Evaluation of the BUILD UP Skills initiative under the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme ·...

COWI Belgium May – 2016

Evaluation of the BUILD UP Skills initiative under the

Intelligent Energy Europe Programme

2011 - 2015

Final report

EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) Unit: Unit B1 - H2020 Energy

Contact: Mrs Zoé Wildiers

E-mail: [email protected]

European Commission B-1049 Brussels

Evaluation of the BUILD UP Skills Initiative (BUS)

i

LEGAL NOTICE

This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the

views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use

which may be made of the information contained therein.

More information on the European Union is available on the Internet

(http://www.europa.eu).

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2014

ISBN: 978-92-9202-185-6

doi: 10.2826/23913

© European Union, 2016

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

PRINTED ON ELEMENTAL CHLORINE-FREE BLEACHED PAPER (ECF)

PRINTED ON TOTALLY CHLORINE-FREE BLEACHED PAPER (TCF)

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER

PRINTED ON PROCESS CHLORINE-FREE RECYCLED PAPER (PCF)

Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (EASME) Unit: Unit B1 - H2020 Energy

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers

to your questions about the European Union.

Freephone number (*):

00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone

boxes or hotels may charge you).

http://europa.eu.int/citizensrights/signpost/about/index_en.htm#note1#note1

ii Evaluation of BUILD UP Skills Initiative (BUS)

CONTENTS

1 Introduction 1

1.1 Aim and objectives of the evaluation 2

1.2 Methodology 3

1.3 Structure of the report 7

2 BUILD UP Skills Initiative in the context of the Intelligent Energy Europe programme 8

2.1 Policy context 8

2.2 The setting of the initiative 13

2.3 BUILD UP Skills' contribution to policy implementation 16

2.4 Pillar I projects 22

2.5 Pillar II Projects 28

2.6 EU Exchange meetings 29

3 Outcomes of the BUILD UP Skills Initiative 32

3.1 Pillar I projects 32

3.2 Pillar II projects 47

3.3 Priorities for the future 52

4 Conclusions and recommendations 57

4.1 Conclusions 57

4.2 Recommendations 67


iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

Acronym Description

CEDEFOP European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training

CfP Calls for Proposals

CIF Competitiveness and Innovation Framework

CVET Continuing Vocational Education and Training

DG ENER Directorate General for Energy

EACI Executive Agency for Competitiveness and Innovation

EASME Executive Agency for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises

EE Energy Efficiency

EED Energy Efficiency Directive, Directive 2012/27/EU

EPBD Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, Directive 2010/31/EC

ESF European Social Fund

EU European Union

FYROM Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

IEE Intelligent Energy Europe Programme

INTERREG Community initiative which aims to stimulate interregional cooperation

IVET Initial Vocational Education and Training

LLL Life Long Learning programme

MS Member State(s)

RES Renewable Energy Sources

SME Small and Medium Sized Enterprise

tCO2e Tons of CO2 equivalent

TOR Terms of Reference

VET Vocational Education and Training


1

1 Introduction

This report presents the evaluation of the BUILD UP Skills Initiative Pillar I and

identifies a methodology for the evaluation of the BUILD UP Skills Pillar II projects,

commissioned by the Executive Agency for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises

(EASME) under the Framework Contract SRD MOVE/ENER/ SRD.1/2012-409, Lot

3, Technical Assistance in the Field of Energy. The evaluation has been carried out

by an Evaluation Team consisting of COWI Belgium and Viegand Maagøe Den-

mark. The evaluation has been carried out between January and December 2015.

The evaluation covers 30 Pillar I projects (one in each EU 28 Member State plus

the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Norway), 22 Pillar II projects (in

21 Member States, Italy having 2 Pillar II projects) and the EU exchange meetings.

Only two of the Pillar II projects were finalised at the time of the evaluation.

The results of the evaluation will be used by EASME and DG Energy to report on

the effectiveness and sustainability of the initiative, as well as to provide a basis for

elaborating the future of the BUILD UP Skills Initiative under the Horizon 2020

programme.

2 Evaluation of BUILD UP Skills Initiative (BUS)

Figure 1 - Countries participating in the BUILD UP SKILLS Initiative

1.1 Aim and objectives of the evaluation

EASME commissioned this evaluation with the objective of evaluating the impact of

the BUILD UP Skills Initiative implemented under the Intelligent Energy Europe II

programme (IEE II). In addition, the aim of the evaluation is to provide a forward

looking set of recommendations in order to give input to the future orientation of the

initiative, notably in the context of the Horizon 2020 Energy Challenge which aims

at supporting the transition to a secure, clean and efficient energy system in

Europe.

The Horizon 2020 Energy Challenge is structured around seven specific objectives

and research areas1:

› Reducing energy consumption and carbon footprint; › Low-cost, low-carbon electricity supply;

› Alternative fuels and mobile energy sources; › A single, smart European electricity grid; › New knowledge and technologies; › Robust decision making and public engagement; and › Market uptake of energy and ICT innovation.

Under the energy efficiency area, energy efficiency in buildings holds an important

role for the European Union to reach its objectives by 2020. On average the

1 http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/secure-clean-and-efficient-energy


3

building sector represents 40% of the energy consumption of the European Union,

and 36% of the total CO2 emissions2. With an ageing building stock, Member

States will need to increase their refurbishment efforts in order to reach their

expected EE targets under the effort sharing decision. In Europe, residential buil-

dings represent 75% of the building stock against 25% for non-residential buil-

dings. More than 40% of the residential building stock in Europe was constructed

before the 1960’s when EE regulations hardly existed. In 2009, 68% of final energy

use was in buildings3. As of 1

st of January 2014, all Member States will need to

renovate 3% of the surface area used by central government administration every

year. In addition, all new public buildings after 31th December 2018 shall be nearly

zero energy buildings. This outlines the importance of public sector buildings in

achieving the 2020 EE objectives. Furthermore, all dwellings for sale or rent will

need an energy performance certificate.

1.2 Methodology

The following approach was adopted to carry out the evaluation of the BUILD UP

Skills initiative.

A set of evaluation criteria had been developed by EASME as a basis for this

evaluation report. During the phase of evaluation structuring, the Evaluation Team

broke down each evaluation question into judgement criteria and indicators in order

to scope the investigation under each question and provide a basis for the data

collection and analysis. The evaluation criteria can be found at the end of this

report. On the basis of these evaluation criteria an interview guide was developed

in order to collect qualitative information through interviews to be carried out with

EC staff and projects coordinators.

The Evaluation Team has collected relevant information at policy, strategy and

programme levels and also information concerning all Pillar I and Pillar II projects.

Information was collected from these sources against the judgement criteria and

indicators identified.

Project documents have been reviewed in order to establish availability and identify

information gaps, i.e. which information was not available and if there were specific

needs for additional document collection. Missing or unreliable information has

then been checked and collected through interviews and the e-survey.

Overall, the team reviewed more than 400 different project documents4 in addition

to the BUILD UP Skills project websites and other related IEE II funded projects5.

The documentation reviewed includes all Pillar I and II documentation made

2 European Commission, https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/energy-efficiency/buildings

3 Europe’s buildings under the microscope - A country-by-country review of the energy performance of

buildings, Buildings Performance Institute Europe (BPIE), 2011.

4 See Appendix D for details of the documentation reviewed.

5 Non-BUILD UP Skills projects' websites were visited when reference to them was found in BUILD UP

Skills documentation.

Evaluation

structuring

Document review


available by EASME, the BUILD UP Skills initiative and project websites; EU policy

and strategy documents and directives; etc.

In order to facilitate the telephone interviews and to ensure that the same

information was obtained from all the interviewees an interview manual was

developed and used for all the interviews hereby ensuring that the interviews are

documented in a coherent way.

Interviews have been carried out with the consortium coordinators of Pillar I and

Pillar II projects. In addition, the Evaluation Team also interviewed representative

of EU wide organisations based in Brussels and active in building related training

and vocational education.

Parallel with the document review and the interviews, an e-survey was designed in

order to collect information from a wider array of stakeholders thus reaching

consortium and platform members of both Pillar I and Pillar II projects. Based on

the analysis of the documents available and the preliminary interviews, the team

identified the areas of investigation to be included in the e-survey. The question-

naire contained both quantitative and qualitative (open and closed) questions. The

survey was distributed to all project coordinators, who were asked to send the e-

survey to the relevant platform members and stakeholders. Approx. 400 useful

answers were received. In this number there are both respondents, who have

answered all the questions and respondents who have only answered some of the

questions, but where the individual answers were still usable.

The following figures illustrate the background of the respondents of the e-survey.

43.9% of the respondents are consortium members and 26.9% are platform

members. The remainder of 29.2% are neither consortium member nor platform

members. This remaining part is a mix of representatives from education

institutions, energy agencies and other organisations.

Figure 2 - Respondent categorisation

Coordinators

interviews

e-survey


5

Figure 3 - Respondent's sector

The majority of the respondents come from the training and education sector

(41.2%), then from the building and construction sector (39.9 %) and there are 18.9

% from the energy sector6.

6 Since some respondents selected more than one sector, these figures are just a rough approximation.


Figure 4 is illustrating the number of answers to the e-survey for each country

divided into consortium members, platform members and those who have

responded “others” to the question: “which sector do you represent?”.

Figure 4 - Distribution of respondents broken down per country

In order to validate and test the conclusions and recommendations of this evalua-

tion, the Evaluation Team organised two workshops with key representatives. The

first workshop gathered representatives of key EU institutions that have a stake or

interest in the BUILD UP Skills initiative and its future. This focus group gathered in

DG ENER on 30th November 2015 with representatives from DG ENER, DG

EMPL, EASME, DG GROW and DG ENV.

The second workshop was organised on 19 January 2016 during the 7th BUILD UP

Skills EU exchange meeting in Brussels.

The aim of both workshops was to gather or confirm information where feasible in

order to strengthen the evidence base of the evaluation. It was also the occasion to

present the initial conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation to the

participants. These sessions provided an interesting perspective to the Evaluation

Team to further strengthen the conclusions and recommendations, notably from an

operational point of view.

Focus groups


7

1.3 Structure of the report

The present report is structured as follows:

› Chapter 2 presents the BUILD UP Skills Initiative in the context of the Intelligent Energy Europe II programme and the evolving policy context of

energy efficiency in Europe; in addition it presents the evaluation findings

concerning the genesis of the initiative, its relevance and the adequacy of its

specific structure – i.e. national consortia, Pillar I and Pillar II projects,

standardised approach and the added value from EU exchange meetings.

› Chapter 3 looks at the results of the initiative and its intermediate impacts (outcomes) and perspectives for the future.

› Chapter 4 presents the conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation.

This section also includes a summary table of the answers to the Evaluation

Questions as well as a suggestion for a methodology for the evaluation of

BUILD UP Skills Pillar II projects.


2 BUILD UP Skills Initiative in the context of the Intelligent Energy Europe programme

2.1 Policy context

The Energy Policy for Europe, agreed by the European Council in March 2007,

establishes the Union’s core energy policy objectives of competitiveness,

sustainability and security of supply. By 2020 renewable energy sources have to

contribute 20% to the final energy consumption; greenhouse gas emissions have

to fall by 20% and energy efficiency gains have to deliver a 20% cut in Europe's

annual primary energy consumption with respect to 1990.

The European Commission has proposed several measures to increase efficiency

at all stages of the energy chain i.e. generation, transformation, distribution and

final consumption. There are measures for all end-use sectors.

The Commission has established several regulatory frameworks in order to ensure

that the objectives on energy efficiency are achieved. Among these are the Energy

Efficiency Directive (EED) (2012/27/EU), the Energy Performance of Buildings

Directive (EPBD) (2010/31/EU) and the Energy Services Directive (ESD)

(2006/32/EC) which have established a common framework of measures for the

promotion of energy efficiency within the Union in order to ensure the achievement

of the Union’s 2020 20% headline target on energy efficiency7 and to ensure

further energy efficiency improvements in the future.

It lays down the rules designed to remove barriers in the energy market and

overcome market failures that impede efficiency in the supply and use of energy,

and provides for the establishment of indicative national energy efficiency targets

for 2020. The EED includes under Article 8 on energy audits and energy

management systems a provision requiring Member States to encourage training

programmes for auditors "in order to facilitate sufficient availability of experts". The

establishment of accreditation/certification schemes –where needed - is requested

7 COM(2010)2020

2020 Energy and

climate goals

Energy efficiency

The Energy Efficiency

Directive (EED) and

the Energy

Performance of Buil-

dings Directive

(EPBD)


9

by the Member States under Article 16, so that a certain level of technical

competence, objectivity and reliability is maintained.

In February 2016, the Commission proposed an EU Heating and Cooling strategy.

Plans for this EU strategy were first launched in 2015 as part of the Energy Union

strategy. This is a first step in exploring the issues and challenges in this sector,

and solving them with EU energy policies. The Strategy is emphasising that cutting

the energy consumed by heating and cooling in buildings and industry can be

achieved through scaling-up the use of advanced construction and design

techniques and high-performance insulation materials when renovating buildings.

The Strategy8 also announced that, in the context of the ongoing review of the

energy efficiency legislation, the Commission will extend the work of the BUILD UP

Skills initiative to improve training for building professionals, in particular through a

new module for energy experts and architects.

The building sector accounts for about 40% of the energy use in Europe as stated

in the Directive on Energy Performance of Buildings (EPBD, 2010/31/EU), which

considers energy efficiency from buildings as an important measure in attaining the

2020 goals. The EPBD promotes the improvement of the energy performance of

buildings within the EU by setting a number of requirements for the energy

performance of buildings. The appropriate level of competence of installers and

builders is considered as critical in achieving the objectives of the EPBD, which

therefore includes in Article 20 a requirement for Member States to ensure that

"guidance and training is made available for those implementing this Directive".

The European Energy Efficiency Plan9 from 2011 assessed that there is a large

untapped energy saving potential in existing buildings. According to the Plan

techniques exist to cut existing buildings' consumption by half or three quarters and

to halve the energy consumption of typical appliances. But the renovation rate of

buildings is too low, just like the uptake of the most efficient appliances. The

Energy Plan stated that there is a lack of appropriate training for architects,

engineers, auditors, craftsmen, technicians and installers, notably for those

involved in refurbishment. When the Energy Plan was published in 2011 it was

estimated that about 1.1 million qualified (in the field of energy efficiency and RES)

workers were available, while it was estimated that 2.5 million would be needed by

2015.

The same year the Communication on Energy Roadmap 205010

with regard to

energy efficiency underlined that "Higher energy efficiency in new and existing

buildings is key" calling for nearly zero energy buildings becoming the norm.

8 COM(2016) 51 final

9 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European

Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Energy Efficiency Plan 2011


Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions Energy Roadmap 2050,

COM(2011) 885

The EU strategy for

heating and cooling

Energy consumption

in the building sector

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/news/commission-launches-plans-curb-energy-use-heating-and-cooling


The 2012 Communication on Strategy for the sustainable competitiveness of the

construction sector and its enterprises11

underlined the importance of the

construction sector, which it estimates brings around 10% of GDP, providing 20

million jobs, mainly in micro and small enterprises. It further stated that "the energy

performance of buildings and resource efficiency in manufacturing, transport and

the use of products for the construction of buildings and infrastructures have an

important impact on energy, climate change and the environment".

As only a small percentage of the building stock consists of new buildings, there is

therefore a large demand for quality energy renovation of the existing building

stock. In fact, it is estimated that new buildings account for only 1% of the building

stock each year, which means that almost two thirds of the buildings in use in 2050

have already been built. At the same time the retrofit rate is considered to be

between 0.5 and 2.5 % each year12

.

The construction sector is facing increasing challenges in terms of a shortfall of

skilled workers, low attractiveness to young people, limited capacity for innovation

and the phenomenon of undeclared work.

The EC ran from 30 June 2015 to 1 October 2015 a public consultation on the

EPBD and was assessing the contributions and evaluating whether the directive

has met its objectives at the time this report was elaborated. The review of the

directive is due by 1 January 2017 as required under its Article 19.

The Renewable Energy Sources (RES) Directive 2009/28 establishes a common

framework for the promotion of energy from renewable sources. The RES Directive

mentions "information and training gaps, especially in the heating and cooling

sector", which it considers should be dealt with. Article 14 of the RES Directive

includes provisions regarding the information and training of all relevant actors

including builders and installers. The introduction of certification schemes for

installers of small-scale biomass boilers and stoves, solar photovoltaic and solar

thermal systems, shallow geothermal systems and heat pumps are to be ensured

by Member States.

The training of construction workers and craftsmen is often an overseen link in the

chain from overall measures, regulation, incentives etc. to the new or renovated

buildings with lower energy consumption. The shortfall of qualified skilled workers

and the need to improve the human-capital basis of the construction sector was

also identified in the 2012 Strategy for the sustainable competitiveness13

. The

Strategy noted also the great variety between education and training systems

across Europe.

11

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Strategy for the

sustainable competitiveness of the construction sector and its enterprises, COM(2012) 433

12 Europe’s buildings under the microscope, BPIE, 2011

http://www.institutebe.com/InstituteBE/media/Library/Resources/Existing%20Building%20Retrofits/Euro

pes-Buildings-Under-the-Microscope-BPIE.pdf

13 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Strategy for the

sustainable competitiveness of the construction sector and its enterprises COM(2012) 433

The Renewable

Energy Sources

Directive (RES)

Training of construc-

tion workers and

craftsmen


11

The lack of appropriate training represents one of the main non-technical barriers

in reaching the energy efficiency objectives in buildings by 2020.

Within the building industry, there is generally an increasing concern about the gap

between the predicted energy performance of buildings and actual measured

performance, typically addressed as ‘the performance gap’. According to the article

“The gap between predicted and measured energy performance of buildings: A

framework for investigation” by Pieter de Wilde from 2014, the measured energy

consumption of low energy buildings can be up to 2.5 times the calculated energy

consumption14

.

From the article “A review of the regulatory energy performance gap and its

underlying causes in non-domestic buildings” published in the magazine Frontiers

in Mechanical Engineering (only released provisionally on 21.12.201515

), one of the

reasons for the deviation in energy performance is described as a result of poor

on-site workmanship or lack of appropriate training. As building regulations

become more stringent and new technologies are introduced, the quality of

construction has to be improved. In the article it is argued that on-site workmanship

needs to adapt and be trained to these increasing levels of complexity in building

construction. One example is the increased focus on airtightness of buildings,

where improved skills are needed. The increased demand for airtightness gives

rise to performance issues as "airtightness is compromised during construction by

discontinuous insulation or punctured airtight barriers". Furthermore installation of

services, such as drainage systems, air ducts and electrical pipe work may leave

gaps which also reduce the airtightness and induce thermal loss. Also the issues of

junctions between roofs and walls insulation, incorrect positioning of windows and

doors, which can reduce the actual performance of the thermal envelope, are

frequently mentioned as problem areas.

The EU has been developing policies to tackle the skills gap in several sectors in

the Union, and for strengthening lifelong learning systems. The Lisbon strategy

recognises the importance of adult training and a better access for higher

education throughout the professional life of EU citizens. The Education and

Training 2010 work programme was designed to reach this objective. It was

followed by the new strategic framework for European cooperation in Education

and Training (ET2020), which was adopted during the 12th May 2009 Council

meeting. Part of this effort (started under the ET2010, and continued under the

ET2020) is the Copenhagen Process launched in 2002. The priorities of the

Barcelona Process included, among others, reinforcing the European dimension in

VET and developing tools for the mutual recognition and validation of competences

and qualifications.

Over the period 2007-2013, the EC integrated numerous educational and training

programmes under a single programme: The Life Long Learning programme (LLL).

14

The gap between predicted and measured energy performance of buildings: A framework for investigation Pieter de Wilde 15

van_Dronkelaar C, Dowson M, Spataru C and Mumovic D(2015) A review of the regulatory energy performance gap and its underlying causes in non-domestic buildings.


The construction workers and craftsmen typically work within the frame of many

years of good practices and experiences for constructing and renovating buildings.

It is however necessary to supplement with new knowledge and practices to

handle low energy building construction projects and energy renovation building

projects.

One example of this is how to insulate buildings correctly in order to achieve the

desired low heating and cooling consumption without damaging the building due to

e.g. accumulated humidity in building components.

Another example is natural and forced ventilation, where the right installation,

insulation and adjustment related to the lower energy consumption and tighter

buildings are necessities for correct functioning.

Consequently, in every EU member state, there is a need for improving the skills of

qualified workers in the building industry for the implementation of energy efficiency

in renovation and new projects.

In 2007 an Ex-Ante Assessment report16

established the need for an initiative

supporting the development of skills of the building workforce. Such an initiative

was considered to be in line with the Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) programme

(Calls for proposals 2011-2012-2013) that aims at boosting the further education

systems for workers in order to promote a high level of energy performance in

buildings. The initiative is part the European Commission's Energy Efficiency Plan

adopted in 2011. The Ex-Ante Assessment report proposed as a preferred action

for MS specific projects reflecting the complex diversity of structures, issues and

relative progress across the Member States. This would be done in two phases:

the first would focus on data gathering, while the second would focus on the design

and implementation of training courses.

On this basis, the BUILD UP Skills initiative was planned and launched. The aim

of the initiative as expressed in the Energy Efficiency Plan17

is to "support Member

States in assessing training needs for the construction sector, developing

strategies to meet them, and fostering effective training schemes". The BUILD UP

Skills Initiative has helped Member Stes in developing national qualificaton

roadmaps for 2020 and providing assistance in the preparation and implementation

of training and certification schemes. To attain these goals, support can be

16

ECORYS, 2007, Ex-ante evaluation of the initiative on the building workforce training and qualification

in the field of energy efficiency and renewable energy within the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme:

https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/Exante%20study%20-

%20Construction%20skills.pdf


Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Energy Efficiency Plan 2011

COM(2011) 109


13

explored by funding instruments like the European Social Fund and the Lifelong

Learning Programme and the Erasmus For All.18

.

2.2 The setting of the initiative

The BUILD UP Skills Initiative consists of two pillars:

Pillar I Supporting the development of national status-quo analysis and national

roadmaps (2011-2013);

Pillar II Supporting the setup or upgrade of qualification and training schemes

(2013-2017).

The two pillars are supplemented with Europe-wide coordinated support activities

(EU exchange meetings) to support the exchange of best practices through

meetings of all the participating BUILD UP Skills projects.

Figure 5 – BUILD UP Skills components19

18

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Strategy for the

sustainable competitiveness of the construction sector and its enterprises COM(2012) 433

19 Adapted from BUILD UP Skills Initiative publication.


In November 2011, 21 countries started working under Pillar I on their status-quo

analysis and national roadmap. In June 2012 nine additional countries joined the

initiative.

The specific provisions for the BUILD UP Skills Initiative were set by the 2011

Commission implementing decision20

establishing the 2012 Work Programme for

the implementation of the IEE II programme. The 2014 H2020 Work Programme

on Energy Efficiency stated the following concerning the expected impacts of the

construction skills projects: "Every million Euro of EU support is expected to

increase the skills of at least 2,000 craftsmen, or 500 construction sector

managers, resulting in energy savings and/or renewable energy production of at

least 25 GWh per year and increasing the employability of the building

workforce"21

.Since this evaluation report only covers the Pillar I projects and not

the Pillar II projects with pilot training programmes, it is not possible to evaluate

whether the numbers from above will be reached. Pillar II covers only pilot training

courses and therefore only a limited number of craftsmen and construction sector

managers will be trained.

20 Commission Implementing Decision of 20/12/2011 establishing the 2012 Work Programme for

implementation of the 'Intelligent Energy - Europe II' programme

21 Ex-Ante Assessment report


15

The following table shows which countries participated in the Pillar I and Pillar II

projects.

Table 1: Countries involved in Pillar I and Pillar II projects

Country Pillar I project completed Proposal for Pillar II Pillar II ongoing

Austria X X X

Belgium X X

Bulgaria X X X

Croatia X X X

Cyprus X X X

Czech Rep. X X X

Denmark X

Estonia X X X

Finland X X X (finished)

France X X

FYROM X X X

Germany X X X

Greece X X X

Hungary X X X

Ireland X X X

Italy X X X

Latvia X X X

Lithuania X X X

Luxembourg X X X

Malta X X

Norway X X

Poland X

Portugal X X X

Romania X X X (finished)

Slovakia X X X

Slovenia X

Spain X X X

Sweden X X X

The Netherlands X X X (finished)

UK X

At the time of this evaluation report two Pillar II projects have been finalized (Romania and the Netherlands).


2.3 BUILD UP Skills' contribution to policy implementation

In terms of Energy Efficiency and integration of Renewable Energy sources, the

EU has set itself objectives that will only be reached if a number of identified

barriers are lifted. The BUILD UP Skills Initiative, an upstream measure, was to

contribute to enhancing the skills of on-site workers and craftsmen in the building

sector in order to meet the EU 20-20-20 objectives. It also aimed at increasing the

number of trained workers in these fields. The priorities of the BUILD UP Skills

Initiative were set out each year in the respective IEE II work programme:

› 2011, National qualification platforms and roadmaps to 2020; › 2012, National qualification platforms & Roadmaps to 202022 and Qualification

& training schemes;

› 2013, Establish or upgrade large-scale qualification and training schemes

2.3.1 The BUILD UP Skills initiative

This chapter investigates the genesis and

structuring of the initiative and the extent to

which it answered the needs and priorities

of the beneficiaries in their respective

countries. Also, this chapter looks into

whether there was a need for public

funding for this initiative, or whether it could

have been initiated through other means.

BUILD UP Skills was initiated in DG

ENERGY, partly in response to concerns

raised by Member States in meeting the

EU 2020 objectives. The lack of skilled

workforce had been raised in many

countries as a major issue for reaching the

efficiency and targets by 2020 both at

national and EU levels. At the time, while

often receiving proposals for training of

craftsmen and on-site workers, the EC held

very little information on the issue. Hence,

DG ENER decided to investigate the topic.

Initially the idea raised concern from several DG´s. DG ENERGY set up working

groups in order to discuss the content and scope of the initiative. This led to the

inclusion of skills pertaining to the installation of small scale renewable energy

installations. In order to strengthen the case for a dedicated initiative supporting the

development of skills of construction site workers and craftsmen, an Ex-Ante

22 Only for countries for which no proposals were selected under the 2011 calls for proposals.

1. Business as usual - no new additional

EU initiative on training for EE and RES

supported by IEE.

2. Collaborative action - MS

government level coordination / analysis

(cf. EPBD) of the training needs,

qualification harmonisation, future

demands and delivery models. Risk of

duplicating existing and ongoing

government action at MS level

3. Pilot schemes - possibly at

centralised EU level – targeted on

training providers who could design and

pilot training provision targeted on areas

of identified need and future demand.

4. Awareness raising – at EU level - of

need, demand and delivery models –

targeted on training providers in order to

increase the likelihood (and speed) of

replication of suitable training.

5. Combination of 2, 3 and 4.

Box 1: Ex-ante evaluation option analysis

summary


17

Assessment report23

was commissioned. The report, delivered in April 2010, is

based on a thorough situation analysis, literature review and desk research. The

evaluation also included a high level consultation involving relevant EC services,

MS representatives (Energy Agencies and professional organisations) and industry

associations and stakeholders. The breadth of desk review of the Ex-Ante

Assessment report was sufficient to capture the challenges throughout the Union,

in terms of training of on-site workers in the building sector, with a specific focus on

energy efficiency and renewable energy.

The Ex-Ante Assessment report concluded on the needs, barriers and priority

actions needed to overcome the shortage of qualified workers. It is worth

mentioning that the scope of the Ex-Ante Assessment report was not to identify an

initiative aiming at "providing training needed, but rather to identify financial support

to create, strengthen or link structures and instruments aiming at boosting the

vocational training and qualification schemes for the building workforce and to

provide structures and instruments for leverage and align existing workforce

training programmes and resources towards the energy efficiency and renewable

energy topics".

The Ex-Ante Assessment report also concluded that a mix of the different options

identified (see box 1 on previous page) was the most appropriate way forward.

This was proposed in order to mitigate the identified risks of each proposed option

if implemented separately. The only identified priority from the Ex-Ante Assessment

report that did not receive specific attention in the elaboration of the initiative was

the emphasis on building synergies with other IEE projects. It is worth noting that

despite this, several projects did develop ties with other relevant IEE projects

through the inclusion of same consortium members or delivering presentations of

the BUILD UP Skills activities in other IEE funded events.

Overall, it can be concluded that the initiative was elaborated through a high level

of consultation, including a non-compulsory Ex-Ante Assessment report.

2.3.2 Standard approach of Pillar I projects

The following could be identified as key features of the BUILD UP Skills initiative as

compared to other IEE initiatives:

› There is a national dimension of projects with EU exchange activities; › Standardised Pillar I projects approach (Specific and detailed guide for

proposers, templates with outlines for roadmaps and Status Quo report).

These are features of the BUILD UP Skills Initiative that differentiate it from other

IEE programme funded projects. First of all, a key feature of Pillar I projects was

the national dimension. It was considered at the time of elaborating the initiative

that introducing a multinational dimension would have blurred the objectives which

23 Ex-Ante evaluation of the initiative on the building workforce training and qualification in the field of

energy efficiency and renewable energy within the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme

TREN/A2/143-2007, Ecorys, 2010.


were a stocktaking exercise. All stakeholders interviewed concur that this was an

appropriate approach. It is commonly agreed that a multi-national approach would

not have allowed mobilising such a wide range of stakeholders. In addition, the

emphasis on the national dimension allowed for mobilisation of stakeholders that

otherwise would not have exchanged on issues pertaining to the enhancement of

skills of blue collars in the field of renewable energies and energy efficiency. This is

particularly true for private sector representatives.

Secondly, the standardised methodology for the Status Quo Analysis (SQA) and

roadmaps, leaving certain latitude for adapting to the national contexts was very

much appreciated by the project coordinators. Most project coordinators found it

beneficial to be guided for the Status Quo Analysis while having sufficient leeway

for adapting to their national context. This particular aspect was reinforced by the

EU Exchange and peer review meetings. These also contributed to enhancing the

coherence of the results, even though final results remain difficult to compare or

aggregate coherently at EU level. The preparatory meetings in Member States

raised the proponents' understanding of the initiative. This resulted in a high

number of proposals submitted for Pillar I. The quality of proposals was also higher

than foreseen.

Need for public funding24

Some countries had already undertaken activities with national stakeholders e.g.

Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark, Norway, but there was generally no

coordination of these activities between the various countries. The BUILD UP Skills

initiative with the national focus has resulted in much more detailed studies than

seen in other previous studies. Other countries mention in the e-survey that there

would not have been the same level of involvement and commitment in the project

if it had not been funded by the EU. Some stakeholders would most likely not have

participated if it had not been an EU funded project.

Some of the existing training initiatives in the areas of energy efficiency have also

approached engineers and not only craftsmen.

59% of the respondents of the e-survey have answered that they do not believe

that the stocktaking could have taken place without EU funding whereas 21%

believe that this could have taken place and 20% of the respondents do not have

any opinion on this question.

24 Evaluation question 3: Could the initiative be replicated by the EU without public/EU funding?

Could this initiative

have been carried

out by the market

without public

funding?


19

Figure 6 - The situation analysis (Status Quo Report), as delivered under Pillar I, could have been

carried out by the market players without EU or public funding

In the e-survey there are respondents from the same country who believe that the

stocktaking could have taken place without EU funding and others who believe that

it could not have taken place, therefore it is not possible to make country specific

conclusions on this subject. However in the following countries every respondent

answered “no” to the question “could the initiative have been carried out without

public/EU funding”: Croatia, Cyprus, Finland, Lithuania, Portugal, Slovakia and

Slovenia.

The interviewed project coordinators have answered that there would not have

been resources for this work to be carried out on a national level without the EU

funding. Furthermore the commitment, the motivation and the involvement from the

stakeholders would not have been at the same level.

Existence of systems for identifying training needs

Prior to the BUILD UP Skills initiative, there were some existing involvements from

the private sector in VET (e.g. in Spain, France and Germany); however there

was not any coherence or coordination between these activities.

The BUILD UP Skills initiative has increased this involvement and the communi-

cation within the building sector. The countries answer that this would not have

been the case without the EU funding. In addition, the flexibility built in the initiative

has allowed some countries to create the National Qualification platform and carry

out the Status Quo Analysis not only at national level, but also at regional level.

This is the case of France which organised 6 inter-regional meetings. This is

particularly important in the framework of decentralisation which devolves training

and education responsibilities to regional or equivalent entities.


Figure 7 - In my country there were already systems in place that identified training needs in the

building sector prior to the BUILD UP Skills initiative

Figure 8 - Market players of the construction sector are now (after the launch of the BUILD UP

Skills initiative) more involved in training on sustainable energy in my country

94% of the e-survey respondents agree to the fact that there was a need for

mapping the existing workforce, only 6% disagree to this.

The set-up of the initiative has ensured that a large amount of market players

already involved in VET have been successfully involved in this initiative. The

number of consortium members and platform members deducted from the lists of

participants from the exchange meetings arranged by EASME and from the final

country reports indicate that a total of approximately 1 800 people from different

organisations have been involved in the Pillar I activities. The total number of

coordinators is 30 (one for each country) and the number of consortium members

is 196 (generally 6 to 7 consortium members per country). It is estimated that the

total number of people involved in the BUILD UP Skills initiative is somewhat

higher since some of the people have been replaced during the projects. Also there

is a large group of people involved in the projects that is not listed in the reports.

Furthermore the stakeholders mentioned above can have participated in different

ways in the project e.g. by attending some of the stakeholder meetings or

conferences or by endorsing the Roadmaps or by having more than one role in the

initiative. It is the opinion of the evaluation team, that the total number of people

involved in this project may be about 2500 people.

The type of the stakeholders varies from country to country, but they cover

organisations like national energy agencies, government or ministries,

organisations for vocational training and education, associations of workers (e.g.

electricians, insulation workers, workers with construction skills, plumbing, heating

installations, carpenters, installers etc.) and financial institutions.

Need for mapping

the existing

workforce


21

Table 2: Consortia size and composition

Country Consortium

members

Number of people

from organisations

involved in the

National Qualification

Platform

Total

Austria 5 80 85

Belgium 4 85 89

Bulgaria 2 42 44

Croatia 8 60 68

Cyprus 7 10 17

Czech Republic 14 58 72

Denmark 8 24 32

Estonia 7 12 19

Finland 5 73 78

France 7 192 199

FYROM 6 80 86

Germany 10 54 64

Greece 8 47 55

Hungary 5 31 36

Ireland 6 12 18

Italy 7 50 57

Latvia 9 30 39

Lithuania 5 25 30

Luxembourg 10 16 26

Malta 6 65 71

Norway 8 10 18

Poland 4 30 34

Portugal 3 34 37

Romania 8 271 279

Slovakia 4 37 41

Slovenia 5 31 36

Spain 4 35 39

Sweden 9 35 44

The Netherlands 7 147 154

UK 5 153 158

Total 196 1 829 2 025


Apart from these numbers there is also one project coordinator for each country i.e.

30 people, making the total number of registered people involved in the BUILD UP

Skills initiative at least 2055.

The findings from the interviews and the e-survey all document that there was a

significant need for stocktaking of the training needs in the building sector. Many of

the respondents say that they were surprised that the findings revealed a very high

number of unskilled workers and a large demand for training of workers. To many

this was new and very useful information to the sector. This information would not

have been gathered in this structured format without the EU funding.

2.4 Pillar I projects

In this section, the relevance of the BUILD UP Skills initiative design in relation to

the sector needs is addressed.

Identification of needs25

The EASME has commissioned a detailed study (the Ex-Ante Assessment report26

)

prior to the launch of the initiative (finalised in April 2010). The assessment

contains a thorough analysis of the situation in the building sector in terms of the

employment trends and skills requirements; both subjects are evaluated in the

analysis in terms of quality and quantity.

Stakeholder consultations were conducted as part of the ex-ante study. In total 21

interviews were conducted for the ex-ante assessment with people from different

stakeholder groups. Also a survey of two groups was conducted with energy

agencies and building sector trade associations.

Based on the thorough situation analysis, the interviews, the literature review and

desk research as well as a high level of consultation involving many EC services,

MS representatives and industry associations and stakeholders, the Ex-Ante

Assessment report identified needs, problems and principal barriers in the sector

and provided recommendations that resulted in the BUILD UP Skills initiative.

The main conclusions from the Ex-Ante Assessment report are:

› There will in the future be a shortage of trained workers with skills in energy efficiency and renewable energy in buildings

› There is a need for collection of data on the number of skilled workers in Europe and the need for training in the future.

› There is a need for transparency on competences and qualifications in the building sector

25 Evaluation question 1. Did the calls for proposals related to BUILD UP Skills respond to the needs,

problems and challenges of the building sector?

26 Ex-ante evaluation of the initiative on the building workforce training and qualification in the field of


TREN/A2/143-2007, Ecorys, 2010.

The BUILD UP Skills

initiative is based on

a thorough situation

analysis


23

The Ex-Ante Assessment report pointed out the lack of EU level projects for

training of craftsmen, as there were already many EU level projects for engineers

and architects.

The Ex-Ante Assessment report recommended two stages of work: the first being

the collection of data and stakeholder consultation at individual MS level and the

second being the development and promotion of pilot training schemes. This

corresponds to the structure of Pillar I and Pillar calls for proposals under the

BUILD Up Skills initiative.

The synergy with other EU programmes was recommended to be improved by the

Ex-Ante Assessment report.

The assessment also identified key stakeholders and their positions in the market.

According to the ex-ante assessment the main target groups were:

› Technicians (non-graduate) › Installers (Renewable Energy, Energy Efficiency equipment, Insulation,

HVAC)

› Energy managers and auditors › Buildings inspectors › Plumbers › Carpenters › Electricians

After conducting the interviews mentioned on the previous page, a large variety of

stakeholders were asked to give their input to the actual call for proposals. For the

Ex-Ante Assessment report, 22 energy agencies from different European countries

were addressed, as well as 17 building associations, 13 EU organisations /

programmes / policy makers and 2 European training foundations.

According to the interviews made for this evaluation report with the staff of EASME,

the level of involvement of MS and their stakeholders for preparing the initiative

has been very high. A number of dialogue meetings and consultations with

professional organisations have been organised before the launch of the Call for

Proposals and the conclusion from these meetings were that there was a

significant need for stocktaking of trained workers and training throughout the

Union and beyond.

Before the launch of the initiative, the main issue was the lack of data. The EASME

staff state that this lack of data resulted in the fact that only few coordinated

initiatives at Member State level were initiated before the BUILD UP Skills initiative.

The different stakeholders in each country had very little dialogue with each other

prior to the BUILD UP Skills initiative.

Many stakeholders

were consulted

before the Call for

Proposals


The Ex-Ante Assessment report27

also points out that there was a need for

addressing the non-technical barrier of workforce training, skills and qualifications

in the buildings energy efficiency and renewable energy workforce. The non-

technical barriers are in the ex-ante report described as: the fragmentation of the

buildings services and design markets; the owner dilemma (the landlord – tenant

disincentive); energy market distortions; regulatory barriers (e.g. planning); lack of

familiarity with, and risk aversion to, new technology; information barriers; cultural

and lifestyle habits; and the availability of products and the skilled workers to

design, build, install, operate and maintain them. These non-technical needs are

not further elaborated as they are falling outside the scope of the initiative.

The e-survey sent out under this evaluation to the stakeholders of the BUILD UP

Skills initiative indicates that 84% of respondents agree to the statement that the

BUILD UP Skills initiative addressed important needs in the building sector. 11%

answer that they disagree to this statement and 5% have no opinion on this issue.

Figure 9 - The BUILD UP Skills initiative addressed important needs in the building sector in my

country

Asked what was not addressed in the initiative, the answers from the respondent of

the e-survey can be divided into these four groups:

1 Other professions should also have been addressed like architects and

engineers as well as policymakers, media people, NGOs, developers and

property owners.

2 Workers with no education could also have been addressed under this

initiative.

3 Focus on skills required for renovating of e.g. historical buildings in energy

efficient ways.

4 Activities aimed at stimulating demand for energy efficiency in the building

sector.

All of the interviewed consortium coordinators except Norway agree that the call

responded to the needs, problems and challenges in their countries. Norway

explains that similar activities like the BUILD UP Skills initiative already has been

carried out in Norway.

27

Ex-ante evaluation of the initiative on the building workforce training and qualification in the field of


TREN/A2/143-2007, Ecorys, 2010.

Additional needs

were identified

The BUILD UP Skills

initiative addressed

important needs


25

While some of the above comments are country and context specific, there are

certain remarks that seem to be shared by several of the respondents, notably on

the need to extend the initiative to other professions/white collars professions.

However, the evaluation team agrees that, while these needs exist, expanding the

initiative at the moment will require further preparatory work in order not to dilute

the efforts and disperse the resources.

Based on the interviews with the project coordinators, the most important aspect

for coordinators, proponents and stakeholders was to attain information about the

number of craftsmen needing training (stocktaking). This information was generally

not available prior to the initiative and few incentives were existent to carry out

such an exercise.

79% of the countries interviewed responded that the need for structured

stocktaking was very high whereas 21% disagree to this. Those who disagree,

argue that the information was not new to them but it was perhaps the first time it

was collected in one place.

The countries answering that there was a need for stocktaking argue that prior to

the initiative, only scarce and partial data was available to assess the training

needs of craftsmen in energy efficiency in their country. Where data was already

available, these data were not compiled or summarised. For instance in Finland,

France, Germany and Norway, some studies had already been carried out with

regards to the training needs of craftsmen in energy efficiency. The approach used

was, however not in line with the one used under the BUILD UP Skills initiative. In

Bulgaria the industry sector had carried out some analysis, but it was not very

coherent.

Effort needed to prepare the Calls for Proposals28

EASME staff describes the process of developing the Call for Proposals for the

BUILD UP Skills Initiative generally as much more work intensive and time

consuming than for other calls for proposals. The evaluation team has been

informed that EASME does not register hours spent on individual projects and it is

therefore not possible to validate whether more hours have been used preparing

the Calls for Proposals for this initiative. Before the Call was launched several

consultations with professional organisations were arranged with input from

Member States (e.g. energy agencies and ministries). These inputs revealed that it

was necessary to organise the initiative in a different way than EU projects are

usually organised (e.g. min. three EU countries). It also became clear that there

was a need for involving local stakeholders rather than involving organisations from

different countries.

The Calls for Proposals were made with fixed outcomes and pre-filled templates in

order to facilitate an easy comparison of the proposals. This work has, as

28 Evaluation question 9. How effective has the BUILD UP Skills approach (1 national project financed

with EU exchange activities, specific and more detailed guide for proposers and templates, outlines for

roadmaps and Status Quo report) been compared with the standard IEE type of projects (international

consortia)?

Perceived need from

Coordinators -

proponents,

stakeholders

Adequate time for

preparing Calls for

Proposals


mentioned before, been time-consuming to the staff of EASME but also much

appreciated by the proposers.

Asked whether the pre-filled templates for the proposal where useful, 16 of the

consortium coordinators, particularly those from countries with less experience in

responding to this type of proposals, found them very useful. Two of the countries

did not find the templates useful since they had already experience in completing

proposals for EU funding. The rest of the countries did not have an opinion on this

subject.

Preparing the proposals

The time from the launch of the Call for Proposals to the submission of the

proposals has been about five months for each call (the 2011 WP IEE II, the 2012

WP IEE II and the 2013 WP IEE calls). This meant that the proposers had

relatively little time to prepare the proposals. Asked whether the coordinators spent

more or less time preparing the proposals, nine countries answer they spent less

time for preparing the proposal than compared to other similar proposals, three

countries have spent more time and for two countries it was the same. Some of the

remaining countries have not prepared a proposal before and can therefore not

answer the question.

Whether more or less time is spent, there is consent that all felt that there was a lot

of pressure especially on finding suitable stakeholders and establish the platform

before the proposal. However, the interviewed consortium coordinators answer that

they had a very good understanding of what the Commission was looking for as

well as on the expected outcome of the project.

The staff of EASME estimated that they have used more internal resources

preparing the Calls for Proposals and attending the meetings before the launch of

the proposals than for other EU initiatives. However, as mentioned before, the

project time and resource tracking system within EASME does not allow for

registering time on individual projects. It is therefore difficult to assess the extent of

extra resources spent under the BUILD UP Skills initiative. The staff do, however,

express that the time spent before the launch has paid off, notably in the light of

the large number of high quality proposals.

After the launch of the first Call for Proposals in 2011, 41 proposals have been

submitted, out of which 2 were not considered eligible. Of the proposals 21 have

received funding. In 2012, 9 proposals have been submitted and all obtained

funding.

The objective of EASME in having one proposal per country (30 projects in total)

was thereby reached. The large number of high quality proposals and the large

number of projects accepted shows that the Call for Proposals addressed current

needs in all the countries. It also indicates that the Call for Proposals had been well

prepared and that the training of craftsmen in the areas of energy efficiency in the

construction sector was in high focus in the Member State countries.

Time from launching

the calls to signing

the contracts

Cost of launch and

selection procedure

Success rate of

BUILD UP Skills

proposals is high


27

Before launching the Call for Proposals the expectations from EASME were not

very high and the high number of quality proposals was therefore unexpected. This

also outlines the relevance of the initiative.

The interviewed consortium coordinators express their content with the

communication with the EASME staff in the proposal phase. They are mainly

pointing at the fact that the templates for the project were very helpful and that the

coordinators knew exactly what was expected of them and what they should

deliver. The management staff of EASME responded very quickly to questions

about the Call and it was possible to get feedback during the process.

The countries express that the information meetings before the launch of the Call

for proposals were very good. A few of the coordinators mentioned that they had

not attended the information meetings before preparing their proposal. The EASME

Project Advisors took part in all meetings.

From the interviews with the project managers, 10 countries have explicitly said

that they think this initiative has been more effective than similar projects (this does

not mean that the remaining project coordinators do not think that the initiative has

been effective, they have just not expressed any opinion on the question).

The fact that strict guidance and templates were provided was appreciated by the

countries, as this allowed them to focus their efforts on the content of the proposals

rather than the approach. Also, the elaboration of the consortia was reported to be

time consuming and the selection of the most appropriate partners was a key

success factor. This is especially true in larger countries.

Good project

management from

the EASME staff

Information meetings

prior to launching the

Calls for Proposals

The approach was

very effective


2.5 Pillar II Projects

The calls for proposals on Pillar II addressed support for the set-up or upgrade of

large-scale qualification and training scheme workers in the field of energy

efficiency and renewable energy in buildings after initial analysis of the situation –

i.e. Pillar I results. This was first eligible in 2012; the 2013 Work Programme was

the 2nd

opening for support to the implementation of national roadmaps'

recommendations.

Pillar II Projects must demon-

strate the extent to which

they build upon the results of

Pillar I projects in their re-

spective country, more

specifically highlighting their

level of contribution to the im-

plementation of the endorsed

roadmaps. The proposal from

Greece provides an excellent

visual presentation of the

linkages between the Pillar II

activities and how they relate

to the roadmap developed

under the Pillar I project.

Other proposals usually

provide tables to compare the

Pillar II intervention.

Understanding by specialised craftsmen of other's craftsmen's role and constraints

is a key factor to the successful implementation of technical solutions leading to

energy efficient buildings (either in renovation or new constructions). Several Pillar

II projects aim at tackling this cross craft dimension (e.g. Austria, Germany, Ireland,

etc.). Another important aspect tackled by most Pillar II projects is the training of

trainers. Indeed, most projects intend to achieve their impacts by the dissemination

of knowledge through knock-on effect of training.

Thanks to the interactions during the EU Exchange meetings, some Pillar II

Projects are working together. This is the case between Slovakia and Austria Pillar

II projects which are preparing a common dissemination event in 2016.

Figure 10: Pillar II from Greece outlining the

correspondence between the roadmaps (Pillar I)

and proposed actions under the Pillar II project


29

Common and specific performance indicators

Pillar II Projects are bound to report their progress (results) and expected

outcomes (impacts) during the period of execution of activities and beyond (2020).

Indicators common to all projects have been set and include:

› Number of training courses triggered by the action › Number of people that will be trained › Number of hours taught in the frame of the courses triggered › Estimated specific cost to qualify each trainee › Renewable Energy production triggered › Primary energy savings compared to projections › Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions

In addition, projects have defined their specific indicators against which they are

due to report. In chapter 4 a methodology is suggested for the evaluation of the

Pillar II projects. So far only two projects are completed, the rest of the Pillar II

projects are ongoing and it is not possible to draw conclusions using the progress

reports against these indicators.

2.6 EU Exchange meetings

Evaluation of the added-value of the EU exchange activities29

Five European BUILD UP Skills exchange meetings have been arranged by

EASME for Pillar I. Consortium coordinators and consortium members attended the

exchange meetings.

In the interviews with the project coordinators, the interviewees expressed that

their expectations to the outcome of the first exchange meeting were not very high.

They mainly expected to receive information from the Commission rather than to

provide information themselves or to share knowledge. At the next meetings, the

participants became much more active.

The consortium coordinators were generally very content with the structure and the

organisation of the meetings. EASME used an external consulting company to

facilitate the support, the organisation and the logistics of the meetings; this has

been appreciated by the participants, since it allowed the EASME Project Advisors

to focus on the hosting of the meetings, exchanging and gathering the inputs from

the participants. Some of the participants express the opinion that although the

meetings were well prepared, not all the participants seemed to know what was

expected from them and some time was spent on explaining this. The meeting

language was in English with no translation. There are some comments on the lack

of translation making it difficult to get all the points from the presentations.

29 Evaluation question 2. Have EU exchange activities been an added-value for the targeted

stakeholders?

Five exchange

meetings have been

arranged

Expectations before

the meetings

The meetings were

effective and well

prepared


One of the recommendations from the project coordinators is to continue the work

with the exchange meetings and to keep the number of meeting to at least two per

year. The project coordinators also recommend continuing to split meetings in an

administrative and a project based part. The exchange within the peer groups

should also be continued. However, it is recommended to adapt the composition of

the peer review groups more to the characteristics of the countries respectively.

Due to the fact that 21 countries started before the last 9 countries, these first

countries were further ahead in the project than the remaining 9 countries. This

meant that at the exchange meetings, most of the first countries had a feeling of

repetition of subjects they had already covered at earlier meetings, whereas the

new countries could benefit from the experience from the other countries.

The first meeting was new to everybody, but already at the next meeting there was

a much better understanding of how the format of the meetings would be and what

the expected outcome of the meeting should be. Some of the more experienced

countries are expressing that they felt that they were giving more (information,

ideas etc.) to the other participants than what they received back.

Going through the meeting reports and the final reports from the participating

countries, it can be concluded that the meetings have resulted in added-value for

the participants in the form of the European dimension, exchange of information,

sharing of knowledge and networking. The countries have learned a lot from each

other and they have exchanged ideas e.g. on how to involve the stakeholders and

how to facilitate the endorsement process. Furthermore they have met the other

participants, which is also seen as very valuable.

However, there are also answers indicating that there was a lot of repetition during

the meetings, that the meetings could have been shorter and that the format with

all the countries presenting their results should be changed since a lot of the

information was the same from one country to the other. Some countries have

suggested splitting the meetings up so that some sessions would be for the less

experienced countries and some for the more experienced countries.

After the first meeting, EASME decided to initiate a peer-review system, were

groups with three countries were formed. In these groups, more in-depth

discussions about the projects could take place. 17 of the interviewed countries

found this a very good idea; some even considered the peer-groups to be one of

the major benefits of the initiative. Three countries did not think that they benefited

from the peer groups. While there is consent regarding the idea with the peer

groups, some participants were less content with the countries they were grouped

with. The participating countries had the possibility to make a wish for which

country they preferred to be grouped with, but it was not possible to fulfil all the

wishes and some countries did therefore not end up in the groups they had asked

for.

Some countries have on their own initiative arranged extra meetings with the

countries in their peer group (Austria, Finland, FYROM, Germany, Ireland and

Slovenia). Portugal thinks that the peer groups were more important than the

exchange meetings.

Some countries felt

that they were giving

more than they

received

The meeting

resulted in added-

value for the

participants

Peer groups have

assisted in the

exchange of

information and best

practices


31

The peer review groups were only active during the Pillar I projects. However,

some countries have continued arranging meetings with the peer groups outside

the project. For instance, Estonia who was in a group with Denmark and Lithuania

has for Pillar II cooperated with Finland, because a number of Estonian workers

travel to Finland to find work opportunities.

The number of participants to the exchange meetings has been relatively steady

from the first exchange meeting to the last under Pillar I. This indicates that the

exchange activities have been an added-value for the participants. The number of

people attending the last meeting (November 2013) was actually fairly low

compared to the others. The drop in attendance in the last meeting can be

explained by the lower number of Pillar II projects (22).

Figure 11: Number of participants to EU Exchange meetings30

According to the majority of the participants, the most important outcome of the

meetings has been the possibilities for networking and exchanging ideas - e.g. on

how to involve and motivate the stakeholders or how to get the Roadmap

endorsed. The exchange of ideas meant that the participants could improve and

adjust their own activities. The concept of the peer group is mentioned by the

interviewed countries as a good practice and it is said that it was much easier to

work in these smaller groups.

30

The number of participants is taken from different sources. When participants list was available, the

number of participants does not include EC and EASME representatives. For the first meeting, the

number of attendees is estimated as no exact figures could be found.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

EU Exchange

meeting N°1 -

Nov-2011

EU Exchange

meeting N°2 -

Jun-2012

EU Exchange

meeting N°3 -

Nov-2012

EU Exchange

meeting N°4 -

Apr-2013

EU Exchange

meeting N°5 -

Nov-2013

Number of participants

Trends in

attendance rate

Exchange of ideas at

the meetings


3 Outcomes of the BUILD UP Skills Initiative

In this chapter, the evaluation looks at the outcomes and impacts of the BUILD UP

Skills initiative throughout the EU, FYROM and Norway. The analysis is split

between Pillar I activities and Pillar II activities. This section also presents the

identified factors of successes and failures (or underperformance) of the projects.

3.1 Pillar I projects

The expected outcomes of the Pillar I projects are specified in the Call for

Proposals and are the same for each country:

The set-up of a National Qualification Platform;

A Status Quo Analysis (SQA) with an analysis of the workforces, the

national education system for vocational training, an assessment of the

training needs and an evaluation of the future lack of workforce in the area

of energy efficiency and energy renovation.

A fact sheet with a summary of the statistical information in each country;

A roadmap of actions for future training and market activities needed to

reach national objectives by 2020 with their level of priority and the key

stakeholders to be involved.

A Project Report summarising the implementation of the projects.

In the following, the outcome of the projects is analysed through a review of the

project documents and correlated to the answer from the interviews with the project

coordinator and the answers from the e-survey.

Establishment of National Qualification Platforms

The objective of establishing National Qualification Platforms was to bring relevant

stakeholders involved in the building sector, the education sector and the energy

sector together in order to be able to obtain all the necessary information required

for the Status Quo Analysis and also to serve as a framework for the development

of recommendations for the roadmap.

National Qualification Platforms

Evaluation of the BUILD UP Skills Initiative (BUS) 33

The start of the Pillar I projects involved the establishment of a National

Qualification Platform. Going through the final project reports from each country, it

can be seen that the task has been addressed in different ways. However, the

activities carried out under the National Qualification Platforms are more or less the

same:

› Gathering relevant stakeholders (representatives of the industry associations, educational and vocational training institutes, business entities, research

institutes and relevant public authorities, social partners, etc.). Some of the

stakeholders were identified before the project started and others have been

identified after the start of the project.

› Facilitating a website for the project with minutes from the meetings and information about the project.

› Facilitate conferences/meetings where the Status Quo Analysis has been presented for the stakeholders and where they can comment on the analysis.

› Bilateral meetings with e.g. guilds, chambers of commerce, training institutions etc.

› Workshops with discussions and input to the Roadmaps with the aim of endorsing the Roadmaps.

Some countries express that the work with the platform has been as planned, for

others it turned out to be a challenge to include the relevant participants in the

stakeholder platform partly due to the fact that the BUILD UP Skills Initiative was

not known to them at that time and the project was therefore of low interest to the

potential stakeholders (Denmark). This challenge was overcome by changing the

plans for the meetings slightly and by spending more time than originally planned

on information activities. According to the factsheets prepared by the project

coordinators, about 1 800 people have been involved in the work with the National Qualification Platforms.

In France the website was also used to collect documents to be used for the

Status Quo Analysis. More than 130 documents were collected on the website.

However, in France, it turned out to be rather difficult to get a total overview of the

input of documents which made it difficult to manage priorities and sometimes

made it necessary to redo the work using more recent or more relevant

documents.

Lithuania is pointing at the challenge of attracting and raising the interest of

relevant stakeholders. The challenge was overcome by increasing the contact on

telephone and e-mails to the potential stakeholders. This successfully resulted in

the involvement of about 50 Lithuanian organisations.

Malta also agrees to the difficulties of attaining the attention of the stakeholders:

“many stakeholders have their own priorities and BUILD UP Skills would not

necessarily be high up in that list of priorities”.

For all the countries the set-up of the platforms has been crucial to the rest of the

outcome of the project. The project coordinators have expressed that it has been a

good support that the process of the platform was well-known right from the

beginning.


The Status Quo Analysis (SQA)

The objective of the Status Quo Analysis was to establish information about the

number of workers in each country and to be able to assess the need for training of

workers in the building industry in energy efficient technologies.

The work with the Status Quo Analysis contains the collection of national statistical

information about numbers of employed workers in the construction sector and an

estimate on the need for new blue collar workers until 2020. It also contains an

estimate on the need for training of workers in energy efficient technologies as well

as an analysis of the barriers and gaps.

The report “BUILD UP Skills – EU overview report Staff working document” has

analysed the content of the SQA reports and has compiled these findings:

› The BUILD UP Skills target group (craftsmen and on-site workers) in the participating countries can be estimated at a total of about 7.6 million workers

and make up for around 57% of the construction sector.

› The construction sector is a major employer in the EU and is composed of a large majority of micro-companies.

› The grey economy is an important factor in this sector although there seems to be large variations between countries.

› The building workforce includes a relatively high proportion of lower-skilled workers.

› The migration of the building workforce is an important issue. Some countries highlight the difficulties in keeping the highly specialised building workers in

the country since it may be more attractive to work in other countries.

› There is an increased demand for upgrading of qualifications.

The collection of the statistical material proved more difficult than expected to

many of the countries. However, once the numbers were gathered, it proved to be

new information to most of the countries. A transverse conclusion across all the

participating countries is that there in the near future will be a shortage of trained

workers and that it will be a major challenge to reach the 20-20-20 targets without

increased activities in the area of training of workers in energy efficient

technologies.

The major difficulties encountered for this work mainly concerned the significant

lack of up-to-date data for the majority of the aspects examined in the Status Quo.

Approximately 66% of the project coordinators have in the interviews answered

that the SQA brought new information; about 33% thinks that this is not the case.

Some of the countries, who do not think that the SQA brought new information,

answer that it is however the first time this information is collected in this way and

in one place. The new inform

Evaluation of the BUILD UP Skills initiative under the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme ·...

Documents

Transcript of Evaluation of the BUILD UP Skills initiative under the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme ·...