Student mobility programs are increasingly recognized to be an important asset for institutional development. Based on input from the five institutions, the impact and the success of these programs is mostly evaluated and/or measured on the student and institutional level. In some instances, these KPIs are examined during accreditation processes.

The indicators used to measure the impact of student mobility programs across all 5 institutions include quantitative metrics on student mobility:

• numbers of participants, both incoming and outgoing;
• duration of mobility;
• type of mobility (exchange or degree-seeking);
• gender ratio in student mobility.

Some institutions also gather and evaluate quantitative metrics on the internationalization of the institution as a whole:

• number of internationalization events organized;
• number of staff and teaching mobility periods organized by the institution;
• number of international visiting professor opportunities organized / number of hours taught;
• percentage of the academic program taught in English.                        

Qualitative metrics prove more difficult to gather and are based primarily on student self-reporting:    

• Perceived impact on language skills;
• Perceived impact on adaptability;
• Perceived impact on employability;
• Overall satisfaction with the experience.

One institution takes this a step further by measuring academic performance before, during, and after mobility periods, which offers a direct and objective way to assess the impact of mobility on students’ academic performance.

Data-gathering methods used by the 5 institutions include:

• EU surveys (Erasmus+ final report);
• Feedback questionnaires created by the institutions internally;
• Spreadsheets required by accrediting bodies as part of the audit process.

Who uses these KPIs to evaluate the success of the mobility programs, and to what end?

• The institutions themselves, as part of a quality plan for continuous improvement;
• Accreditation agencies, to determine whether or not to grant accreditation;
• Erasmus+ national agencies, to determine the level of funding for future projects;
• Other governmental agencies providing financing (national, regional or local), to determine the level of funding for future projects;
• National press organizations, to establish rankings of HEIs.