Erasmus+ priorities are not optional extras to mention at the end of your application. They are a core part of the Relevance criterion — the highest-weighted evaluation criterion at 30 points — and evaluators are explicitly instructed to assess whether projects genuinely integrate the programme’s priorities or merely reference them in passing. In 2026, the bar for what counts as genuine integration has risen further still.
This guide explains what the four Erasmus+ horizontal priorities are, what they specifically require in the context of 2026, how to address each one convincingly in a KA210 or KA220 application, and the most common priority-related mistakes that cost applicants points on the Relevance criterion.
📋 In This Guide
1. What Are Erasmus+ Priorities and Why They Matter
Erasmus+ priorities are the thematic areas the European Commission has identified as most important for the programme to address in the current period. They reflect the EU’s broader policy agenda — the green transition, the digital transformation, social cohesion and democratic resilience — translated into specific expectations for the projects it funds.
There are two types of priorities in Erasmus+. Horizontal priorities apply across all sectors and all Key Actions — every application in every sector is expected to address at least one of them. Sector-specific priorities apply within individual sectors — School Education, VET, Higher Education, Adult Education and Youth each have additional priorities specific to that field. This guide focuses on the four horizontal priorities, which are the ones most directly assessed in the Relevance criterion of KA210 and KA220 applications.
The connection between priorities and evaluation scores is direct and documented. The Relevance criterion asks evaluators to assess whether the project is connected to the priorities of the Erasmus+ programme. An application that does not demonstrate a clear, specific connection to at least two named priorities will lose points in this criterion regardless of how strong the project idea is. An application that connects to priorities generically — without specific strategies or evidence — will score below one that demonstrates genuine, measurable integration.
| Priority Type | What It Covers | Where It Is Assessed |
|---|---|---|
| Horizontal priorities (4) | Inclusion and Diversity, Digital Transformation, Environment and Climate, Democratic Participation | Relevance criterion — all Key Actions, all sectors |
| Sector-specific priorities | Varies by sector — e.g. mental health for schools, micro-credentials for VET, civic engagement for Youth | Relevance criterion — within the specific sector of application |
2. The Four Horizontal Priorities Explained
Each of the four horizontal priorities has a specific meaning in the Erasmus+ context — and a specific set of things evaluators are looking for when they assess whether your application genuinely addresses it. Understanding the difference between what each priority covers and what a strong response to it looks like is the foundation of effective priority alignment.
Priority 1 — Inclusion and Diversity. This priority focuses on ensuring that Erasmus+ reaches beyond the organisations and individuals who traditionally engage with European programmes. In practice it means two things: broadening the types of organisations participating (smaller, newer, less-experienced applicants) and broadening the profile of participants (those facing barriers to participation — socioeconomic disadvantage, geographic remoteness, disability, cultural differences, health conditions).
In a 2026 application, addressing inclusion means naming the specific barriers your target group faces, describing the specific support measures your project provides to address those barriers and — where relevant — quantifying the proportion of participants with fewer opportunities. Saying “we will ensure inclusive participation” is not addressing this priority. Saying “30% of our participants are from rural communities in southern Greece with limited access to European mobility — our project addresses this through funded travel support and pre-departure language preparation” is.
Priority 2 — Digital Transformation. This priority covers three distinct dimensions in 2026: developing digital competences in participants, integrating AI in education and training contexts, and advancing institutional digital strategies. For KA2 cooperation projects, this means the intellectual outputs should have a genuine digital dimension — not just being published online but being designed as digital learning tools, interactive resources or AI-assisted educational materials.
The digital priority does not require every project to be about technology. It requires every project to show how digital competences will be developed in participants — or how the project’s methodology, outputs or dissemination leverages digital approaches in a way that is educationally meaningful. A project that trains youth workers in digital facilitation methods is addressing this priority as effectively as one that builds a digital platform.
Priority 3 — Environment and the Fight Against Climate Change. The green priority in 2026 has two layers. The first is operational — how the project itself minimises its environmental footprint, particularly through sustainable travel choices. For trips under 500km, train or other low-carbon transport is now the expected default. The second is educational — how the project contributes to green competences, climate literacy or sustainability behaviours in participants.
For most projects, the green priority is addressed through both layers simultaneously. Describe your sustainable travel plan explicitly in the activity section, and describe how the project’s content or methodology builds environmental awareness or green skills in participants. Even a project on digital skills or youth participation can address the green priority through its methodology — for example by incorporating environmental themes into workshop content or by measuring participants’ attitudes toward sustainability before and after the project.
Priority 4 — Participation in Democratic Life. This priority covers civic engagement, media literacy, critical thinking, active citizenship and understanding of EU common values. In 2026 it connects explicitly to the Preparedness Union Strategy — the EU’s framework for building resilience in education systems during crises, conflicts and emergencies. This gives the democratic participation priority a broader scope than in previous years, encompassing not just elections and civic engagement but also media literacy, disinformation awareness and institutional resilience.
For youth organisations and NGOs, this priority is often the most naturally aligned with the project’s existing mission. For schools and VET providers, it connects to citizenship education, critical thinking and the development of active, engaged learners. The key is to move from general statements about European identity to specific, concrete activities that develop named democratic competences in identifiable participants.
💡 Address at Least Two Priorities — Specifically, Not Generically
Most funded Erasmus+ applications address two or three horizontal priorities convincingly — not all four superficially. Choose the two or three that genuinely connect to your project’s objectives and target group, and address each one with a specific strategy, a concrete measure and a measurable indicator. Two priorities addressed with depth and specificity will score higher than four priorities addressed with generic sentences.
3. How to Address Priorities in Your Application
The following framework — three elements per priority — is the most reliable structure for addressing Erasmus+ priorities in a way that scores well on the Relevance criterion. Apply it to each priority your project addresses.
Element 1 — Name the priority explicitly. Use the exact language from the Programme Guide: “Inclusion and Diversity,” “Digital Transformation,” “Environment and the Fight Against Climate Change,” or “Participation in Democratic Life.” Do not paraphrase. Evaluators are checking for explicit alignment — a project that describes environmental activities without naming the green priority may not receive credit for it.
Element 2 — Describe your specific strategy. In one to two sentences, explain exactly what your project does to address this priority. This should be specific to your project — not a description of the priority itself or a general statement about its importance. The strategy should be verifiable: it should describe an activity, an output, a participant profile or a methodology that is unique to your project design.
Element 3 — State a measurable indicator. Include at least one specific, measurable indicator for each priority. This can be a participant number, a percentage, a pre/post assessment, a survey score or a documented output. The indicator signals to the evaluator that the priority integration is planned and deliberate — not aspirational.
The three-element structure applied to the Inclusion and Diversity priority looks like this in practice:
EXAMPLE — Inclusion and Diversity
Priority named: “This project directly addresses the Erasmus+ horizontal priority of Inclusion and Diversity.”
Strategy: “A minimum of 40% of participating young people are from rural municipalities in Greece, Italy and Portugal with limited prior access to European learning mobility. The project provides travel grants, language preparation sessions and a dedicated mentoring system for these participants.”
Indicator: “Pre- and post-project surveys will measure change in participants’ sense of European belonging and confidence in international settings. Results will be published in the open-access project report.”
Apply this same three-element structure to each priority your project addresses. Place it in the context and relevance section of the application — not as an afterthought at the end, but as a core part of your argument for why this project should be funded.
Where to place priority alignment in the form. Priority alignment belongs primarily in the Context and Relevance section — the part of the application that feeds directly into the Relevance criterion. However, priorities should also be visible in the objectives (as named priority areas the project contributes to), in the methodology (as the approach used to achieve priority outcomes) and in the impact section (as the measurable priority-related outcomes expected). A priority that appears only in the relevance section and nowhere else in the application will score lower than one that is integrated throughout.
4. Priority Alignment by Key Action
While all four horizontal priorities apply across all Key Actions, the most natural and most convincing alignment varies by action and sector. The table below maps the strongest priority connections for each Key Action and provides the specific angle to use in each case.
| Key Action / Sector | Strongest Priority Alignment | Specific 2026 Angle | What Evaluators Expect to See |
|---|---|---|---|
| KA210/KA220 — School Education | Digital Transformation, Environment, Inclusion | Mental health and well-being explicitly expected; gender equality in STEM if relevant; green travel plan for all transnational activities | Specific well-being strategy; named digital competences developed; sustainable travel choices described with distance justification |
| KA210/KA220 — VET | Digital Transformation, Environment, Inclusion | Union of Skills framework connection; micro-credentials dimension if applicable; green skills for the green economy transition | Named vocational skills connected to digital/green economy; specific learner profiles with fewer opportunities; reference to Union of Skills |
| KA210/KA220 — Adult Education | Inclusion, Digital Transformation, Democratic Participation | Basic skills for digital inclusion; civic participation for adult learners; reach adults with low qualification levels | Target group with specific barriers named; digital skills dimension beyond basic ICT; civic or democratic dimension for adult learners |
| KA210/KA220 — Youth | Inclusion, Democratic Participation, Environment | Fewer opportunities participants central — not peripheral; media literacy and democratic engagement strongly valued; climate action as youth civic engagement | Specific fewer opportunities profile with named barriers; Youthpass integration; measurable democratic or environmental competence outcomes |
| KA152 — Youth Exchanges | Inclusion, Democratic Participation, Environment | Green travel expectation especially strong for exchanges; inclusion of participants with fewer opportunities explicitly prioritised; intercultural democratic dialogue as methodology | Fewer opportunities participants named with specific barriers; sustainable travel plan; programme designed around democratic or environmental competence development |
| KA121/KA122 — School, VET, Adult Mobility | Digital Transformation, Inclusion, Environment | Staff digital competence development; sustainable travel for all short-distance mobility; well-being dimension for school staff | Named digital competences to be developed; train/sustainable travel for under 500km; institutional impact of mobility on priority integration back home |
5. Most Common Priority Mistakes
Listing priorities without connecting them to the project. The most common priority mistake is writing a sentence that names a priority and then describes the priority itself rather than the project’s approach to it. “This project addresses the digital transformation priority, which focuses on developing digital competences across all learning sectors” tells the evaluator nothing about the project. “This project develops digital facilitation competences in 24 youth workers across Greece, Italy and Portugal through a structured online-to-offline training methodology” tells them exactly what the project does and why it is digitally relevant.
Addressing all four priorities superficially rather than two or three deeply. Some applicants mention all four priorities briefly in an attempt to maximise their alignment score. Evaluators see through this pattern quickly — four priorities each addressed in a single generic sentence score lower than two priorities each addressed with specific strategy, evidence and measurable indicators. Choose the priorities that genuinely connect to your project and address them with depth.
Placing priority alignment only in the relevance section. Priority integration is most convincing when it appears across multiple sections of the application — in the needs analysis, the objectives, the methodology, the work plan and the impact section. A priority that appears once in the relevance section and is never mentioned again reads as a compliance exercise rather than a genuine design principle. Thread the priority through the entire application.
No measurable indicators for priority outcomes. Stating that a project “will contribute to digital transformation” without specifying what change will be measured, in whom and by when is an incomplete priority claim. Every priority addressed in a 2026 application should have at least one measurable indicator — a pre/post survey, a competence assessment, a participant count with a specific fewer opportunities profile, or a documented green travel saving. The indicator is what makes the claim credible.
Treating the green travel requirement as optional. The 2026 Programme Guide’s expectation that trips under 500km use sustainable transport is not a soft recommendation — it is an explicit programme priority that evaluators can check against the budget and activity plan. If your project includes transnational travel and all participants are travelling by plane regardless of distance, this is a visible misalignment with the green priority. Review your travel plan before submitting and justify any flight bookings for short distances explicitly.
Not updating priority alignment from a previous application. Organisations that resubmit a rejected application sometimes update the project design but leave the priority section unchanged from the previous year’s submission. In 2026 this is a problem because the Programme Guide has strengthened the priority expectations — particularly for mental health, green travel and measurable indicators. Always rewrite the priority section from scratch when resubmitting, using the current Programme Guide as the reference.
6. Priority Checklist
- ✅ At least two horizontal priorities selected — chosen because they genuinely connect to the project, not for coverage
- ✅ Each priority named explicitly using the exact Programme Guide terminology
- ✅ Each priority addressed with a specific strategy — what the project does, not what the priority is
- ✅ At least one measurable indicator provided for each priority addressed
- ✅ Inclusion priority: specific fewer opportunities barriers named — not “disadvantaged groups” in general
- ✅ Digital priority: named digital competences to be developed, or named digital dimension of outputs
- ✅ Green priority: sustainable travel plan described for all trips under 500km
- ✅ Green priority: educational or behavioural green dimension described for participants
- ✅ Democratic priority: specific civic, media literacy or democratic competence outcomes named
- ✅ Mental health / well-being dimension included for School and VET applications
- ✅ Priority alignment visible across multiple sections — not only in the relevance section
- ✅ Priority language updated from the 2026 Programme Guide — not copied from a previous year’s application
- ✅ Sector-specific priorities checked and addressed alongside horizontal priorities
- ✅ Priority alignment reviewed for consistency with objectives, methodology and impact section
📋 Need Help Aligning Your Proposal With 2026 Priorities?
GrowthProjects.eu writes proposals with evaluator-level priority integration built in from the start — not added as an afterthought. From project concept development and priority alignment to full KA210 and KA220 proposal writing. Over 32 funded projects across 18 European countries.
✅ Check Your Organisation’s Erasmus+ Eligibility First
Free eligibility checker — takes 2 minutes, no sign-up required.
