SERIE: ERASMUS+: DEL PROPÓSITO A LA PRÁCTICA.Chapter 4 of 10. Partners Who Build, Not Just Host: Finding the Right Erasmus+ Organisations
Partners Who Build, Not Just Host: Finding the Right Erasmus+ Organisations
From Purpose to Practice · Chapter 4. Why a good European partnership starts with educational needs, not an attractive destination.
A successful Erasmus+ mobility does not begin at the airport. It begins with a question: what can this particular organisation teach us that our own centre needs to learn?
Three ideas to take away ↔
01. The partner is not a destination
A mobility may take place in a beautiful city and still produce very little institutional learning. The decisive question is not “Where would we like to go?” but “Who can help us address the problem we have identified?” The third chapter linked activities and participants to an educational objective. This fourth chapter adds a crucial component: the host organisation. A suitable partner is not simply willing to welcome visitors. It understands the objective, can show relevant practice, agrees on a realistic programme and is prepared to exchange feedback.
02. Start with a need, not a country
Imagine an adult education centre that wants to reduce dropout among learners who combine study, employment and family responsibilities. A fashionable digital training provider might offer an impressive presentation. Yet a smaller European adult education centre with documented experience in flexible attendance, tutoring and learner re-engagement could be a much stronger match. The selection process should begin with a short description of the need, the learning outcomes sought and the type of practice worth observing. Only then should the search for organisations begin.
03. Where to look: four complementary routes
The Erasmus+ Project Results Platform helps teams identify funded projects, themes, outputs and organisations. EPALE provides communities and partner-search opportunities particularly useful in adult education. The European School Education Platform includes partner finding for school education and relevant vocational contexts. National Agency training and cooperation activities can create opportunities to meet prospective hosts. Former partners, professional associations and trusted networks also matter, but personal recommendations should open a conversation rather than replace verification.
04. From a contact to a credible partner
An attractive website is not evidence of a strong learning environment. Request a short meeting. Ask the host to explain its relevant practice, propose observation sessions, identify staff who can discuss methods and describe what visiting teachers will actually do. A credible programme names activities, approximate time allocations, opportunities for questions and a method for collecting evidence. It also clarifies accessibility, safeguarding where relevant, language support and practical arrangements. Do not mistake a polished itinerary for a learning plan.
A useful first video meeting has a purpose: ask the host to describe a typical working day, the professionals whom visitors would observe, the evidence of learning that could be collected, accessibility arrangements, and a realistic plan for exchanging materials afterwards. The Jaén working annex explicitly treats conversations as a way to decide whether organisations are suitable—not merely as an administrative courtesy.
05. A selection matrix that protects the purpose
A simple matrix can prevent enthusiasm from dominating judgement. Score each prospective host against criteria agreed before the search: relevance to the objective, evidence of practice, quality of the proposed programme, capacity to support participants, accessibility and inclusion, willingness to collaborate and feasibility. Weight relevance and learning quality more heavily than destination appeal. The numbers are an internal decision aid, not an official Erasmus+ scoring system. Keep brief notes on the evidence supporting each score; otherwise the matrix becomes decorative bureaucracy.
06. The first email should begin a dialogue
Avoid writing: “We have Erasmus+ funding and would like to visit your city.” A stronger message explains the educational challenge, introduces the sending organisation, proposes two or three observable learning outcomes and asks whether the host has relevant experience. A useful opening might be: “Our adult education centre is exploring ways to support learners at risk of disengagement. We would value the opportunity to observe your tutoring and flexible-learning practices. Could we arrange a short online meeting to discuss a focused job-shadowing programme?” The aim is not to secure an immediate yes; it is to test whether there is a genuine fit.
07. Red flags worth noticing early
Be cautious when an organisation promises everything without asking about your needs; offers only sightseeing or generic presentations; refuses to identify the people responsible for the programme; cannot explain what will be observed; or asks you to commit before discussing learning outcomes and practical conditions. None of these signs automatically proves bad faith, but each deserves clarification. An expensive intermediary is not automatically a high-quality host. Check the applicable Programme Guide and National Agency guidance before using support organisations or making commitments.
08. A case study: building a network through research
One historical working document from an adult education Erasmus+ accreditation process in Jaén described an extensive search for partners. The team approached cultural and educational networks, previous Erasmus+ contacts, adult education associations, EPALE ambassadors and organisations connected with prison education. It also examined past project results, professional publications and opportunities for job shadowing. Months of messages and online meetings helped the team assess experience, commitment and relevance. This is a valuable example of a method, not a claim that every centre must contact hundreds of organisations. Its central lesson is simple: investigate first, travel later.
From the coordinator's working files: six routes, thirteen criteria, one principle
In a historical Erasmus+ accreditation working annex prepared at the IPEP in Jaén, the team did not begin by drawing up a list of appealing European capitals. It started with a diagnosis of the institution's needs and drafted a short introductory letter setting out the project's objectives. The letter was specific enough to be meaningful, yet open enough to invite a genuine conversation.
The search followed six complementary routes: Spanish embassy cultural offices, contacts from earlier European projects, a Portuguese adult education association, EPALE ambassadors, the European Prison Education Association (EPEA), and the Erasmus+ project-results database. The archive records that EPEA-related networking led to three contacts described as partners and several experts. This is a historical account from the working document, not a claim about current partnerships.
Then came the less photogenic part of European cooperation: months of correspondence and online conversations. The document mentions hundreds of emails and meetings on Zoom and Google Meet. Rather than treating these conversations as a formality, the coordinators used them to understand the people, their professional expertise and whether a worthwhile learning programme could be organised.
Its thirteen selection criteria considered thematic experience, reputation within specialist networks, references, years of practice, previous project results, relevant academic roles and publications, willingness to collaborate beyond a single visit, capacity to receive job-shadowing participants or learners, geographical and social diversity, and the ability to contribute to several objectives. Prestige appeared on the list, but it was not enough by itself: a prestigious organisation without a useful learning offer would still be the wrong choice.
The document ends with a reminder that is easy to forget while planning flights: staff members leave behind lessons, families and caring responsibilities to participate. Public funding and people's time deserve a serious educational return. That is the ethical test behind the selection matrix.
Documentary basis: “Anexo III: Proceso de selección de centros y los criterios usados para ello”, historical Erasmus+ accreditation working file, IPEP Jaén. The six search routes, thirteen criteria and account of correspondence are drawn from this document; the editorial conclusions are interpretive.
A downloadable tool from the author’s Erasmus+ working files
13 criteria. One better partnership decision.
These thirteen criteria come from a historical Erasmus+ accreditation working annex at IPEP Jaén. Hover or tap a criterion for its Spanish wording. The companion PDF adds a practical evidence-based scoring worksheet.
Source note: The list follows the original working annex. English translations and the optional 0–3 evidence scale in the PDF are editorial adaptations, not official Erasmus+ scoring rules. The downloadable file is embedded in this post; no external PDF hosting is required.
09. Agree on learning, evidence and transfer
Before confirming a mobility, agree what the visitors will observe, what evidence they may collect ethically, how the host will provide feedback and what the sending organisation intends to change afterwards. A brief learning agreement or programme can connect the original objective with daily activities. Plan the transfer before departure: a staff workshop, a revised tutoring protocol, a pilot activity or an evaluation cycle. A partnership becomes valuable when knowledge travels back with the participants and is tested in their own institution.
Think beyond the individual traveller: agree on a short observation diary, one practical resource to adapt, a feedback meeting with colleagues and a date to review whether anything has changed. These are proposed tools for implementation, not requirements quoted from the historical annex. They make the partnership accountable to the original institutional need.
10. The real measure of a good partner
The best partner is not necessarily the most famous institution, the largest organisation or the one in the most appealing city. It is the organisation whose experience helps you ask better questions, observe meaningful practice and make a credible improvement at home. A good Erasmus+ partnership is built through reciprocal respect: the host contributes expertise, the visitors bring thoughtful questions and both sides learn. The journey matters, but the educational relationship is what makes it worthwhile.
Practical tool: partner selection matrix
Score each criterion from 1 (weak) to 5 (strong). This is a suggested internal tool, not an official EU assessment grid.
| Criterion | Weight | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Relevance to our objective | 30% | Examples of comparable educational practice |
| Quality of learning programme | 25% | Detailed observation plan and named mentors |
| Inclusion and accessibility | 15% | Practical support and accessible arrangements |
| Collaboration and feedback | 15% | Availability for meetings and follow-up |
| Feasibility and logistics | 15% | Schedule, communication and realistic conditions |
Five questions before saying yes
Tick the questions you can answer confidently. Any unticked item is a useful topic for the next meeting, not a reason for embarrassment.
Mini challenge · Think like a coordinator
Scenario: Your centre wants to improve retention in adult education. Organisation A offers a beautiful city tour and a generic technology lecture. Organisation B offers observation of tutoring sessions, staff interviews and a follow-up meeting. Which would you investigate first?
Organisation B is the stronger starting point because its programme relates directly to the stated educational need. Still verify capacity, safeguarding, inclusion and practical arrangements before confirming.
Useful official starting points
- Erasmus+ Programme Guide
- Erasmus+ Project Results Platform
- EPALE: Adult Education and Partner Search
- European School Education Platform: Partner Search
- SEPIE — Spanish National Agency
Eligibility and obligations vary by sector, action and call. Always check the current official guidance.
The series so far · In publication order
01 · Before ApplyingWhat does your centre really need to change?
02 · From Idea to FormBuilding a coherent Erasmus+ application.
03 · From Objective to MobilityChoosing well before packing a suitcase.
04 · You are here: Partners Who Build, Not Just Host.
Keep building the project
Follow Changing Perspectives on Education through Erasmus+ for the next practical chapter.
Follow the blog →Author: Manuel Molina Porlán · Changing Perspectives on Education through Erasmus+. © 2026 Manuel Molina Porlán. All rights reserved. Part of the NEUROEDUCATION Educational Publishing Project.
Comentarios
Publicar un comentario