This chapter offers an analysis of the system-level policy areas in Lithuania that have a substantial influence the quality and relevance of teaching and learning in higher education and vocational education and training (VET) and offers recommendations on how these can be recalibrated to better serve the needs of Lithuanian students, the labour market and society.
Ensuring Quality Vocational and Higher Education in Lithuania
Abstract
This section analyses three sets of wider, system-level policy areas that have a substantial influence on the quality of vocational education and training (VET) and higher education in Lithuania: 1) policies that determine the level of diversity and coherence across VET and higher education provision, and its alignment with the skills needed by the economy and society (i.e. governance); 2) the student admission and related public funding systems, and how these influence institutional action to improve teaching quality (i.e. funding); and 3) the availability of comparable, system-level information on the quality and relevance of VET and higher education, and how such information is used in policy planning and to guide student choice (i.e. information).
6.1.1 Approach to managing the network of higher education and VET providers and programmes, and aligning provision with the skills needed by the economy and society
This section examines Lithuania’s approach to managing the network of VET and higher education providers and programmes, and the attempts made to align this provision with the skills needed by the economy and society. It starts by offering an overview of recent reforms made by the Lithuanian authorities to reorganise the network of VET and higher education providers and diversify the offer of study programmes, followed by a discussion of two key challenges identified by the OECD team in its analysis.
Lithuania has sought to improve the quality and relevance of VET and higher education through a series of institutional mergers and a diversification of programme types
Since 2017, Lithuania has embarked on a process of institutional consolidation and restructuring in both the VET and higher education sectors. These reforms were introduced to respond to rapidly declining youth cohorts in Lithuania and staff shortages in regional VET providers and colleges. Evidence shows that institutional consolidation has the potential to bring efficiency and quality gains, as it allows different institutions to bring together teaching staff and students from institutions and programmes across multiple locations or to pool certain central services (such as information technology, financial management and human resources) (OECD, 2023[1]). In higher education, five mergers were carried out to tackle pressing staff and student shortages and related quality concerns, especially in the college sector. Three regional colleges were merged and two colleges were integrated into universities (OECD, 2023[1]). In the VET sector, declining student numbers have led the Lithuanian authorities to reduce the number of public VET providers from 75 to 44 between 2017 and 2023 (SMSM, 2018[2]).
In line with developments observed in other OECD and EU jurisdictions, over the past decade, Lithuania has also introduced a range of new and professionally-oriented programme types to respond to demands from students and society for more accessible and practically-oriented forms of tertiary education (OECD, 2025[3]). In 2013, professional bachelor’s programmes were introduced, followed by the introduction of short-cycle study programmes at level 5 of the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) in 2021, with both programme types delivered by colleges. Short-cycle programmes were introduced to supplement the existing post-secondary non-tertiary programmes at ISCED level 4, delivered by VET providers, and to create new pathways for VET graduates to obtain a tertiary-level qualification. One of the most recent developments in Lithuania to diversify the post-secondary education and training offer is the government’s decision to allow colleges to start offering professional master’s programmes as of 2028, provided they can demonstrate sufficient research capacity. Not only does this decision offer the potential to bring greater diversity in the existing higher education programme landscape in Lithuania, but it may also enhance the quality of teaching and learning more broadly in the college sector – as it incentivises those institutions to invest in their research capacity and research-based teaching practices (OECD, 2023[1]).
Many programmes, especially those offered by regional colleges and VET providers, lack the critical mass of students and teaching staff to guarantee quality
While evidence on the optimal number of VET and higher education providers relative to the size and population of a territory is limited, 35 higher education institutions (HEIs) and 43 public VET providers for a country with a population of just under three million is objectively high by international standards (OECD, 2023[1]). Many programmes, especially those delivered by regional colleges and VET providers, also lack the critical mass of students and teaching staff to guarantee quality across their full range of programmes.
Several programmes, especially in colleges and VET providers, fail to attract enough students to create a stimulating learning environment
Figure 6.1 shows that, between 2013/14 and 2023/24, student enrolment in higher education dropped from around 150 000 to 100 000. However, colleges are feeling the impacts of declining student enrolment more strongly than the university sector. Some colleges currently have a student body one-third smaller than a decade earlier. Enrolment in universities is one-fifth lower than in 2013/14. This puts pressure on institutions to remain financially viable. Only a handful of colleges (e.g. the Vilnius and Lithuanian Business colleges and St. Ignatius college) and universities (e.g. Vilnius University, LCC International University, the Lithuanian Military Academy, and the Vilnius St. Joseph Priests Seminary) have managed to expand their student bodies over time, partly as a result of mergers with other institutions. This places greater pressure on those that have not managed to sustain student numbers over time.
Student numbers in 2023/24 relative to 2013/14
Note: This figure includes only institutions that were open to students in 2023-24 to look at enrolment without the influence of institutional closures. The calculation is the number of students in 2023-24 divided by the number of students in 2013-14.
Source: OECD calculations based on NŠA (2024[4]), Studentų skaičius 1 [Number of students 1], https://data.gov.lt/datasets/313/.
Decreasing student numbers have also hollowed out programmes in VET (Table 6.1). Compared to a decade earlier, median programme sizes have more than halved, with the bottom 25% of programmes running with fewer students than is legally allowed – the statutory minimum is 12 students per programme (Rebublic of LIthuania, 2024[5]). This median figure masks further regional disparities. For example, in the Tauragė region 75% of all programmes have 12 or fewer students. While colleges and universities have not been subject to the same deterioration over time, they too face similar issues. The smallest 50% of programmes for both colleges and universities are similar in size to those in VET providers (Table 6.1). In interviews with the OECD team, several higher education and VET stakeholders, students in particular, mentioned that being taught in extremely small groups potentially had a negative impact on their study experience and learning outcomes. While generally speaking being taught in small is positive, limited available evidence on “optimal” student-to-teacher ratios shows that ensuring a number of peers to learn with and from is equally important to create an engaging learning environment (OECD, 2020[6]).
Distribution of number of students per programme per institution, ordered by programme size
Note: VET programme numbers include both initial and continuing students. For higher education, programme totals only count for students in their first course, so that students of different years are not aggregated together (variable stkursas= 1 kursas).
Source: OECD calculations based on (2024[7]), Profesinių mokyklų mokiniai pagal kursus ir mokymo programas [Vocational school students according to courses and curricul - dataset], https://data.gov.lt/datasets/342/ (accessed on 15 February 2025) and NŠA (2024[8]), Studentų skaičius 2 [Number of students 2], https://data.gov.lt/datasets/314/ (accessed on 15 February 2025).
Regional colleges and VET providers are facing acute staffing challenges, which can have an impact on educational quality
The VET and higher education sectors also face important staffing challenges. In the VET sector, the decrease in student numbers has not been accompanied by a similar drop in the total number of teaching staff, meaning that in 2023/24 there was an average of only 9.5 students per teacher, compared with 12.5 a decade ago (Table 6.2). A similar pattern can be observed in universities, where the total number of teaching staff has declined by only 13% between 2013/14 and 2023/24, compared with a decline in the number of students by almost one-third (31%) over the same period. This poses questions about the efficient use of resources in VET providers and HEIs in terms of managing their teaching delivery.
While student numbers have fallen faster than staff numbers on a national scale, colleges in some counties are suffering from acute issues with teacher recruitment and retention, especially in Klaipėda, Panevėžys, and Marijampolė. In Klaipėda, colleges now average 48.8 students per teacher, with an equivalent figure of 34.5 in Panevėžys, compared with respectively around 32.5 and 20.2 per instructor a decade earlier. In Marijampolė, the total number of students per instructor has increased from 13.3 in 2013/14 to 60.8 students per teacher in 2023/24 (i.e. an increase of 357%).
As a result of these staffing challenges, many colleges are heavily reliant on part-time teaching staff, who often teach in multiple colleges in the region, and in some cases also in VET institutions. International evidence in higher education finds that a high reliance on part-time teaching staff may potentially have adverse effects on students’ learning experience (OECD, 2020[6]). For example, some studies have found that staff on precarious contracts are generally perceived as being less qualified by students and to negatively affect student retention between the first and second year of higher education (OECD, 2024[9]).
In consultations with the OECD team, stakeholders argued for stronger links between VET and higher education providers – regional VET providers and colleges especially – to help institutions tackle common staffing and student enrolment challenges. Together, they may also offer a meaningful alternative to the geographical concentration of university education in Vilnius, Klaipėda and Kaunas (Table 6.2). The recent closures of the university campus in Šiauliai and the university-level seminary programmes in Telšiai have meant that it is now only possible to study at a university in one of these three cities,1 weakening the diversity of post-secondary education and training opportunities in the regions. VET providers are much more evenly distributed across the country and, similarly, there are colleges operating in eight of the ten counties of Lithuania. By pooling their staff and expertise they could, in time, create a more professionally-oriented post-secondary education and training offer that responds to local labour market and skills needs.
Source: Based on NŠA (2024[7]), Vocational school students according to courses and curriculum - dataset, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/342/ (accessed on 15 February 2025), NŠA (2024[8]), Number of students 2 – dataset, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/314/ (accessed on 15 February 2025), NŠA (2024[10]) Pedagogical staff of vocational schools – dataset, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/348/ (accessed on 15 February 2025) and NŠA (2024[11]), Number of teachers 1 – dataset, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/320/ (accessed on 15 February 2025).
Transitions between VET and higher education remain limited, and the supply of post-secondary graduates does not match the skills needed by the economy and society
Despite institutional consolidation in the VET and higher education sectors and the introduction of short-cycle programmes at ISCED level 5, the level of connection and transitions between VET and higher education in Lithuania remains limited. Available evidence shows that, in 2022, only 3.2% of upper-secondary VET students applied for tertiary education, with 1.7% successfully entering. This compares with 66.9% of students from general upper-secondary education applying, and 57.8% successfully entering tertiary education (Beleckienė, Kazlavickas and Palevič, 2022[12]). The uptake of short-cycle programmes at ISCED level 5, which were, as noted, introduced to facilitate transitions to higher education for VET students has remained low. In 2022/23, the first 11 students were admitted to short-cycle study programmes, and in 2024/25 this number increased to 51 (LAMA BPO, 2024[13]). At the time of writing, there are 15 short-cycle programmes in Lithuania, offered by five colleges.2
Share of new entrants to tertiary education, 2022
Note: EU21 and OECD are unweighted averages based on the respective member countries shown.
Source: OECD (2024[14]), Share of entrants to and first-time graduates at tertiary education, http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/18p.
Post-secondary vocational programmes at ISCED levels 4 and 5 are also not a popular study choice in Lithuania. In 2022, only 10% of adults aged 25-34 in Lithuania had this as their highest qualification (at this time ISCED level 5 was only just being introduced) (OECD, 2023[15]). By contrast, Lithuania has extremely high participation rates at bachelor’s level compared with other OECD and EU jurisdictions. In 2022, the share of new entrants at bachelor’s level (91%), was significantly higher than the OECD average of 78% (see Figure 6.2). In 2023, 57% of 25-34 year-olds in Lithuania had tertiary education as their highest qualification, compared to only 47% for all OECD countries. In other OECD and EU jurisdictions, attainment rates across different types of post-secondary VET and higher education programmes are more balanced. In Latvia, for example, 44% of 25‑34 year-olds had an upper or post-secondary VET qualification as their highest qualification in 2023, and 45% had tertiary education (OECD, 2024[16]).
These figures show that there is a clear imbalance in the share of adults with a post-secondary vocational or short-cycle tertiary qualification in Lithuania and those choosing a traditional higher education degree. While this situation is not unique to Lithuania, evidence from the OECD’s latest survey on adult skills shows that these imbalances may translate into skills mismatches in the economy and society. In 2023, 29% of adults in Lithuania were over-qualified for their role, compared with the OECD average of 23%. However, only 17% of workers were over-skilled, meaning that qualification attainment was not necessarily leading to an accumulation of skills that could access better employment opportunities. Field of study mismatches were typical of broader OECD experience, with 37% working in sectors or professions that do not match their studies (compared to 38% for all OECD countries) (OECD, 2024[17]).
Incidence of qualification and field of study mismatch, 2023
Note: Adults aged 25-65 who are not self-employed.EU18 is an unweighted average based on the member countries shown. Average is the unweighted average of the 27 OECD countries shown. For Poland, caution is required in interpreting results due to the high share of respondents with unusual response patterns. See the Note for Poland in the Survey of Adult Skills Reader’s Guide.
Source: OECD (2024[17]), Do Adults Have the Skills They Need to Thrive in a Changing World?: Survey of Adult Skills 2023, Table A.4.12, http://doi.org/10.1787/b263dc5d-en.
A lack of curriculum alignment and collaboration between VET providers and HEIs are factors in the low popularity of post-secondary VET and short-cycle tertiary programmes
There are many reasons for the low popularity of post-secondary VET and short-cycle tertiary programmes in Lithuania. For post-secondary VET programmes, one of these is their less favourable study and labour market outcomes compared with traditional higher education programmes. Available evidence shows that, in 2023, more than 40% of students in VET programmes dropped out before completing their programme, compared with just over 10% in higher education (excluding short-cycle study programmes) (ŠVIS, 2024[18]). A post-secondary vocational qualification also leads to weaker employment outcomes than a higher education qualification. In 2023, 84.8% of 25-34-year-olds with a post-secondary VET qualification were in employment, compared with 91.2% of graduates with a higher education degree (OECD, 2024[19]).
Another reason for the low popularity of post-secondary VET and – based on the limited experience to date – short-cycle tertiary programmes is the perception that these programmes offer limited opportunity to progress to other levels of study. The lack of progression pathways reflects a lack of collaboration between VET providers and HEIs to align their curricula to provide the basis for such pathways. The study programmes at ISCED level 4 and 5 also appear to be insufficiently distinct from each other in terms of content and purpose, creating confusion for learners and employers. In 2023, the government introduced a legal requirement for ISCED level 5 entrants to hold a VET qualification to create a clearer distinction and progression route between both programmes. However, as noted, post-secondary VET programmes at ISCED level 4 have few entrants and upper-secondary VET graduates at ISCED level 3 who have successfully completed the general Matura examination prefer to apply for bachelor’s programmes rather than ISCED level 5 programmes, even if they have lower chances of entering higher education through this route (Kur Stoti, 2024[20]). As a result, the pool of potential entrants to ISCED level 5 programmes (i.e. ISCED 3 and 4 VET graduates) is small, and the legal change to clarify pathways has done little to increase participation rates in short-cycle study programmes.
There is also insufficient articulation between short-cycle tertiary and professional bachelor’s programmes. Unlike in some other OECD and EU jurisdictions, the successful completion of a short-cycle tertiary programme in Lithuania does not guarantee that students can transfer credits towards the completion of a professional bachelor’s degree. In Ireland and the Netherlands, for example, the successful completion of a short-cycle study programme automatically grants students entry to the second or third year of a professional bachelor’s programme in a related discipline (OECD, 2025[3]). In Lithuania, such decisions are left up to the discretion of individual HEIs, with several reported to recognise only very few credits on the grounds that ISCED level 5 graduates supposedly have insufficient theoretical preparation. As a result, short-cycle graduates often have to start their professional bachelor’s programme from the first year.
During the fact-finding mission to Lithuania in March 2024, the OECD team identified some examples of inter-institutional collaboration between VET providers and colleges around the curricula of their VET and short-cycle study programmes. An example is Kaunas Technical College (KTK), which collaborates closely with regional VET providers to ensure its short-cycle programmes align with the upper-secondary and post-secondary VET programmes offered by these providers (see Box 6.1). Other types of collaboration in which VET providers and HEIs engage include the sharing of practical training centres and teaching staff. As noted earlier, VET providers and colleges face acute challenges in hiring qualified teaching staff.
More structured forms of collaboration between VET providers and HEIs are rare in Lithuania and may be limited by some policies. In consultations with the OECD team, several stakeholders mentioned that in annual VET Director assessments, the ŠMSM had imposed targets on the number of students from general education schools that attend some form of short training placements at VET providers. This focus means that there is less bandwidth for VET providers to expand their collaborative activity with colleges. For HEIs, the upcoming research assessment also means that many colleges are primarily focused on strengthening the research capacity of their teaching staff instead of enhancing the quality of practical training in their study programmes – for example by establishing links with regional VET providers.
Kaunas Technical College (KTK) became involved in the development of short-cycle programmes as early as 2016, which is when the Ministry of Education, Science and Sports (ŠMSM) launched discussions with VET providers, employers and colleges on the competencies graduates from short-cycle graduates should achieve. After these discussions, and the ŠMSM’s announcement of the professional fields in which short-cycle programmes could be offered, KTK started to collaborate with local VET providers and employers to develop its short-cycle curricula. The collaboration with these VET providers (notably Marijampolė and Kaunas Technological VET Centres) and employers involved the following activities:
1. defining the learning outcomes and practical training arrangements for the programme
2. comparing and aligning the VET and short-cycle curricula
3. aligning the short-cycle programme with professional bachelor’s programmes in related fields
4. developing procedures for the recognition of practical training skills
5. sharing of infrastructure with partner VET providers and employers
6. delivering (part of) some modules together with teachers from VET providers.
Stakeholders from KTK noted that while it is challenging to align VET and ISCED level 5 curricula, this step is crucial to support the preparation and transition of prospective students from VET into these programmes. Collaboration with (future) employers on the learning outcomes and practical training components of the programmes is also crucial to give students and employers perspective and clarity on future employment opportunities.
Note: Based on interviews by the OECD team with stakeholders from Kaunas Technical College (KTK).
Highly fragmented governance of VET and higher education hinders skills alignment
In many ways, the lack of collaboration and alignment across VET and higher education at provider level reflects the situation at system level in Lithuania. At present, separate departments in the ŠMSM oversee the VET and higher education sectors, each with an entirely separate regulatory framework, budget envelope and external quality assurance (QA) system. If Lithuania wishes to foster greater co-operation across the VET and higher education sector at provider level, it will also need to rethink its system-level governance of both sectors. In the area of QA specifically, it will require the country to explore options for collaboration between the Centre for Quality Assessment in Higher Education (SKVC) and the Qualifications and Vocational Education and Training Development Centre (KPMPC), as well as SKVC and the Research Council of Lithuania (LMT) in the area of doctoral education.
The Technical Support Implementation (TSI) project “Strengthening the system of evaluation and quality assurance of higher education and vocational education and training in Lithuania” is the first example of structured collaboration between the VET and higher education sectors in Lithuania. The project has allowed the Lithuanian Division for VET and Lifelong Learning and the Division for Higher Education as the main beneficiaries of the project to gain an in-depth understanding of the similarities and differences that exist between both sectors’ regulatory and quality assurance systems. The peer learning events organised as part of the project have also created opportunities for stakeholders from the VET and higher education sectors to – in many cases for the first time – meet with each other, share best practices and collectively reflect on the future of VE and higher education quality assurance and skills development in Lithuania.
The overwhelmingly positive feedback received from stakeholders on the culture of collaboration and co-operation generated through the project, at both institution and system level (e.g. between the two Divisions in the ŠMSM and the external QA agencies), shows that fertile ground for future collaboration in VET and higher education has been created. During group discussions at the national roundtable event on 25 March 2024, students, teaching staff and staff involved in quality assurance reported to the OECD team that they were surprised to discover so many similar challenges (e.g. lack of time, opportunities and recognition structures for teaching excellence; administratively burdensome external QA systems, which do not always have the desired impact; or a highly regulatory operating environment). At the level of institutional leadership, the differences appeared to be slightly larger, which is perhaps a reflection of the highly fragmented approach to governing both sectors at system level.
6.1.2 Use of the student admission and the related public funding system to influence quality
This section examines Lithuania’s student admission system for VET and higher education, and the related public funding system. For higher education, it also analyses the recently introduced system of performance-based funding, and how this is influencing HEIs to focus on teaching quality.
The lack of specific entry requirements for post-compulsory VET hinders its attractiveness, and the allocation of study places does not reflect labour market demand
In 2023, Lithuania expanded its centralised student admission system, which had existed for VET since 2017, to short-cycle, bachelor’s and integrated higher education programmes. The system is managed by the Lithuanian Higher Education Institutions Association for Organising Joint Admission (LAMA BPO) (LLAMA-BPO, n.d.[21]). Until the end of 2024, there was a common system of admission for higher education and VET. In 2025, the VET admission system was incorporated into a new centralised admission system (Mokausi Lietuvoje), alongside pre-school, kindergarten and general secondary admissions.
Through these systems, students compete for a fixed number of state-funded places, primarily based on their prior academic achievement. Students who do not obtain a state-funded place can be admitted to higher education as fee-paying students, provided they have a sufficient level of prior achievement. In many ways, the study-place-based system incentivises VET and higher education providers to attract as many students as possible, as this is a key source of income for them.
Stricter entry requirements in higher education seek to improve the readiness of students entering the system, while no such requirements exist in the VET sector
Since 2024, access to higher education requires the successful completion of at least three Matura exams for both state-funded and self-financed places; the competitive score is calculated from four exams.3 The reason for moving towards stricter entry requirements was to address concerns coming from teaching staff over the academic readiness of students (National Audit Office of Lithuania, 2021[22]). In the short term, it is hoped that stricter admission requirements will discourage students who may be unprepared for higher education from applying, and in the longer term to rebalance application rates across VET and higher education. Achieving this, however, will depend on the willingness of all HEIs to implement these stricter entry requirements. According to some stakeholders interviewed by the OECD team, some HEIs still allow students who do not meet the basic entry requirements to enter their programmes, driven in part by the “money-follows-the student” model underpinning the admission system. It will also require a clear entry system for post-compulsory VET.
Unlike in higher education, there are no specific entry requirements for post-secondary VET programmes. The absolute requirements for entry into VET programmes are determined only by the number of available state-funded study places in different VET providers, described in more detail in the next section. The lack of a specific entry requirements – such as a VET-specific Matura examination – hinders the status and distinctive nature of post-secondary VET. At the same time, schools have no basis to filter most students based on anything other than previous exam scores, which means that at the threshold of acceptance for places, students who may be more motivated to participate in the course might not be selected due to marginal differences in past educational attainment.4
The current procedure for the allocation of state-funded study places in VET and higher education does not sufficiently reflect the skills needed by the economy and society
As noted, when applying for entry to VET and higher education, students compete for a fixed number of state-funded study places determined each year by the ŠMSM. The total number of state-funded study places in higher education, and their distribution across study fields, is determined annually by the ŠMSM based on the available state budget, proposals submitted by HEIs, an assessment of labour market demand, as well as the qualifications of teaching staff, student-teacher ratios and an estimation of the costs associated with running different programmes (Republic of Lithuania, 2009[23]).
In VET, the total number of state-funded study places is fixed for each of the ten counties in Lithuania based on forecasts of the need for VET qualifications, information on the results of the basic education achievement tests, proposals of the regional development councils and the state‘s overall financial capabilities. Places are categorised according to the fields of education defined in the Lithuanian Education Classifier (Republic of Lithuania, 2005[24]) and determined for each county of Lithuania by 1 February of each year.5 This is after the draft of the number of state-funded formal VET places is submitted to ministries and regional development councils. Proposals from the ministries and regional development councils are then evaluated to determine the final county place offers, subject to the original constraint on overall places from the preliminary estimate. Regional development councils then propose how many places in which education field can be allocated to a specific VET institution operating in that county. This means that there are no quotas of VET places attributable in certain fields of education within counties or individual VET institutions.
Despite this seeming responsiveness to economic and societal developments in the allocation of state-funded study places in VET and higher education, evidence shows that the allocation of state-funded places has remained relatively stable over time. For VET, places have numbered around 20 600 for each of the previous five years. For higher education, places have averaged 12 000. This is despite changes to both the size of the eligible student population and broader labour market dynamics. Government forecasts point to rapidly changing skills demand over the next eight years. One forecast by STRATA estimates that manufacturing jobs are expected to shrink by 15% over the next ten years (31 000 jobs), whereas employment in transport and storage is expected to grow by 15% in the same period (23 000 jobs) (Strata, 2024[25]). These changes are significant and will require participation in education to mirror future skills needs. Ensuring that VET and higher education participation adapts with these changes will be vital in ensuring the vibrancy of the Lithuanian economy. The de-coupling of national and regional-level forecasts in VET creates further challenges in matching national and regional forecasts. The sum of individual regional estimates of VET needs by subject may be very different to national level forecasts. Reviewing how well the two sets of forecasts match with each other and where the main differences are may give an understanding of how sensitive VET places by subject area are to the particular methodologies and assumptions used in the different forecasting processes. This can inform where further adjustments may be necessary.
Low overall public funding and rapidly declining youth cohorts drive a fierce competition for students among providers, and the effects of the performance-related funding model on developing quality cultures in higher education are yet to be demonstrated
International evidence shows that having a stable source of core (public) funding to fund the day-to-day teaching, research and engagement activities of education providers is crucial to ensuring quality (OECD, 2020[6]). Compared with OECD and EU counterparts, Lithuania spends less than average per full-time equivalent student. Adjusted for purchasing-power parity, Lithuania spent USD 13 400 per upper-secondary VET student and USD 14 200 per tertiary student in 2021, compared to an EU25 average of USD 14 800 and USD 20 000 respectively (see Figure 6.4). This is 10% lower than the EU25 average for VET spending and 29% for tertiary students. On average, the spending differentials between these two sets of students are much smaller than they are across other EU and OECD countries.
Spending per student 2021, USD purchasing power parities (PPP), current prices
Note: Adjusted for purchasing-power parity (PPP). This includes only government spending. Countries with large work-based learning VET sectors also have significant employer contributions. EU25 and OECD (35) are the unweighted averages of the member countries shown.
*Upper-secondary vocational spending not separated and includes general upper-secondary.
Source: OECD (2024[26]), Expenditure on education institutions per full-time equivalent student, http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/1d4.
Several stakeholders interviewed by the OECD team noted that the current funding model creates a strong competition for students among higher education providers. While a healthy level of competition between providers has the potential to positively incentivise institutions to focus on enhancing the quality of their provision, too much competition can have unintended consequences, which several stakeholders reported was the case in Lithuania right now (OECD, 2020[6]). Instead of developing a distinct and high-quality programme offering, focused on institutional strengths and a selected target audience, declining youth cohorts are instead incentivising many Lithuanian HEIs to admit as many students as possible and keep programmes open, even if – as noted earlier in this section – some students do not meet the entry requirements set by the government or there is limited demand for programmes (see Table 6.1).
For VET providers, a similar competition for students occurs. As noted, VET providers’ funding is based solely on student numbers and – given the recent process of school closures and mergers – VET providers are facing increased pressure to secure sufficient student numbers to keep programmes and institutions open. This has an extra regional dynamic, given the nature of government-funded VET places, which are demarcated by county. As student numbers have decreased and average programme sizes have shrunk, schools may compete for students to retain teachers and keep programmes open. As discussed earlier in this section, this leads to several smaller programmes being offered in multiple institutions, rather than increased specialisation among providers offering fewer but larger programmes (see Table 6.1).
The effects of the performance-related funding model in higher education on developing quality cultures are yet to be demonstrated
Following recommendations from the National Audit Office of Lithuania (National Audit Office of Lithuania, 2021[22]), the ŠMSM introduced a performance-based funding model in higher education to encourage HEIs to pay greater attention to enhancing the quality and labour market relevance of their programmes, instead of increasing student numbers only. As such, Lithuania has followed the example of several other small and medium-sized higher education systems in the OECD and EU in trying to use the funding system to influence teaching quality and relevance (OECD, 2025[3]).
In 2023, a sum equivalent to 5% of total state funding for educational activities in higher education was allocated based on performance indicators, with the proportion increased to 10% in 2024 and to 20% from 2025. The calculation of institutions’ performance-related funding is carried out by the ŠMSM, based on data collected by SKVC each year for all HEIs on six key performance indicators: 1) time-to-completion rates; 2) graduate employment rates; 3) internationalisation of study programmes; 4) employment rate of students into research, art and educational activities; 5) share of graduates who received a state scholarship; and 6) private funding for educational activities (see Table 6.3).
The OECD team has identified three key issues with the current design of Lithuania’s performance-related funding system for higher education. The first is that the system is based on a narrow set of quantitative indicators only. HEIs also do not receive performance-based funding associated with drop-out rates and graduate employment rates if they have a drop-out rate higher than 25% and an employment rate lower than 60% across the institution. Not only do these indicators not adequately capture the quality of teaching and learning in institutions, but the strict performance targets associated with them incentivise “creative compliance” among HEIs to a limited set of performance metrics as opposed to pursing pedagogical innovation (OECD, 2024[9]). An OECD review of international practice in the use of performance-based funding in higher education recommends the use of a differentiated set of indicators reflecting institutions’ student population and local economy and supplementing quantitative indicators with a more nuanced set of qualitative information that reflects the mission and profile of individual institutions (OECD, 2025[3]). In the past, when STRATA monitored HEIs’ educational resources, a differentiation between different disciplines existed. For example, the threshold for student drop-out was set at 30% for programmes in the field of Humanities and 50% in the Technical Sciences. The threshold for student drop-out in master’s programmes was set at 20%, and at 10% for doctoral programmes (SKVC, 2011[27]).
A second key challenge is that HEIs’ performance-based funding envelope is allocated on an annual basis. The lack of a long-term funding approach prevents institutions from using funds in a more strategic manner to support quality enhancements. It also requires considerable analytical and administrative resources from SKVC and the ŠMSM each year.
Indicators used for performance-related funding in Lithuanian higher education, 2024
Sources: Republic of Lithuania (2023[28]), Procedures, data and performance funding of HEI education outcomes monitoring, Ministry of Education, Science and Sports (ŠMSM), Vilnius, https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/86b1cbb087b611edbdcebd68a7a0df7e/asr (assessed on16 February 2024) and Republic of Lithuania (2021[29]), On the Approval of the Procedures for the External Evaluation and Accreditation of Studies, Evaluation Areas and Indicators, ww.skvc.lt/uploads/lawacts/docs/355_23a7f3887e5f74f259c820ddd1e68dd3.pdf (assessed on 16 February 2024).
Finally, SKVC’s calculations for performance-based funding are based on a weighting of the six indicators, differentiated by type of institution and cycle (see Table 6.4). For some institution and programme types, the weighting of indicators appears rather arbitrary. For example, it is not clear why graduate employment rates are not counted for master’s programmes, whereas the involvement of students in research activities accounts for 50% of the total share of the calculations for performance-related funding. Time-to-completion rates counts for only 10% in all programme types, except doctoral programmes.
Weighting of indicators for performance-based funding in Lithuanian higher education, 2024
Source: Adapted from Republic of Lithuania (2023[28]), Procedures, data and performance funding of HEI education outcomes monitoring, https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/86b1cbb087b611edbdcebd68a7a0df7e/asr (assessed on 16 February 2024).
6.1.3 Collection and use of system-level information on the quality and relevance of higher education and VET
This section examines Lithuania’s approach to collecting and using system-level information on the quality and labour market relevance of teaching and learning in VET and higher education. It starts by examining the types of system-level data on the quality and labour market relevance of VET and higher education, followed by an analysis of how this information is used for policy planning and to guide student choice.
A system-level view of the quality of VET and higher education is lacking, and there is no systematic approach to collecting the views of students and recent graduates
In Lithuania, system-level information on the quality of teaching and learning in VET and higher education is provided by the Government Strategic Analysis Centre (STRATA) in the form of skills and labour market forecasts. In the past, there were annual reports on the “State of VET and Higher Education in Lithuania”, and SKVC has attempted to launch a national student survey in higher education, in collaboration with the Lithuanian Unions of Students (LSS).
STRATA produces skills and labour market forecasts for a wide range of sectors, including VET and higher education
Until recently, Lithuania had a specific national research body dedicated to conducting regular system-level analyses of the state of VET and higher education in Lithuania, the Lithuanian Science and Education Monitoring and Analysis Centre (MOSTA). In 2017, MOSTA’s mandate was moved under the responsibility of STRATA. Since then, STRATA’s mandate for strategic foresight, monitoring and evaluation has expanded to many other policy areas, while also retaining a specific mandate to analyse workforce needs, human and vocational training needs and the supply of higher education graduates (OECD, 2021[30]). Through these analyses, STRATA aims to “help address the analytical capacity gaps within the Lithuanian public sector”, support evidence-based policy making by government ministries and municipalities and inform the development of relevant government strategies and programmes (OECD, 2021, p. 132[30]).
An examination of STRATA’s analytical work shows that the organisation produces a wide range of reports and data that can inform strategic decision making at government and institution level in the areas of VET, higher education and skills. This work can be divided into three broad categories:
Thematic research reports are prepared by STRATA’s Strategic Insights Group (Strateginių įžvalgų formavimo grupė) and focus on priorities included in Lithuania’s strategic policies, such as the “Lithuania 2050” strategy or Lithuania’s National Progress Programme (NPP). The policy analysts from this team either conduct these studies upon direct request from the Government, or upon their own initiative where they see a need for strategic advice (Strata, 2024[31]). Examples in the areas of VET and higher education are two reports on internationalisation or inclusion in higher education (Strata, 2020[32]; Strata, 2017[33]).
Impact assessments are carried out for all legislative initiatives, including policies in the areas of education and skills. STRATA carries out both ex-ante impact assessments to support the government with choosing the most appropriate implementation options, and ex-post impact assessments to assess the positive and negative impacts of existing regulations (Strata, 2024[34]).
Based on an initial analysis of megatrends (Strata, 2021[35]), STRATA has published nine skills anticipation and forecasting studies in 2022, one of which focused on education and skills. Using foresight methodology, these reports examine future trends and challenges that will be relevant to different policy areas, and provide recommendations for the development of strategic documents by relevant ministries (Strata, 2024[34]).
In addition to this, STRATA manages the Human Resource Forecasting System (Žmogiškųjų išteklių prognozavimo Sistema – ŽIPS), which was developed in 2016 and integrates all available data on individuals from different information systems, in particular administrative data, into one platform (OECD, 2021[36]). The ŽIPS dashboard contains both general forecasts on the projected change in the number of jobs over a ten-year period, as well as data on the expected expansion or contraction of jobs (in individual sectors and the economy as a whole), and on the expected supply of the education sector) (Strata, 2024[37]). By law, all state authorities in Lithuania are obliged to use these data to inform decision making in the fields of labour market, education, and human resource development.
Annual reports analysing quality of teaching and learning in VET and higher education have been discontinued
Until 2022, STRATA prepared annual reports on the “State of VET and Higher Education in Lithuania”. In 2022, however, the government stopped funding this activity, without a clear replacement. In consultations with the OECD team, several stakeholders reported this as a great loss as these reports provided an important system-level insight on the educational landscape. SKVC and KPMPC’s annual monitoring of programme performance against key performance indicators is the only system-level view on quality currently available to the government and institutions in Lithuania. As noted in sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this report, the agencies’ analysis is primarily quantitative in nature and based on information from the Education Management Information System (ŠVIS - Švietimo Valdymo Informacinė Sistema) (ŠVIS, 2024[38]).
At the time of writing, SKVC and KPMC have not engaged in more in-depth qualitative analysis on the reasons underpinning these figures, or their implications for the higher education sector which could inform decision making at institution and system level. As noted in sections 3.1 and 4.1 of this report, both agencies currently lack the analytical capacity and resources to engage in this type of work. By contrast, at the level of school education, the National Agency for Education (NŠA) publishes annual “Reviews on the State of Education”, which are publicly available on its website and used to both inform the wider public on the state and quality of school education in Lithuania, and to inform decision making (NŠA, 2024[39]).
There is no systematic approach to collect and analyse feedback from students and recent graduates in VET and higher education
Finally, in contrast to several other OECD and EU jurisdictions, there appears to be no national student survey in Lithuania to systematically collect information from students on the quality and relevance of study programmes in VET and higher education. In the past, SKVC has attempted to develop a national student survey in higher education, in close co-operation with the Lithuanian Student Union (LSS) (SKVC, 2024[40]). As part of the project, a National Student Survey (NŠA) tool was created to help Lithuanian HEIs with the collection of information from students on the quality of their study programmes. In addition to allowing HEIs and student representatives to upload their own surveys, the app includes questions on pre-defined and recommended topics. However, the project was discontinued because only few HEIs ended up using the tool. The main reasons for this are because most HEIs preferred using their own institutional student feedback surveys, and because students had concerns over the handling of their personal data.
There is also no systematic approach to tracking the outcomes of VET and higher education graduates in Lithuania, although several ad hoc surveys and data collections taken place in the past. In 2014, a national survey of higher education was carried out and Lithuania has also participated in the EU-funded pilot survey of Eurograduate, which could lay the foundation for the development of a national level survey (Beadle et al., 2020[41]). As noted, STRATA has also been active in tracking the outcomes of VET and higher education graduates by analysing available administrative data, until it stopped conducting such analyses systematically in 2021. A key challenge facing Lithuania with developing a national graduate tracking system is ensuring sufficient response rates.
Lithuania makes limited use of system-level data on the quality and relevance of VET and higher education to inform policy planning and guide student choice
The lack of a systematic approach in Lithuania to collecting information on the quality and relevance of VET and higher education at national level means that the Lithuanian authorities do not have a strong evidence base to inform system-level policy planning, or to provide prospective students with comparable and objective information on the quality and relevance of study programmes.
Limited use of system-level information for policy planning
According to several Lithuanian stakeholders consulted for the project, the use of STRATA’s system-level monitoring, evaluation and foresight data by the ŠMSM is limited. This is consistent with findings from the OECD’s “Skills Strategy Lithuania”, which concluded that “Lithuania lacks a culture of evidence-informed policy making [...] emphasis[ing] that ministries do not sufficiently use data and evidence for policy making, despite the availability of data” (OECD, 2021, p. 47[36]). As noted earlier in this section, it is unclear which data the ŠMSM uses to inform the allocation of state-funded study places in VET and higher education. According to interviewees, the limited use of evidence is related to the limited analytical capacity within ministries. However, in recent years Lithuania has invested in the analytical capacity of individual ministry units, including in the divisions of Higher Education and VET and Lifelong Learning in the ŠMSM.
Prospective students do not have access to comparable information on the quality and relevance of study programmes
The government-funded AIKOS platform is an online tool available to anyone looking for information about general, vocational and higher education programmes available in Lithuania (ENQA, ESU, EUA and EURASHE, 2015[42]). The website is used by prospective students and presents study opportunities in three categories (“I want to learn”, “I want to study” and “I want to improve”), offering information on about the qualification and entry requirements for each programme, links to the institutional websites, and information about the jobs programmes seek to prepare learners for. In addition to this, the platform offers information on the number of students and teachers in different institutions. This information is updated twice per year.
Lithuania is also in the middle of initiatives to modernise and strengthen information and admissions systems across different elements of its education system. In 2025 the government’s new centralised admission system (“Mokausi Lietuvoje”) will incorporate VET for the first time. It also centralises admissions for pre-school, kindergarten and general education. Currently, when providing information about courses, it links through the information provided by AIKOS. In December 2023, the government also launched a new platform “Kursuok.lt” (Kursuok, n.d.[43]). The platform specifically targets adult learners in search of upskilling and reskilling opportunities and brings together a wide range of programmes offered by VET, higher education and adult learning providers in Lithuania. It will be important to capitalise on these investments, by ensuring that they contain information in an easy, accessible format that aids all students to make better application decisions.
An analysis of the information provided on the AIKOS platform shows that this it is highly descriptive in nature and lacks comparable information on the quality and outcomes of study programmes. To get a more objective and rounded view on quality, students must visit providers’ own websites or consult relevant external review reports (for higher education, links to relevant SKVC study field evaluation reports are included on the platform). Many students interviewed by the OECD team mentioned that the SKVC reports are not a helpful resource to help inform their study choice. The information provided on the website of VET and higher education providers is also of variable quality and relevance. Stakeholders argued for Lithuania to collect and embed more comparable information on the performance of different institutions and programmes into the platform, drawing for example on data collected by KPMPC, SKVC or the National Agency for Education, as is done in several other OECD and EU jurisdictions (European Commission, 2022[44]). The introduction of feedback from a national student survey was also suggested. As noted earlier in this section, in the higher education sector SKVC has attempted to conduct such a survey in co-operation with the Lithuanian Union of Students (LSS), but low response rates have led the agency to abandon the project. In VET, a national survey of students also does not exist.
This section offers recommendations and a roadmap with suggested action points for Lithuania to address some of the most important challenges identified in Section 6.1 above. The recommendations and associated roadmap were developed based on a review of international policies for quality assurance and enhancement across nine comparator jurisdictions for Lithuania, see OECD (2025[45]) and OECD (2025[3]).
6.2.1 Develop a national strategy to strengthen place-based collaboration and coherence across post-compulsory VET, higher education and the labour market
Despite a “reform fatigue” among both institutional and system-level actors – the OECD Skills Strategy has found that more than 20 major reforms in the area of education and skills have taken place in Lithuania between 2012 and 2023 (OECD, 2021[36]) – it is imperative for Lithuania to continue reforming its network of VET and higher education providers, building on the recent experience of institutional mergers and consolidation. To date, reforms have focused on reducing the number of providers separately in each sector. Moving forward, Lithuania should rethink this approach by fostering greater collaboration between institutions and programmes offered across the VET and higher education sectors (especially between post-compulsory VET and college provision). This should include other labour market actors that support skills development in Lithuania.
A more strategic and place-based approach to managing the skills pipeline in Lithuania is needed and should seek to encourage VET and higher education providers to align their provision with each other. This includes both institutional specialisation and joint delivery, rather than programme duplication and competition for students. Local economic needs should be well integrated into this strategy. The needs of companies and communities in Vilnius will be different to those in Klaipėda or Marijampolė. Together, VET providers and HEIs should create a clear, flexible and coherent set of educational pathways that both responds to the needs of the labour market and society, and offers broad access and flexible pathways to all learners.
Recommendation 18: Develop a common vision and sector oversight for post-compulsory VET and higher education, with a specific focus on exploring collaboration in quality assurance
A first recommendation for Lithuania is to develop a common vision and sector oversight for post-compulsory VET and higher education. A unified concept of “post-compulsory education and training” could be embraced, not as an umbrella term for all forms of post-compulsory VET and higher education, but as “a political approach that deliberately and strategically brings together multiple existing sectors […] ensuring there is holistic and joined-up policy making” (Ashwin et al., 2024[46]). At its heart should be the shared ambition to adopt a more managed approach to governing post-compulsory VET and higher education based on collaboration, co-ordination and coherence, instead of regulation and competition. The OECD team understands and recognises the linguistic challenge associated with the term, as there is no adequate translation for the term “post-compulsory education and training” in Lithuanian.
In recent years, several leading OECD jurisdictions – especially systems outside of the European Union – have embarked on “a national effort to create an accessible and organised tertiary [or, post-compulsory] system” (Teo et al., 2023, p. viii[47]). These countries have followed three key steps to develop a more coherent and integrated post-compulsory education and training system (OECD, 2025[3]):
Step 1: Carry out an (independent) review of VET, higher education, research and/or skills policies. For example, Ireland, Scotland (UK) and Wales (UK) have each reviewed how these sectors can better contribute to the development of national skills priorities (Hazelkorn and Boland, 2023[48]; Weingarten, 2018[49]; SFC, 2021[50]). Australia’s “Universities Accord”, prepared by an independent expert panel, includes a “National Tertiary Objective” accompanied by 47 recommendations and national attainment targets for VET and higher education (Australian Department of Education, 2024, p. 24[51]).
Step 2: Formulation of common strategic priorities and targets, in close consultation with all sectors concerned. International experience shows that it is important to keep objectives broad and attainable, to allow intrinsically different sectors to find common ground. For example, Wales has formulated six objectives spanning VET, higher education and research: 1) widening access to post-compulsory education and training; 2) enhancing economic impact; 3) improving research and innovation; 4) maintaining sustainable institutions and system; 5) learning value added; and 6) the promotion of the Welsh language and culture (Government of Wales, 2022[52]). In the Netherlands, an independent review panel has proposed five priorities for the same three sectors: 1) promoting equal opportunities for all students; 2) strengthening the connection between education and the labour market; 3) strengthening the role of the regions; 4) creating parity of esteem between VET providers, universities of applied sciences and universities; and 5) science engagement and communication (KBA-Consortium, 2023[53]).
Step 3: To implement a common vision for VET and higher education, the countries examined have established an arms-length body to provide common sectoral oversight. Such bodies now exist in Australia, England (UK), New Zealand, Norway, Scotland (UK), Singapore and Wales, and tend to have one (or all) of the following duties: developing common quality regulation, standards, funding, or monitoring performance across the two sectors (OECD, 2025[3]). In 2020, Ireland established the Department for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Skills (DFHERIS) as a single government ministry spanning VET, higher education, research and skills policy to further strengthen its co‑ordination and planning (DFHERIS, 2023[54]).
Drawing on these international experiences, a recommended approach for Lithuania is to start with the establishment of a consultative and advisory body to the ŠMSM (e.g. called a “Lithuanian Commission for Post-Compulsory Education and Training”). This should include representatives from the different bodies that currently regulate, fund and assure the quality of VET and higher education. It could also include experts from some of the countries listed above to provide further reflections and expert insight. As a first step, this Commission could be given a time-bound terms of reference to carry out a review of post-compulsory VET, higher education and research in Lithuania (i.e. Step 1 above) to identify priorities and recommendations for policy action by the ŠMSM across the post-compulsory VET and higher education sectors (i.e. Step 2 above). The OECD team’s analysis included in the present report can serve as a starting point for the review, and be expanded by also focusing on the country’s wider research and skills ecosystem. In function of the results of this review, the ŠMSM could then consider renewing the mandate of this Commission to lead the implementation of policy actions (i.e. Step 3 above).
In this context, Lithuania could also explore options for resource sharing and collaboration on core areas of evaluation between SKVC and KPMPC. While similar sets of knowledge and expertise exist in each organisation, they operate almost in full isolation from each other. Four main similarities can be observed: a) both agencies have a legal mandate for the ex-ante and ex-post review of institutions and programmes, and are in the process of developing a risk-based quality monitoring system; b) both must establish and maintain a network of external experts to support the implementation of its evaluation activities; c) while to a limited extent, SKVC and KPMPC each support sectoral quality enhancement; and d) both have corporate functions for human resources, legal affairs and communication to support its daily operations. Each organisation is also relatively small, with approximately 30 staff members, high rates of staff turnover and limited financial resources, which brings risks to business continuity and reputational standing.
Evidence shows that organisations with larger teams and broader responsibilities tend to be more efficient and resilient than smaller ones, as they can more easily transfer resources across and between teams to re-prioritise needs (OECD, 2021[55]). For this reason, in some OECD and EU jurisdictions, the QA agencies for VET and higher education share resources, collaborate or even operate as a single agency. In some systems, this integration of QA functions is part of wider strategic efforts related to tertiary integration. In five of the nine comparator systems analysed for Lithuania, there are examples of limited, partial and full integration in the external QA functions of VET and higher education (OECD, 2025[3]), along the lines of the following three models:
Model 1 – Limited integration: Different agencies are responsible for the quality assurance of VET and higher education, but there is regular information sharing between the agencies and collaboration on some evaluation procedures (e.g. providers offering both VET and higher education programmes; or programmes aimed at supporting transitions from VET to higher education). An example can be found in Australia where, in 2016, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed between the Tertiary Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA) – the national regulator and QA agency for higher education – and the Australian Skills Quality Agency (AQSA) – the national regulator for VET providers in Australia (ASQA and TEQSA, 2016[56]). ASQA and TEQSA collaboration focuses on information sharing through the identification and use of common data, documentation and other evidence to reduce the administrative burden of compliance assessments carried out by each respective agency. The agencies also co-regulate providers that deliver both VET and higher education courses (called “multi-sector providers”) and that offer education to overseas students.
Model 2 – Partial integration: A single agency or inspectorate co-ordinates the external QA of VET and higher education, based on a common set of quality standards or evaluation principles. However, to avoid a one-size-fits-all approach, the practical implementation of external QA is carried out by distinct units within the same agency. Finland offers an example of this approach, where FINEEC as the single QA agency is responsible for the evaluation of all education levels, but implementation is done by separate units. Collaboration is limited to sharing administrative and corporate communications functions, thematic evaluation, and using common themes and methods defined in a four-year evaluation plan (FINEEC, 2024[57]).
Model 3 – Full integration: In fully integrated QA systems, like the partial integration model, a single QA agency is responsible for VET and higher education. In addition to this, wider reflections and efforts are being made to achieve greater system-level coherence and collaboration between VET and higher education. Ireland has a fully integrated model where “Core Statutory Quality Assurance Guidelines” apply to all types of VET and higher education providers, supplemented with topic and sector-specific guidelines (QQI, 2016[58]). The common QA approach is part of wider efforts in Ireland to create a unified tertiary education system.
Given the many changes needed and planned for the VET and higher education QA systems in Lithuania over the coming years (see sections 3.2 and 4.2), the OECD team does not recommend merging SKVC and KPMPC into a single QA agency (i.e. Models 2 and 3 above). Instead, it recommends SKVC and KPMPC to explore options for resource sharing and carrying out joint evaluation in areas of relevance to both the VET and higher education sectors (i.e. Model 1 above). Consultations between the OECD team and both agencies carried out as part of the current TSI project show that there is willingness among the leadership of both agencies to start such a process, especially around assuring the quality of short-cycle programmes at ISCED level 5 and improving transitions from VET to higher education. To implement this recommendation, Lithuania could consider the following steps:
Step 1: The ŠMSM is advised to give SKVC and KPMPC a legal mandate to explore collaboration and resource sharing, and frame it in the context of a wider system-level strategy to build a more coherent and co‑ordinated post-compulsory education and training system. Both agencies should reflect on how collaboration between them can help to achieve system-level objectives defined by the government.
Step 2: To allow discussions between SKVC and KPMPC to take place on an “equal footing”, the agencies could consider appointing an external expert or advisory body to lead these discussions and consider the full range of collaboration options. Possible areas of alignment and collaboration are presented in Table 6.2.
Step 3: Based on the outcomes of the discussions under Step 2, SKVC and KMPC could agree on core areas of collaboration and formalise these in a written “Collaboration Protocol”, as has been done in Australia or the Netherlands (OECD, 2025[3]).
To implement Recommendation 18, Lithuania is recommended to focus on the following action points:
Action Point 1: Consider establishing a consultative and advisory body – perhaps a “Lithuanian Commission for Post-Compulsory Education and Training” – tasked with reviewing Lithuania’s post-secondary VET, higher education and research systems, to identify common priorities and recommended policy actions by the ŠMSM across these three sectors. Based on the results of this review exercise, the mandate of this Commission could be renewed to support policy implementation in a second phase.
Action Point 2: Give SKVC and KPMPC a legal mandate to identify options for resource sharing and areas for meaningful collaboration in external evaluation and QA. Areas of particular relevance to explore include improving the quality and relevance of short-cycle ISCED level 5 provision and improving transitions from VET to higher education.
Recommendation 19: Establish a national mechanism to foster co-operation between VET providers, colleges and employers to better align and integrate provision
An immediate policy action Lithuania may consider to supplement the creation of a Commission to support more coherent and joined-up policy making across post-compulsory VET and higher education (i.e. advisory role) is the establishment of a mechanism to promote collaboration on the ground between both sectors (i.e. implementation role). In some countries, the OECD team has found evidence of dual sector provision being encouraged as a specific action to move towards a more integrated system. These are “programmes developed in partnership by VET and higher education providers, including a strong regional dimension focused on collaboration with employers to support local skills development” (OECD, 2025, p. 15[3]).
For example, in 2023 Ireland established a National Tertiary Office (NTO) with the specific objective of supporting VET and higher education providers to develop joint “tertiary degrees” (NTO, n.d.[59]). In a tertiary degree, students spend the first two years studying at a VET institution, after which they can receive a Higher National Certificate (HNC) at ISCED level 5. The next two years, students automatically progress to a partner HEI (often a technological institute) to obtain a bachelor’s degree at ISCED level 6, thereby creating a seamless and fully integrated learning experience for students. In many other systems, national bodies or projects supporting greater alignment or transitions between VET and higher education curricula also include a strong focus on regional skills needs. There are four key considerations for Lithuania here:
Key consideration 1: Consider strengthening the administrative capacity of the regions in Lithuania to help VET and higher education providers align their provision with the skills needs of local employers. For example, France’s Professional Campus and Excellence Qualifications aim to align education and training with regional economic priorities in sectors. These campuses involve a decentralised governance model that fosters collaboration between regional authorities, educational institutions, and businesses (French Ministry of Education and Youth, 2024[60]).
Key consideration 2: Consider prioritising the creation of more integrated VET-higher education pathways in sectors and regions where acute skills challenges exist. In Scotland (UK), Regional Delivery Boards (RDBs) were established for the north and south-east of the country as regions where specific skills shortages were identified. The RDBs play a co-ordinating role in strengthening alignment of all forms of post-16 education and training with these local and regional skills needs (SFC, 2022[61]). In the Netherlands, the Lifelong Learning Catalyst prioritises employers-VET-HE collaboration around sustainability as a priority theme (Government of the Netherlands, 2023[62]).
Key consideration 3: Build on already existing practice of VET-higher education collaboration, especially between VET providers and colleges. An example is Kaunas Technical College (KTK), discussed earlier in this section, which collaborates closely with regional VET providers to ensure its ISCED level 5 programmes align with the programmes of these VET providers (see Box 6.1).
Key consideration 4: Consider giving colleges greater flexibility to offer short-cycle programmes for which there is demonstrated demand (i.e. a focus on the demand side). Presently, central control of the professional fields in which colleges can offer short-cycle programmes limits responsiveness to local needs. The required evidence base could be a request by local employers asking for certain skills gaps to be filled, or a clear progression route from an ISCED level 3 or 4 programme from a VET provider in the region and/or professional bachelor’s programme offered by the college.
To implement Recommendation 19, Lithuania is recommended to focus on the following action points:
Action Point 1: Establish a national mechanism to foster collaboration between VET and higher education institutions, especially VET providers and colleges, to develop more integrated study pathways, aligned with the needs of the economy. Consideration should be given strengthening the role of the regions and focusing on sectors and regions with acute skills needs.
Action Point 2: Give greater autonomy to colleges to offer short-cycle programmes in sectors where there is a clearly demonstrated need or demand from the labour market, or where such a programme can support transitions from VET to professional bachelor’s programmes.
6.2.2 Use national skills data to inform the allocation of state-funded study places and consider performance agreements to supplement performance indicators
To enhance the quality and relevance of VET and higher education, Lithuania should adopt a more evidence-driven approach to the allocation of state-funded study places in both sectors. It should also incentivise providers to make more strategic use of investments that may directly impact teaching quality. The following sections include two recommendations on how Lithuania can optimise the allocation of state-funded study places in VET and higher education, and how it can improve its performance-based funding model for higher education and consider introducing such a model in VET.
Recommendation 20: Incorporate data from national skills forecasts in the allocation of state-funded study places
To optimise the allocation process of government-funded places in VET and higher education, Lithuania is recommended to systematically integrate skills anticipation into its annual planning. Skills anticipation uses analysis – such as skills surveys, forecasting models, and labour market analyses – to predict future skill demands (OECD, 2016[63]). Leveraging such insights can ensure alignment between educational output and labour market needs.
Several European countries provide inspiration of how skills forecasts are integrated into education planning. For example, Finland’s labour market barometer includes regional skills assessments, which can also provide inspiration for Lithuania when it comes to allocate its regional government-funded places. Finland’s methodology combines statistical data with industry-specific workshops. Each of Finland’s 15 regional centres produces localised assessments that are aggregated for national planning. This ensures educational priorities reflect both local and national labour market demands (TEM, n.d.[64]).
Denmark and Sweden both provide examples of where quantitative labour market analysis directly informs government-funded student places. Denmark integrates qualitative insights from social partners with quantitative models to set education priorities. The Council for Academy Profession and Professional Bachelor’s Programmes advises the government on aligning education with labour market needs. Additionally, Denmark uses a rationing system to adjust student intake based on graduate employment outcomes, ensuring responsiveness to market conditions (UFM, 2018[65]). The rationing calculations look at whether course graduates have excessive unemployment rates relative to other graduates, and removes funding for those courses whose graduate unemployment is above average. The advantage of this approach is that the government does not have to set absolute funding levels, and funding is instead guided by labour market outcomes. In Sweden annually produced area analyses provide the basis for assessing current and future demand of higher VET programmes, the analyses are sectoral and each reports standardised information on current and new educational programme places with completion rates, graduate outcomes from these programmes, competence demands in the sector over the next 3-5 years alongside regional supply and demand forecasts (MYH, 2024[66]). State-funded places for programmes are time limited, and license renewals must demonstrate labour market needs (Sveriges Riksdag, 2009[67]). The area analyses provide the basis for ensuring sufficient funding provision to meet employer needs.
However, human resource forecasts by Lithuania’s Government Strategic Analysis Centre (STRATA) are primarily produced to provide information on employment trends and human capital development for the inter-institutional government Commission co‑ordinating human resource issues (Republic of Lithuania, 2016[68]). They are not designed to produce information to support education funding discussions. Stakeholders reported to the OECD that current human resource forecasts from STRATA would need amendments to make them more suitable to support funding discussion for student places. Drawing inspiration from these examples, STRATA could supplement its existing Human Resource Forecasting System (ŽIPS) with information to inform the allocation of funded student places. This would ensure that higher education and vocational training programs are aligned with both current and future labour market demands, enhancing workforce readiness and economic competitiveness.
To implement Recommendation 20, Lithuania is recommended to focus on the following action points:
Action Point 1: Undertake a review to consider what information is currently missing from the STRATA human resource forecasts to enable better account of skills and labour market needs in state education planning. This programme of work should separately consider what analysis is needed to make central, high-level student number decisions, and what additional regional analysis may be necessary to support regional decision making in the allocation of state-places to specify sectors.
Action Point 2: Following the review, further consultation with STRATA to discuss whether and in what capacity the ŽIPS forecasts could be amended, and what funding and resource implications this might have.
Recommendation 21: Introduce institutional performance agreements in higher education and consider introducing a similar system of quality agreements in VET
A fourth recommendation for Lithuania is to rethink it’s performance-based funding model in higher education, and to consider introducing such a system in VET. If properly designed, international evidence shows that performance-based funding has the potential to support improvement in the management of HEIs, transparency on how funds are used by HEIs (e.g. how they are used to improve teaching quality), and closer alignment between national and institution-level priorities (Jongbloed et al., 2022[69]). A careful analysis of key features of the performance-related funding models in the nine comparator systems analysed for Lithuania suggests that there are three key changes Lithuania could consider introducing to support the quality and relevance of its system (OECD, 2025[3]):
Change 1: The first – and perhaps the most important – change for Lithuania to introduce is to shift towards a more qualitative and strategic approach to promoting quality by introducing a system of institutional performance agreements with HEIs. In most of the nine small to medium-sized comparator jurisdictions analysed for Lithuania, governments have moved away from solely formula-based models for allocating public funds to HEIs (currently used in Lithuania). Systems now include negotiated agreements with individual HEIs that contain qualitative and strategic performance targets. For example, in Austria, four system-level strategic priorities guide HEIs’ performance agreements and include a specific focus on improving teaching and learning (Austrian Ministry of Education, Research and Science, 2021[70]). In the Netherlands, the government redirected additional funding that became available as a result of the reformed student grant into a student loan system into a “development fund” for HEIs. A condition for HEIs was to use this funding for performance improvements that would benefit student learning. It was therefore crucial for students to be closely involved in the design of quality agreements between the government and HEIs, as well as the implementation and evaluation of these agreements (NVAO, 2024[71]). Closely involving students in the design, implementation and evaluation of performance agreements is therefore also a key recommendation to keep in mind for the Lithuanian authorities. A key advantage of institutional performance agreements is to include objectives that would be challenging to capture through purely quantitative steering indicators. Two particular priorities that could be reflected in performance agreements would be:
Promoting greater institutional profiling and differentiation between the college and university sectors through use of differentiated goals and targets. This approach is taken by Norway, which uses development agreements as a strategic tool to encourage clear differentiation between universities and colleges, to ensure complementarity of provision at system level (Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 2023[72]).
Fostering greater alignment between different sectors of post-compulsory education and training – notably, VET providers and colleges (as discussed below, this would likely require the government to introduce similar agreements or other incentives in VET). A relevant example for Lithuania can be found in Ireland. Since 2020 the VET and higher education sectors in Ireland are jointly governed by DFHERIS. Performance agreements are negotiated between the Higher Education Authority (HEA) and HEIs, and the Education and Training Board (ETBs) and Further Education and Skills Service (SOLAS). The DFHERIS reviews and approves the agreements. Both sectors have some common priorities, one of which is improving pathways between VET and higher education (for ETBs) and strengthening sectoral and tertiary cohesion (for HEIs) (SOLAS, 2022[73]; HEA, 2023[74]).
Change 2: Lithuania should adopt a longer-term approach to its assessment of the performance of HEIs (and potentially VET providers). At present, the performance (and funding) of HEIs and is assessed on an annual basis. This does not give HEIs the financial stability and autonomy to make strategic and long-term investments. Based on the positive experience of other systems, Lithuania should consider giving HEIs between three and five years to demonstrate progress in relation to the goals in the new performance agreements.
Change 3: Lithuania could consider giving SKVC a role in supporting HEIs with the development of their performance agreements and monitoring their implementation. At present, SKVC only monitors HEIs’ performance against seven quantitative indicators, but it does not support institutions in a more strategic way. A link could be made by linking priorities and goals in performance agreements at least in part with the findings from SKVC institutional evaluations, as is done in Austria (BMBWF, 2021[75]). In the Netherlands, HEIs also received support from the QA agency (NVAO) to develop their quality agreements (NVAO, 2024[71]).
While performance agreements are less common in VET, some countries are also starting to move towards such models in VET. Across the nine comparator systems analysed for Lithuania, evidence of VET providers being required to formulate strategic performance agreements was found in Ireland, the Netherlands and Scotland (UK) (OECD, 2025[3]). To discourage VET providers from focusing on filling the minimum number of state-funded study places (which is one of five indicators KPMPC currently monitors), Lithuania may also consider introducing a performance-agreement model in VET, building on the experience in the higher education sector.
To implement Recommendation 21, Lithuania could focus on the following action points:
Action Point 1: Redesign its performance-based funding model for higher education, adopting a more qualitative, strategic and long-term approach by agreeing on sector and institution-specific objectives and targets included in negotiating strategic performance with individual HEIs. In this process, Lithuania could consider a role for SKVC in supporting HEIs with the development and monitoring the implementation of these agreements.
Action Point 2: Introduce a performance-based funding model in VET, building on the experience from the higher education sector. Where possible, explore synergies in the priorities guiding performance agreements with VET providers and colleges of higher education (e.g. supporting transitions between VET and higher education), as per the Irish model.
6.2.3 Strengthen the availability and use of system-level data on the quality of teaching and learning to improve strategic decision making and student information
A final set of recommendations for Lithuania is focused on strengthening the student voice and “what works” in VET and higher education. The following sections offer two recommendations to develop a national student survey and graduate tracking system for VET and higher education, strengthen the online student information platform, and to strengthen system-level research on the quality of teaching and learning in VET and higher education.
Recommendation 22: Strengthen the online student information platform by developing a national student survey and graduate tracking system for VET and higher education
In an increasing number of OECD and EU countries, governments have established national student surveys and graduate tracking systems in VET and higher education (Humpl et al., 2018[76]; Beadle et al., 2020[41]; OECD, 2023[77]). Such surveys collect information from students and (recent) graduates on the quality and relevance of teaching and learning and employment outcomes. Key aspects covered in such surveys include: students and graduates’ perceptions on the overall quality or relevance of their degree, course or institution; the effectiveness of teaching and assessment methods; the relevance of the curriculum; the quality of teaching staff; or the quality and availability of student support services.
Evidence shows that such mechanisms can be a powerful tool to strengthen the voice of students and employers in quality assurance at institution and system level. They also offer a rich source of information to help students and parents make informed choices about their educational paths, as they highlight critical aspects of quality (Hazelkorn, 2015[78]). Making information on the quality of study programmes publicly available can also encourage institutions to improve their performance, foster accountability, and provide a benchmarking tool against peers, potentially leading to overall improvements in educational quality (Johnes, 2018[79]; Bonaccorsi and Cicero, 2016[80]).
In Europe, the “Council Recommendation on tracking graduates” and accompanying European Graduate Tracking Initiative (EGTI) have given a particular boost to countries to strengthen their graduate tracking systems in VET and higher education (Council of the EU, 2017[81]). Across the nine comparator jurisdictions examined for Lithuania, national student surveys and graduate tracking systems appear to be more developed in the higher education sector than in VET. However, in some systems (notably, in Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Scotland) the opinions of VET students and recent graduates are also systematically collected (OECD, 2025[3]).
In four systems (i.e. Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Scotland), the OECD team found evidence of countries integrating key indicators from student and graduate surveys into online student information platforms, to give students a more objective and comparable evidence base for making study choices. For example, Norway’s “Studiebarometeret.no” platform, created in 2014, offers data on approximately 1 800 study programmes, allowing users to compare student satisfaction across dimensions such as workload and vocational training quality. The platform is widely used by students, HEIs, and policy makers to make informed comparisons and support improvements in education quality (NOKUT, n.d.[82]). The United Kingdom’s “Discover Uni” platform is an official higher education resource, managed by the country’s four major funding and regulatory bodies. Available in English and Welsh, it integrates data from the National Student Survey (NSS), Graduate Outcomes (GO), and Longitudinal Education Outcomes (LEO) surveys. Users can explore detailed information on student satisfaction, graduate employment rates, and earnings, enabling informed course comparisons. “Discover Uni” also provides links to summaries of institutional quality assessments conducted by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), offering insights into institutional standards and regulatory reviews (Discover Uni, n.d.[83]).
In Lithuania, SKVC has tried to introduce a national student survey in higher education in co-operation with the National Union of Students (LSS). However, response rates were too low for meaningful analysis. As a result, the project was abandoned and a highly institutionalised approach to the collection of students and recent graduates’ opinions remains in Lithuanian higher education. In VET, the comparatively small size of providers and classes means institution-level data collection faces similar challenges. Lithuania therefore does not have any more objective or comparable system-level data on the quality and relevance of VET and higher education that could be used to enhance its (currently highly qualitative and descriptive) online student information platform.
Building on the international examples cited above, Lithuania should strongly consider re-introducing a national student survey and graduate tracking system for VET and higher education, and use these data to enhance its online student information platform. Three considerations should be kept in mind:
Key consideration 1: A first key consideration for Lithuania is to build on what is already there, both nationally and internationally. Several Lithuanian HEIs already have well-established student and graduate tracking systems in place, and as noted there are very good examples of national systems internationally (e.g. in Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands and Ireland). Lithuania should collect and compare the questions included in these systems to select the most relevant questions for the Lithuanian VET and higher education contexts.
Key consideration 2: A second consideration is to adopt a national partnership approach to develop and implement a survey. It is crucial to involve HEIs closely in the development of a national student survey or graduate tracking system, to leverage their existing institution-level surveys and student data. The Irish Survey of Student Engagement, for example, is managed and co-funded as a collaborative partnership by the HEA, institutions’ representative bodies, and the national student union. An external third-party company delivers the online survey system to the partnership (StudentSurvey.ie, n.d.[84]). For Lithuania, the following bodies would need to be involved: the ŠMSM’s Divisions for VET and Lifelong Learning and the Division for Higher Education as a funding authority, the National Union of Students (LSS), the Rectors’ Conference for Universities, and the Rectors’ Conference for Colleges, and the Association of VET Directors.
Key consideration 3: After piloting the national student and graduate tracking survey with a sample of HEIs and VET providers, Lithuania should determine the frequency of this national monitoring tool. Across the nine comparator systems analysed for Lithuania, the frequency varies from every three years in Austria, to every one to two years in Denmark and Ireland (OECD, 2025[3]).
Key consideration 4: In close consultation with LSS, employers, VET and higher education providers, Lithuania could determine which questions provide meaningful information on the quality of VET and higher education programmes that could inform student choices. Data from these questions could then be linked to the information available on the student information platform.
To implement Recommendation 22, Lithuania is recommended to focus on the following action points:
Action Point 1: Introduce a national student survey and graduate tracking system for VET and higher education through a national partnership approach involving all relevant stakeholders.
Action Point 2: Add comparable indicators on the quality of VET and higher education to the AIKOS student information platform, to enhance student choice.
Recommendation 23: Invest in the production and use of educational research and annual state-of-education reports to support evidence-based policy making and practice
Lithuania should invest in the production and dissemination of research on “what works” in VET and higher education. Using research more systematically to improve the quality and relevance of education policy and practice has become a priority for an increasing number of OECD and EU jurisdictions (OECD, 2022[85]). First, many countries have increased the availability of funding for educational research such as experiments, systematic reviews and other forms of primary and secondary education research. Second, there has been a growing investment in initiatives to facilitate the use of research by policy makers and practitioners. The What Works Clearinghouse in the United States, the Evidence for Policy and Practice Innovation Centre (EPPI Centre) in England (United Kingdom) and the Netherlands’ National Initiative for Educational Research (NRO) are examples of national platforms that have been created with government funding to provide educational practitioners (mainly primary and secondary education teachers) with access to educational research and resources (WWC, n.d.[86]; EPPI, n.d.[87]; NRO, n.d.[88]).
In Lithuania, as is the case in other OECD and EU jurisdictions, HEIs – and within those, teacher education institutes – are the most active organisations in the production of research for both education policy makers and practitioners (OECD, 2022[85]). However, given their role in the initial and continuing education of primary and secondary school teachers, most research produced these institutions primarily focuses on primary, secondary and vocational education. They are often also more engaged in the production of educational research rather than its dissemination. As noted in Section 5.1 of this report, the Lithuanian Educational Research Association (LERA), a national body uniting educational researchers in Lithuania, primarily focuses on advancing educational practice in VET and general education, and does not have many resources to focus on dissemination and outreach (LERA, 2024[89]). In future, Lithuania may consider expanding resources of the LERA to also engage in higher education research, and focus more on the dissemination of research.
In many systems, a dedicated agency (or agencies) will produce an annual report on the state of education and develop analysis to inform policy development (OECD, 2013[90]). In some systems, this role is carried out by a single QA agency for different levels of education and training. This is the case in the Netherlands, where the Inspectorate of Education carries out thematic analysis and produces an annual state of education report for all levels of education and training (MinOCW, 2024[91]). In Ireland, Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI), as the single QA agency for VET and higher education, produces two separate reports on quality in further education and training and higher education (QQI, 2024[92]). Often these reports have a strong data component and provide an overview of key figures, such as the number of teaching staff and students, graduation and employment rates, or drop-out rates.
Lithuanian experts reported that while NŠA is the holder of all system-level data of Lithuanian education and training, it does not have the analytical capacity or expertise to provide annual state of education reports for VET and higher education. Therefore, a recommendation for Lithuania is to mandate SKVC and KPMPC to produce one such report each year, to inform strategic decision making, and to collaborate with NŠA for the analysis of relevant data. The government will need to significantly invest in the analytical capacity of the agencies to enable them to take on this responsibility, in addition to the discussion in other sections of this report.
To implement Recommendation 23, Lithuania is recommended to focus on the following action points:
Action Point 1: Invest additional resources in the production and dissemination of educational research on “what works” in VET and higher education. Consider strengthening the role of the Lithuanian Educational Research Association (LERA) in this space.
Action Point 2: Re-introduce an annual “state of education” report for the VET and higher education sectors to inform strategic decision making. Consider making SKVC and KPMPC responsible for the development of such a report on an annual basis, in close co-operation with the National Agency of Education (NŠA) as the provider of necessary data.
References
[46] Ashwin, P. et al. (2024), Adopting a regional tertiary education, research and innovation system in England: priorities, principles and practicalities, https://www.hepi.ac.uk/2024/11/06/adoping-a-regional-tertiary-education-research-and-innovation-system-in-england-priorities-principles-and-practicalities/ (accessed on 6 December 2024).
[56] ASQA and TEQSA (2016), The Memorandum of Understanding between ASQA and TEQSA, Australian Government, https://www.asqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/teqsa_mou_signed_7_july_2016.pdf (accessed on 27 August 2024).
[51] Australian Department of Education (2024), Australian Universities Accord Final Report – Summary Report, Australian Government Department of Education, https://www.education.gov.au/australian-universities-accord/resources/australian-universities-accord-final-report-summary-report (accessed on 18 July 2024).
[70] Austrian Ministry of Education, Research and Science (2021), Perspectives on national strategies to promote learning and teaching: Austria, Austrian Ministry of Education, Research and Science, https://oead.at/index.php?eID=dumpFile&t=f&f=27692&token=137e2ea4fd997dd92800191174901774f78e8118 (accessed on 23 July 2024).
[41] Beadle, S. et al. (2020), Mapping the state of graduate tracking policies and practices in the EU Member States and EEA countries, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/62505 (accessed on 7 September 2024).
[12] Beleckienė, G., L. Kazlavickas and M. Palevič (2022), Vocational Education and Training in Lithuania 2021, Government Strategic Analysis Center (STRATA), Vilnius, https://strata.gov.lt/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/PMBA2021_EN_web.pdf.
[75] BMBWF (2021), PH-EP Pädagogische Hochschulen - Entwicklungsplan 2021-2026 [PH-EP Teacher Education Colleges - Development Plan 2021-2026], Austrian Ministry of Education, Research and Science, https://pubshop.bmbwf.gv.at/index.php?article_id=9&type=neuerscheinungen&pub=783 (accessed on 23 July 2024).
[80] Bonaccorsi, A. and T. Cicero (2016), “Nondeterministic ranking of university departments”, Journal of Informetrics, Vol. 10/1, pp. 224-237, https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2016.01.007.
[81] Council of the EU (2017), Council Recommendation on Tracking graduates, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017H1209%2801%29 (accessed on 7 September 2024).
[54] DFHERIS (2023), Statement of Strategy 2023-2025, Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, https://www.gov.ie/en/organisation-information/b1aad-statement-of-strategy-2023-2025/ (accessed on 19 July 2024).
[83] Discover Uni (n.d.), About Discover Uni, https://discoveruni.gov.uk/about-discover-uni/ (accessed on 5 August 2024).
[42] ENQA, ESU, EUA and EURASHE (2015), Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance in the European Higher Education Area, EURASHE, Brussels, Belgium, https://www.enqa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ESG_2015.pdf.
[87] EPPI (n.d.), EPPI Centre: Evidence for Policy & Practice, https://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/ (accessed on 25 June 2023).
[44] European Commission (2022), EQAVET framework, https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1570&langId=en.
[57] FINEEC (2024), National Education Evaluation Plan 2024–2027, Finnish Education Evaluation Centre (FINEEC), Helsinki, https://www.karvi.fi/en/publications/national-education-evaluation-plan-2024-2027 (accessed on 27 August 2024).
[60] French Ministry of Education and Youth (2024), Les Campus des métiers et des qualifications [Campus of professions and qualifications], https://www.education.gouv.fr/les-campus-des-metiers-et-des-qualifications-5075 (accessed on 13 September 2024).
[62] Government of the Netherlands (2023), Staatscourant van het Koninkrijk der Nederlanden [Government gazette of the Kingdomof the Netherlands], Government of the Netherlands, https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/stcrt-2023-19046.html (accessed on 19 July 2024).
[52] Government of Wales (2022), Commission for Tertiary Education and Research (CTER), https://www.gov.wales/tertiary-education-and-research-commission (accessed on 20 January 2023).
[78] Hazelkorn, E. (2015), The Effect of Rankings on Student Choice and Institutional Selection, Routledge, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271505215_The_Effect_of_Rankings_on_Student_Choice_and_Institutional_Selection (accessed on 5 August 2024).
[48] Hazelkorn, E. and T. Boland (2023), Discussion Papers on a Unified Tertiary System, Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, https://www.gov.ie/en/policy-information/4d5cb-unified-tertiary-system/#discussion-papers-on-a-unified-tertiary-system (accessed on 18 July 2024).
[74] HEA (2023), System Performance Framework 2023-2028, Higher Education Authority (HEA), Dublin, https://hea.ie/assets/uploads/2017/04/System_Performance_Framework_2023-2028.pdf (accessed on 23 July 2024).
[76] Humpl, S. et al. (2018), Mapping of VET graduate tracking measures in EU Member States – Final report, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2767/053473 (accessed on 7 September 2024).
[79] Johnes, J. (2018), “University rankings: What do they really show?”, Scientometrics, Vol. 115/1, pp. 585-606, https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-018-2666-1.
[69] Jongbloed, B. et al. (2022), Final report of the study on the state and effectiveness of national funding systems of higher education to support the European universities initiative . Volume I, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/dfd61c3c-c79c-11ed-a05c-01aa75ed71a1/language-en (accessed on 19 July 2024).
[53] KBA-Consortium (2023), Vandaag is het 2040: Toekomstverkenning voor middelbaar beroepsonderwijs, hoger onderwijs en wetenschap [Today it is 2040: Exploration of the future for VET, higher education and science], Dutch Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2023/09/08/toekomstverkenning-voor-middelbaar-beroepsonderwijs-hoger-onderwijs-en-wetenschap-deel-1 (accessed on 18 July 2024).
[20] Kur Stoti (2024), Bręsta permainos: studijos trumpės [Changes are brewing: Courses will be short], https://kurstoti.lt/s/12081/bresta-permainos-studijos-trumpes (accessed on 10 April 2024).
[43] Kursuok (n.d.), Kursuok - Your Improvement Begins Here!, https://kursuok.lt/en (accessed on 7 March 2024).
[13] LAMA BPO (2024), 2024 m. centralizuoto priėmimo į Lietuvos aukštąsias mokyklas apžvalga [Overview of centralised admission to Lithuanian higher education – 2024], Lithuanian Higher Education Institutions Association for Organising Joint Admission (LAMA BPO), https://lamabpo.lt/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/2024-m.-bendrojo-priemimo-rezultatu-apzvalga-1.pdf.
[89] LERA (2024), Lithuanian Educational Research Association (LERA), https://lera.lt/en/home/ (accessed on 28 April 2024).
[21] LLAMA-BPO (n.d.), Lithuanian Higher Education Institutions Association for Organising Joint Admission (LAMA BPO), https://lamabpo.lt/en/bachelors-studies/applying-to-university-college/ (accessed on 1 March 2024).
[91] MinOCW (2024), “Jaarwerkplan 2024 (Annual work plan 2024)”, Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap, https://www.onderwijsinspectie.nl/onderwerpen/themaonderzoeken/documenten/jaarplannen/2024/11/06/jaarwerkplan-2024 (accessed on 1 February 2025).
[66] MYH (2024), Områdesanalyser och regional efterfrågan (Area analyzes and regional demand), https://www.myh.se/yrkeshogskolan/ansok-om-att-bedriva-utbildning/omradesanalyser-och-regional-efterfragan (accessed on 17 July 2024).
[22] National Audit Office of Lithuania (2021), Ar užtikrinama studijų kokybė aukštosiose mokyklose [Is the quality of studies ensured in higher education institutions], National Audit Office of Lithuania, Vilnius, https://www.eurosai.org/en/databases/audits/Is-the-quality-of-studies-ensured-in-higher-education-institutions/ (accessed on 4 March 2024).
[82] NOKUT (n.d.), Studiebarometeret [Study barometer], Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education (NOKUT), Oslo, https://studiebarometeret.no/en/artikkel/2 (accessed on 5 August 2024).
[72] Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (2023), Utviklingsavtaler for universiteter og høyskoler [Development agreements for universities and colleges], Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, Oslo, https://www.regjeringen.no/no/dokumenter/utviklingsavtaler-fra-mars-2023/id2964165/ (accessed on 24 July 2024).
[88] NRO (n.d.), Nationaal Regieorgaan Onderwijs [Netherlands Initiative for Educational Research], https://www.nro.nl/ (accessed on 25 June 2023).
[8] NŠA (2024), Number of students 2 - dataset, IVPK Information Society Development Committee, Konstitucijos pr. 15-89, Vilnius, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/314/ (accessed on 15 February 2025).
[11] NŠA (2024), Number of teachers 1 - dataset, IVPK Information Society Development Committee, Konstitucijos pr. 15-89, Vilnius, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/320/ (accessed on 15 February 2025).
[10] NŠA (2024), Pedagogical staff of vocational schools - dataset, IVPK Information Society Development Committee, Konstitucijos pr. 15-89, Vilnius, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/348/ (accessed on 15 February 2025).
[7] NŠA (2024), Profesinių mokyklų mokiniai pagal kursus ir mokymo programas [Vocational school students according to courses and curricul - dataset], IVPK Information Society Development Committee, Konstitucijos pr. 15-89, Vilnius, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/342/ (accessed on 15 February 2025).
[4] NŠA (2024), Studentų skaičius 1 [Number of students 1], IVPK Information Society Development Committee, Konstitucijos pr. 15-89, Vilnius,, https://data.gov.lt/datasets/313/.
[39] NŠA (2024), Švietimo Būklės Apžvalgos [Reviews of the State of Education], National Agency of Education (NŠA), Vilnius, https://www.nsa.smm.lt/svietimo-stebesena/svietimo-bukles-apzvalgos/ (accessed on 21 April 2024).
[59] NTO (n.d.), National Tertiary Office (NTO), https://nto.hea.ie/ (accessed on 18 July 2024).
[71] NVAO (2024), Kwaliteitsafspraken [Quality agreements], Dutch-Flemish Accreditation Organisation (NVAO), https://www.nvao.net/nl/procedures/nederland/kwaliteitsafspraken (accessed on 30 April 2024).
[3] OECD (2025), “Ensuring Quality in VET and Higher Education: Going Beyond Quality Assurance”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives No. 119, https://doi.org/10.1787/e6862056-en.
[45] OECD (2025), “Ensuring Quality in VET and Higher Education: Making Quality Assurance Work”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives No. 118, https://doi.org/10.1787/812ff006-en.
[17] OECD (2024), Do Adults Have the Skills They Need to Thrive in a Changing World?: Survey of Adult Skills 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b263dc5d-en.
[16] OECD (2024), Education at a Glance 2024: OECD Indicators - Trends in the educational attainment of 25-34 year-olds, by gender (2016 and 2023), OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c00cad36-en.
[19] OECD (2024), Employment rates of adults, by educational attainment, age group and gender, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/18o.
[26] OECD (2024), Expenditure on education institutions per full-time equivalent student, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/1d4.
[14] OECD (2024), Share of new entrants to and first-time graduates at tertiary education, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/18p.
[9] OECD (2024), “The state of academic careers in OECD countries: An evidence review”, OECD Education Policy Perspectives No. 91, https://doi.org/10.1787/5cc2d673-en (accessed on 1 March 2024).
[15] OECD (2023), Education at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators (table A1.3), OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e13bef63-en.
[77] OECD (2023), Ensuring Quality Digital Higher Education in Hungary, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5f44fd6f-en.
[1] OECD (2023), Institutional missions and profiles in higher education in Lithuania, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/institutional-missions-and-profiles-in-higher-education-in-lithuania_286832a7-en.html.
[85] OECD (2022), Who Cares about Using Education Research in Policy and Practice?: Strengthening Research Engagement, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d7ff793d-en (accessed on 28 July 2023).
[30] OECD (2021), Mobilising Evidence at the Centre of Government in Lithuania: Strengthening Decision Making and Policy Evaluation for Long-term Development, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/323e3500-en.
[55] OECD (2021), OECD Compendium of Productivity Indicators 2021, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f25cdb25-en (accessed on 30 May 2024).
[36] OECD (2021), OECD Skills Strategy Lithuania: Assessment and Recommendations, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/14deb088-en.
[6] OECD (2020), Resourcing Higher Education: Challenges, Choices and Consequences, Higher Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/735e1f44-en.
[63] OECD (2016), Getting Skills Right: Assessing and Anticipating Changing Skill Needs, Getting Skills Right, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264252073-en.
[90] OECD (2013), Synergies for Better Learning: An International Perspective on Evaluation and Assessment, OECD Reviews of Evaluation and Assessment in Education, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264190658-en.
[92] QQI (2024), Our Insights, Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI), Dublin, https://www.qqi.ie/what-we-do/engagement-insights-and-knowledge-sharing/our-insights (accessed on 21 August 2024).
[58] QQI (2016), Statutory Quality Assurance Guidelines developed by QQI for Providers of Statutory Apprenticeship Programmes, Quality and Qualifications Ireland (QQI), Dublin, https://www.qqi.ie/sites/default/files/2021-11/qg-3-topic-specific-qa-guidelines-for-statutory-apprenticeship-programmes.pdf (accessed on 12 July 2024).
[5] Rebublic of LIthuania (2024), Description of the procedure for admission to study under formal vocational training programs in vocational training institutions and other state or municipal educational institutions, Ministry of Education, Science and Sports (ŠMSM), https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/ee80e5923c0411e79f4996496b137f39/asr.
[28] Republic of Lithuania (2023), Dėl Mokslo ir studijų institucijų studijų veiklos pasiekimų vertinimo, valstybės biudžeto skatinamojo finansavimo už studijų veiklos pasiekimus lėšų paskirstymo mokslo ir studijų institucijoms, duomenų, kurių reikia siekiant atlikti studijų veiklos pasiekimų vertinimus, teikimo ir mokslo ir studijų institucijų studijų veiklos pasiekimų vertinimo kriterijų svorio koeficientų nustatymo tvarkos aprašo patvirtinimo [Procedures, data and performance funding of HEI education outcomes monitoring], Ministry of Education, Science and Sports (ŠMSM), Vilnius, https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/86b1cbb087b611edbdcebd68a7a0df7e/asr (accessed on 16 February 2024).
[29] Republic of Lithuania (2021), On the Approval of the Procedures for the External Evaluation and Accreditation of Studies, Evaluation Areas and Indicators, Ministry of Education, Science and Sports (ŠMSM), Vilnius, https://www.skvc.lt/uploads/lawacts/docs/355_23a7f3887e5f74f259c820ddd1e68dd3.pdf (accessed on 16 February 2024).
[68] Republic of Lithuania (2016), Nutarimas Dėl Nacionalinės Žmogiškųjų Išteklių Stebėsenos Sistemos (Resolution On The National Human Resources Monitoring System), Republic of Lithuania, https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/d713d051dbbd11e59019a599c5cbd673/asr.
[23] Republic of Lithuania (2009), Higher Education and Research Act, Ministry of Education, Science and Sports (ŠMSM), Vilnius, https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/548a2a30ead611e59b76f36d7fa634f8 (accessed on 23 January 2024).
[24] Republic of Lithuania (2005), Lithuanian education classifier, Ministry of Education Science and Sport (ŠMSM), Vilnius, https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/TAIS.253592/asr.
[61] SFC (2022), Regional Tertiary Pathfinders, Scottish Funding Council (SFC), Edinburgh, https://www.sfc.ac.uk/skills-lifelong-learning/pathfinders/ (accessed on 18 July 2024).
[50] SFC (2021), Coherence and Sustainability: A Review of Tertiary Education and Research, Scottish Funding Council (SFC), Edinburgh, https://www.sfc.ac.uk/reform/review/ (accessed on 19 July 2024).
[40] SKVC (2024), AMIS-3, Centre for Quality Assessment in Higher Education (SKVC), https://www.skvc.lt/default/en/projects/current-projects#AMIS-3 (accessed on 6 February 2024).
[27] SKVC (2011), Dėl Aukštosios mokyklos realiųjų išteklių vertinimo metodikos patvirtinimo [On the approval of the methodology for the assessment of higher education institutions’ learning resources], Ministry of Education, Science and Sports, Vilnius, https://www.e-tar.lt/portal/lt/legalAct/TAR.BA58DEFD9A3E/jnURRdcyNf (accessed on 16 February 2024).
[2] SMSM (2018), Įsakymas Dėl Valstybinių Profesinio Mokymo Įstaigų, Kuriose Švietimo Ir Mokslo Ministerija Įgyvendina Savininko (Dalininko) Teises Ir Pareigas, Tinklo Vystymo 2018–2020 Metų Bendrojo Plano Patvirtinimo, Lietuvos Respublikos Švietimo Ir Mokslo Ministras, https://e-seimas.lrs.lt/portal/legalAct/lt/TAD/094a5111345511e884a38848fe3ec9e2?jfwid=zaydj60p3%20.
[73] SOLAS (2022), Transforming Learning Strategic Performance Agreements: The Further Education & Training System 2022-2024, Further Education and Skills Service (SOLAS), Dublin, https://www.solas.ie/f/70398/x/807fb6e096/fet-system-report.pdf (accessed on 24 July 2024).
[34] Strata (2024), Ateities įžvalgos [Foresight studies], Government Strategic Analysis Centre (Strata), Vilnius, https://strata.gov.lt/en/veikla/ateities-izvalgos/ (accessed on 19 April 2024).
[37] Strata (2024), Įrankiai [Tools], Government Strategic Analysis Centre (Strata), Vilnius, https://strata.gov.lt/en/veikla/irankiai/ (accessed on 19 April 2024).
[25] Strata (2024), Long-term forecasts of human resources, Statistics Lithuania, https://osp.stat.gov.lt/en_GB/strata-dashboards (accessed on 1 July 2024).
[31] Strata (2024), Tyrimų ataskaitos [Research reports], Government Strategic Analysis Centre (Strata), Vilnius, https://strata.gov.lt/en/veikla/tyrimai/ (accessed on 19 April 2024).
[35] Strata (2021), Lietuva 2050 - Pirminė megatendencijų analizė, Versija 2.0 [Lithuania 2050 - Primary analysis of megatrends, Version 2.0], Government Strategic Analysis Centre (Strata), Vilnius, https://strata.gov.lt/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/20220228-pirmine-megatendenciju-analize.pdf (accessed on 3 June 2024).
[32] Strata (2020), Kaip skirtingo SES moksleiviams sukurti lygias galimybes įgyti aukštąjį išsilavinimą (How to create equal opportunities for students of different SES to obtain higher education), Government Strategic Analysis Centre (Strata), Vilnius, https://strata.gov.lt/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/20210321-aukstojo-mokslo-prieinamumas.pdf.
[33] Strata (2017), Užsienio studentai Lietuvoje: ar gebame pritraukti mokytis, o įgijusius išsilavinimą išlaikyti Lietuvoje? (Foreign students in Lithuania: are we able to attract them to study, and retain those who have gained education in Lithuania?), Government Strategic Analysis Centre (Strata), Vilnius, https://strata.gov.lt/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/uzsienieciai.pdf.
[84] StudentSurvey.ie (n.d.), About the surveys, https://studentsurvey.ie/about-surveys (accessed on 1 February 2025).
[67] Sveriges Riksdag (2009), Lag (2009:128) om yrkeshögskolan (Law 2009:128 on Higher Vocational Education), Utbildningsdepartementet, https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-och-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/lag-2009128-om-yrkeshogskolan_sfs-2009-128/.
[18] ŠVIS (2024), PM išorinio vertinimo rodikliai (PM external evaluation indicators), https://www.svis.smm.lt/rodikliai/ (accessed on 27 May 2024).
[38] ŠVIS (2024), Švietimo Valdymo Informacinė Sistema (ŠVIS) [Education Management Information System (EMIS)], https://rsvis3.emokykla.lt/ (accessed on 23 April 2024).
[64] TEM (n.d.), Työvoimabarometri (Labour force barometer), https://tem.fi/tyovoimabarometri (accessed on 7 September 2024).
[47] Teo, I. et al. (2023), International Comparison of Tertiary Education Systems, Australian Government Department of Education, https://research.acer.edu.au/higher_education/80/ (accessed on 24 June 2024).
[65] UFM (2018), “Uddybende modelbeskrivelse (detailed model description)”, Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet, https://ufm.dk/uddannelse/institutioner-og-drift/styring-af-uddannelsesudbud/dimensionering/ledighedsbaseret-dimensionering/uddybende-modelbeskrivelse/uddybende-modelbeskrivelse.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2024).
[49] Weingarten, H. (2018), Maximising the Contribution of the Post-Compulsory Education and Training System to the Achievement of Welsh National Goals: A review of systems for monitoring and improving the effectiveness of post-compulsory education in Wales, Government of Wales, https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2018-09/maximising-the-contribution-of-the-post-compulsory-education-and-training-system-to-the-achievement-of-welsh-national-goals.pdf (accessed on 18 July 2024).
[86] WWC (n.d.), What Works Clearninghouse, https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ (accessed on 25 June 2023).
← 1. This excepts the functioning of the Šiauliai branch of Vilnius University, the Vilnius Art Academy branch in Telšiai, and master’s programmes offered by Kaunas Technological University in Panevėžys.
← 2. The five colleges currently offering short-cycle programmes in Lithuania are: 1) Kaunas College (KK), 2) Kaunas Technical College (KTK), 3) Panevėžys College (PK), 4) Šiauliai State College (ŠVK) and 5) Vilnius College (VK).
← 3. Students’ Matura results are weighted as follows: main subject (40%); second subject (20%); third subject (20%); Lithuanian language and literature, or another subject in case Lithuanian was chosen as the first subject (20%).
← 4. An exception to this is those students enrolling in IT programmes, who must take an entrance test to determine their IT skills.
← 5. The preliminary (and final) number of places of formal VET financed by the state does not include some specific types of VET programmes. This includes VET for the judicial system, the training of customs officers and the training of internal affairs, as well as the training carried out in accordance with the procedure established by the Law on Employment and the Law on the Fundamentals of the Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities of the Republic of Lithuania.