excellence - Centres of Vocational Excellence
 Policy Networks (EQF, EUROPASS, EUROGUIDANCE)
 National Erasmus Offices -NEOs
 Erasmus+ Virtual Exchanges
 Social Inclusion and Common Values
 European policy network on teachers and school leaders
 European policy network in the field of education of children and young people with a
migrant background
The amount of the single lump sum contribution will be determined for each grant based on
the estimated budget of the action proposed by the applicant. The granting authority will fix
the lump sum of each grant based on the proposal, evaluation result, funding rates and the
maximum grant amount set in the call.
Based on these principles the following steps will be taken to calculate the amount of the
lump sum contribution:
3.2.1 Grant proposal

Applicants will provide an estimated budget for the work to be carried out under the action
(using the submission form template). The budget will be split into work packages and
eligible cost categories, by beneficiary and its linked third party, as explained below
The applicants must fill in a detailed budget table, which enumerates the costs of each
beneficiary in the categories listed under point 1.
67
a) The applicants must provide in their proposal a breakdown of the lump sum showing the
share per work package (and, within each work package, the share assigned to each
beneficiary and linked third party);
c) Proposals for lump sum grants must contain the resources and a detailed cost estimate per
work package and per beneficiary and linked third party;
d) Indirect costs should be calculated by applying a flat rate of 7% to the direct cost;
e) The co-financing rate will be applied to the total estimated eligible costs, using the funding
3.2.2 Evaluation
a) Proposals will be evaluated according to the standard evaluation procedures with the help
of internal and/or external experts. The experts will assess the quality of the proposals, against
the requirements defined in the call and the expected impact, quality and efficiency of the
action.
b) Experts will need to have the necessary financial know-how as they will also have to check
the estimated budget and verify whether the resources proposed, and the split of work
packages, allows the achievement of the activities and expected outputs. For each work
package, the estimated budget will be assessed for accuracy and if the appropriateness of the
resources proposed and the split of lump sum shares allows achieving the activities and
expected outputs, to be achieved in the light of the proposed resources.
c) To ensure equal treatment and benchmark the estimated activities and costs, the experts
will consult statistical, historical or any other appropriate data on costs and resources from
d) They will propose to remove some ineligible costs and/or actions from the proposal, as e.g
cost of activities outside the eligibility period, costs not permitted in the action, indirect cost
included as direct cost.
e) They will check that the costs proposed are in line with the call specifications, the
appropriateness of the split of the work packages and the quality of the out puts

a) Following the proposal evaluation, the authorising officer will establish the amount of the
lump sum, taking into account the findings of the assessment carried out (including
recommendations from the evaluation committee). If cost or activities items are adapted, the
lump sum and the lump sum breakdown are modified accordingly during grant preparation.
b) The final lump sum is included in the grant agreement as the maximum grant amount. It is
calculated by the granting authority by applying the reimbursement rate set out in the call to
the total estimated eligible costs in the detailed budget table.
c) The minimum and maximum amount established in each call will be respected.
contributions for Erasmus Mundus Joint Masters (EMJM), including Erasmus
68
3.3.1 Justification
The EMJM aims to enhance the attractiveness and excellence of European higher education in
the world and attract talent to Europe, through a combination of a) institutional academic
cooperation to showcase European excellence in higher education, and b) individual mobility
for all students taking part in the EMJM, with EU-funded scholarships for the best students
applying.
The tangible outputs are the selected international EMJM study programmes, at Master
course level, jointly delivered and jointly recognised by HEIs established in Europe, and open
to institutions in other countries of the world; as well as the graduates of these master
programmes.
The new unit cost system will entail three key features:
Firstly, there will be a new unit cost system for student scholarships, leading to a significant
simplification for the students and for the consortia managing the scholarships.
Secondly, more visibility will be given to the institutional support of the action.
Thirdly, a unit costs system will be implemented for special needs allowances, contributing to
additional costs of students with disabilities.
3.3.2 Method to determine and update the amount of the Union contribution in the form of
unit contributions
3.3.2.1 Institutional unit contribution calculation
Under the former EMJMD (2014-2020), the funding ratio was approximately 5% of the grant
for the management of the consortium delivering the joint master programme (in the form of
a lump sum) and 95% for the scholarships (as unit costs). However, these scholarships also
included ‘participation costs’ (namely tuition fees, insurance, etc.), which in reality were
directly claimed by the consortium to cover their running costs. In the EMJM, these
participation costs and the management lump sum will be merged into a new single
institutional unit cost. At the same time, the institutional unit cost system proposed creates an
incentive for the consortia to recruit self-funded students, which will increase their chances of
becoming fully sustainable after the project lifetime. In this sense, it is preferable over the
lump sum system as it was in vigour under the EMJMD project generation and will allow for
a more balanced contribution (in other words: programmes that attract more students will
obtain more institutional funding).
Similarly, to the student scholarship contributions, a monthly unit cost will be introduced,
based on the number of enrolled students. This institutional unit cost will be the same for all
types of students (with or without scholarship) and will cover a proportionally larger share of
the actual cost to implement a master programme (approximately 80%).
As the EMJM action is open to HEIs from all over the world, statistical data covering a larger
area than only the EU or the Erasmus Programme Countries is required. The 2019 OECD
Education Indicators published in the OECD report: Education at a glance 201929, provide an
estimate of the average institutional cost per student for all types of education in all OECD
countries. The publication provides the total expenditure on educational institutions per full-
29
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/education-at-a-glance-2019_f8d7880d-en
69
time equivalent student as an average for all OECD countries (37 countries), which is an
appropriate basis to estimate the average cost of a student in a master programme organised
between higher education institutions in different countries from all over the world.
The indicators on which the OECD figures are based30 provide an assessment of the
institutional cost per student (as a national average). Expenditure per student on educational
institutions is influenced by core educational activities (teachers’ salaries and pension
systems, instructional and teaching hours, the cost of teaching materials and facilities),
ancillary services (i.e. costs related to student welfare, at tertiary level) and R&D activities
(laboratories, equipment, libraries etc.). The expenditure per student on educational
institutions at a particular level of education (tertiary – long cycle in the case of Erasmus
Mundus) is calculated by dividing total expenditure on educational institutions at that level by
the corresponding full-time equivalent enrolment. Excluded from these indicators are e.g.
costs for countries’ education ministries and other non-institutional investments. The Erasmus
Mundus Joint Masters aims to cover the same institutional costs (core educational activities,
ancillary services and research and development costs) and therefore the OECD figures are
considered an appropriate proxy.
Benchmarking the average OECD data against average data for 23 EU countries results in a
ratio of 98.9/100 and confirms the relevance of the data31.
The total expenditure on educational institutions per full-time equivalent student for tertiary
education of the long cycle (applicable to master level education as offered under the EMJM)
amounts to 16 576 USD-PPP per student per year for the average OECD country32.
As the EMJM involve a minimum of three HEIs from different countries, and often more,
taking the OECD average (ranging between high national averages of 51.000 USD for LUX
and the lowest of 7.143 USD for LV) is still preferable over applying separate country unit
cost rates. Calculating this combination of rates per country would be highly complex. Often
students in the same programme follow entirely different mobility paths (not all students
study at all partners of the consortium), which would require an individually calculated unit
cost for each student, each month. Moreover, the institutional contribution of the Union is
usually managed centrally by the coordinator, and allocated to the different partners based on
the consortium agreement, taking into account the real needs/costs of the different institutions.
An average is therefore likely to be more accurate for the situation of EMJD consortia, and far
more easily applicable than country-based rates, which would require specific unit costs for
each student. Moreover, OECD data would not allow us to cover all countries worldwide.
Furthermore, this OECD average amount is a generic average and are estimated to be an
underestimation for the EMJMs, considering that international master programmes require
more organisation than the average national master programmes on which these calculations
are largely based. Indeed, an international joint master requires additional coordination (e.g.
meetings and staff) and implementation costs (e.g. staff mobility, student services such as
help with registration, housing, visa, etc.) in comparison to ‘simple’ national master
programmes.
30For more information on the applied Methodology, please see the OECD Handbook for Internationally Comparative
Education Statistics 2018 and Annex 3 for country-specific notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/f8d7880d-en).
31 (Figure C1.2)
32https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org//sites/f8d7880d-en/1/2/4/1/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/f8d7880d-
en&_csp_=b2d87f13821f45339443c7ca94aafe46&itemIGO=oecd&itemContentType=book#tablegrp-d1e18349
70
Using the currency conversion based on the Purchasing Power Parities (PPPs), equalizing the
purchasing power of different currencies by eliminating differences in price levels between
countries indicated in the same OECD report33, the applicable exchange rate is set by the
OECD at 0.697 for reference year 2017 in the EU-28 countries, which leads to an equivalent
amount of 11.553 EUR per full-time equivalent student per year.
The EMJM action aims to enhance institutional academic cooperation. The commitment at
institutional level is crucial to achieve this, so it can be reasonably expected of the higher
education institutions involved to express this commitment in a co-financing contribution. For
this reason, the Union contribution will be limited to 78% of the OECD estimation of 11.553
EUR, namely 9.011. Like for the student scholarship unit cost (see below) and as the duration
of the studies may vary according to the length of the master programme, the unit costs will
be defined on a monthly basis: 750 EUR (9011/12).
This leads to an institutional unit cost of 750 EUR per enrolled student (with or without
scholarship) per month for all EMJM programmes.
3.3.2.2 Scholarship unit cost calculation
Under the former Erasmus+ EMJMD action, student scholarships included monthly
subsistence costs, travel and installation costs and a participation cost, directly claimed by the
consortium (see above). In the new EMJM action, the student scholarships will exclude the
participation costs, as scholarship holders will not have to pay for any costs related to their
participation in the course, (tuition fees, insurance coverage and any other mandatory costs).
The scholarship will thus consist of a monthly unit cost covering subsistence costs, travel
costs and installation costs jointly.
The calculation of this monthly unit cost is based on the former EMJMD student scholarships,
but applying the same scholarship amount for all students, irrespective of their residence and
nationality.
Under the Erasmus+ EMJMD action, the actual student scholarship depended mainly on:
 the student’s nationality (either from a Programme Country or Partner Country);
 the student’s place of residence (less than 2000km, between 2000km and 3000km
and more than 3000km from the first home institution);
 the duration of the master programme (12, 18 or 24 months).
This led to a scenario in which students could have quite different scholarships while
attending the same programme at the same place.
The calculation for the new simplified unit cost is based on the previous unit costs actually
paid to the last 3 generations of EMJMD students (2017, 2018, 2019).
In this period, an amount of 53.093.000 EUR was paid as scholarship contribution to travel
costs, an amount of 8.846.000 EUR to installation costs and 217.836.000 EUR to subsistence
costs. Divided by the numbers of respective student months applicable (number of students,
multiplied by either 12 - for 60 ECTS programmes, 18 - for 90 ECTS programmes or 24 - for
120 ECTS programmes), the average scholarship contribution under the EMJMD for the last
33
https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SNA_Table4
71
3 student generations was 1.284 EUR per month34. The proportion expected to be covered by
these unit costs varied between 75% and 95% of the overall costs, considering:
 the distance from the students’ residence to their first home institution;
 the obligation for all scholarship holders to study in a minimum of two different
Programme Countries;
 additional costs related to the issuing of visas and residence permits, as well as the
temporary accommodation needs after their arrival in each study destination;
 the students' destination countries, not known in advance and varying in number in
accordance with the JMD structure and/or the scholarship holder needs.
Excluded in these calculations were e.g. travels home in between semesters and/or academic
years and family arrangements made by scholarship holders
As these unit costs were defined by the Decision for EMJMD based on 2013 data, the
simplified new unit cost should takes into account a 6.77 % inflation rate35. The new unit
costs would thus increase to 1.370 EUR per month. Rounded up for communication purpose
and ease of calculation, this leads to a monthly unit cost rate of 1.400 EUR per month for all
scholarship holders in all Erasmus Mundus Joint Master programmes.
3.3.2.3 Special needs unit costs calculation
Cost for special needs for the enrolled students (with or without scholarship), in line with the
Decision authorising the use of lump sums contribution and unit contributions for the Marie
Skłodowska-Curie Actions under the Horizon Europe Programme 2021-2027.
In order to establish a special needs allowance based on unit cost, the MSCA special needs
unit costs36 will be applied.
MSCA performed an analysis of costs incurred for researchers/staff members with disabilities
(e.g. long-term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairments), participating in training
and research activities. Based on historical evidence, these costs were grouped according to
the average cost of the items or services considered. On this basis, a list of categories was
established based on quantitative and qualitative data, each corresponding to a range of costs.
Taking into account the existing margins due to different price levels of special needs items or
services across countries and the impact that fluctuations in the range from 1 000 to 2 000
EUR have at the lower end of the scale of the categories, the final unit costs were set as
follows:
34
Ranging between € 1.389 / mth for 90 ECTS students travelling from >4.000km, to 1.089 / mth for 120 ECTS students
from Europe, or less if their studies took place in their country of residence.
35 Eurostat, rate based on EU 27 (without UK) - HICP index (Index 2015 = 100), whereas 2013 MTH 1 is 98.34 and 2020
MTH 1 is 105.00.
36 For a more detailed justification of the costs and categories applied, please refer to the Decision authorising the use of lump
sums contribution and unit contributions for the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions under the Horizon Europe
Programme - Ares(2021)902919.
72
EUR 3 000 EUR 13 000 EUR 47 500
EUR 4 500 EUR 18 500 EUR 60 000
EUR 6 000 EUR 27 500
EUR 9 500 EUR 35 500
The triggering event for the payment of the special needs allowance will be the enrolment of a
student (with or without scholarship) with disabilities whose long-term physical, mental,
intellectual or sensory impairments are certified by a competent national authority and of such
nature that their participation in the action would not be possible without the special needs
items or services.
Beneficiaries shall claim the closest lower rate per student compared to the estimated actual
costs of his/her special needs. Special needs allowance may be assessed on a case-by-case
basis, in order to further ensure compliance with the principle of sound financial management.
Where this assessment shows that the needs described do not match the category of allowance
proposed, the Agency may adjust that the category of need be changed to reflect the
description.
Costs lower than 3 000 EUR and higher than 60 000 EUR shall not be reimbursed through the
special needs allowance.
The amount of the monthly unit contribution shall be calculated as follows:

{(special needs unit x (1/number of months)}
The number of months in the formula above shall correspond to the number of months the
special needs items or services were used or produced for implementing the action, depending
on the nature of the items or services. For one-off costs, the number of months shall
correspond to 1.
Enrolled students will declare what type of items/services are needed and their cost. The
applicable unit cost will be identified as the rate corresponding to or immediately lower than
the estimated expenses. This unit cost is a contribution, and is not intended to fully cover the
actual costs.
The use of the MSCA unit costs for special needs are justified under the EMJM as well,
because:
- The EMJM students are from the same target group, namely excellent
students/researchers from all around the world, from the same age group, selected on
the basis of their excellence with the same kind of training (classroom, group work,
etc.) and research (laboratory work, thesis, internships) activities;
- EMJM students with special needs will thus require the same type of assistance in
terms of travel, international mobility, infrastructural adaptations, technological
equipment and specific services (e.g. assistance by third persons, adaptation of work
environment, additional travel/transportation costs) than they need under the MSCA,
with similar costs.
Like for the Horizon Europe Programme, inclusiveness is a specific aim of the Erasmus+
Programme. EMJM should be accessible to all students, regardless of their origin,
background or the special needs they require
73
Finally, using the same special needs unit cost scheme means a significant simplification
for beneficiaries (universities applying for both EMJM and MSCA grants) and for
students (EMJM graduates often enrol in PhD programmes).
Erasmus Mundus Joint Master

Institutional unit per month/per enrolled student
750 EUR
cost
Scholarship unit per month/per scholarship holder
1400 EUR
cost
Special needs unit
(special needs unit x(1/number of months)
cost

financing
The principle of sound financial management, co-financing and no double financing are
ensured.
The methodologies explained in section 3 ensures sound financial management since they all
aim at establishing an amount which is a proxy of the real costs. The methodologies are based
on either costs reimbursed under the previous programme, statistical data or the estimated
budget of the beneficiary. The proposed budget in the application will have been assessed via
expert judgement based on reference and comparative data to ensure that the submitted
information is reasonable, and the overall feasibility of the project.
Co-financing will be ensured by applying the reimbursement rate set out for each action
during the preparation of the Grant Agreement. The co-financing is also ensured in actions
where the cost covered by the action are not fully covered with the value of the contributions,
and in some other actions the use of contributions guarantees the co-financing principle as it
was taken into account for the lump sum or unit cost calculation.
Absence of double funding can be ensured by clearly identifying in the call and in the grant
agreement all categories of eligible and ineligible the costs and activities which are covered,
and subsequently checking in e-Grants or other systems any potential overlapping with other
grants awarded to same beneficiary.
74
Electronically signed on 17/10/2022 20:24 (UTC+02) in accordance with Article 11 of Commission Decision (EU) 2021/2121

Ls and Unit Cost Decision Erasmus en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ls and Unit Cost Decision Erasmus en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ls and Unit Cost Decision Erasmus en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ref.

Version Publication date Changes

1.0 24/03/2021 Initial version

2.0 23/11/2021 Amendment to Annex 1

4.0 18/11/2022 Amendment to Annex 1

5.0 XX/XX/2023 Amendment to Annex 1

(3) Simplified cost options have been implemented in predecessor programmes to

THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN DECIDED:

Authorising Officer signature

Pia Ahrenkilde Hansen

2.1 Nature of the supported actions

Travel distances[1] Green travel Non-green travel

211 EUR per

309 EUR per

Between 2000 and 2999 395 EUR per

Between 3000 and 3999 580 EUR per

1735 EUR per 1735 EUR per

Action Amount of Union contribution (per mobility):

400 EUR per participant;

400 EUR per participant with a minimum of 15

- Activities with non-associated

3.1.2.1 Higher Education

Group 1: Group 2: Group 3:

KA2 short-term blended mobility 2014-2020

- Up to the 14th day of activity: 58

Average grant per participant 760 EUR

Average distance 1 040 Km

Average travel support 275 EUR

Average duration 8 days

Average individual support 464 EUR

KA1 short-term mobility 2021-2027

- Up to the 14th day of activity: 79

The rates determined by Decision C(2014)6158, as amended by Decision C(2017)6863 and

EU Member States and third Third countries not associated

Third countries not Group 2:

Table 5: Individual support for HE staff

Receiving country Min-Max (per

The resulting update of the levels of support is presented below:

Staff 107-191 EUR 95-169 EUR 84-148 EUR

13 Source: Erasmus+ Dashboard

Avg. country Avg. country Avg. country

VET learners 85 (+18.06%) 72 59 (-18.06%)

Table 6: Individual support for Youth exchanges and Youth workers

3.1.4.4 Mobility of staff in the field of sport

3.1.5 Preparatory Visits

3.1.6 Course Fees

3.1.8.1 Project management

Table 7: Coaching costs

Austria, Belgium, France,

Cyprus, Czechia, Estonia, , 137

Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary,

3.1.8.3 Youth participation events support

3.1.9 DiscoverEU Inclusion action

3.2 Key Action 2

All KA2 - 2014 - 2020

Table 8: Distribution of KA2 2014-2020 project budgets

SE VET HE AE YOUTH TOT %

Project meetings 10 600

Multiplier events 5 200