All the distortions and irregularities in the organization of Vocational Training in Greece were brought to light by an audit from the European Commission.
A confidential report revealed by Euro2day.gr hands out… yellow cards to the Greek authorities, imposes “fines” in the form of a financial correction (repayment of European resources), and leaves a fiscal “mine” of future repayments of large amounts from most of the EU programs managed by Greece.
The Commission’s planned sample audit of training programs turned up “big catches”, highlighting problems that were well known to those in the know:
- Large tenders, tailored to the needs of the powerful players in the sector (the well-known “Holy Trinity” of vocational training companies…) that turn small and medium-sized companies into subcontractors of the powerful for tiny amounts.
- Terms that essentially exclude European companies from the tenders, an issue on which the Commission places particular emphasis and for which it imposed major financial corrections, reaching 25% of EU funds.
- Manipulations to “inflate” the number of participants in training and blatant violations, such as training prisoners in Greek, while many did not even speak Greek.
The most serious issue, however, that touches the entire Greek edifice of vocational training is that the Commission sets in motion an institutional domino effect:
- It starts with the programs that were sample-audited and requests a 25% correction for the violation concerning the exclusion of European training and certification companies. However, it then points out that the risk is systemic and asks the national authorities to impose the same correction on all programs managed by the same body, if it is found that the same terms exist that lead to the exclusion of European companies.
- For the time being, the financial corrections stop here, but there are many more dominoes that may fall: since the Commission insists that the terms leading to the exclusion of companies from Europe are irregular, and given that the imposition of such terms is widespread in Greek tenders, it is clear that all these tenders are now under the sword of Damocles of a 25% correction.
The Commission report
More specifically, the audit report of the Joint Audit Directorate for Cohesion of the European Commission is a damning indictment of the way Greece manages European funds in the field of vocational training and skills upgrading.
The document, dated 7 September 2026, reveals a deeply problematic system. The Commission auditors, who carried out their audit at the end of 2025, proceeded to issue an “opinion with reservations and significant impact”, classifying the Greek management and control system in “Category 3”. This means that the system “functions partially” and “substantial improvement is required”, as serious deficiencies were identified that expose the European Funds to the risk of irregularities.
The audit focused on a sample basis on the “Just Development Transition” Program (JTF 2021) and the “Human Resources and Social Cohesion” Program (ESF+ 2021). The competent Managing Authorities (MA JDT, MA HR) and the Intermediate Body of the Ministry of Labour (IB YEKA) came under scrutiny.
The picture that emerges is disheartening: tenders that favor a few, exclusion of small and medium-sized enterprises, insurmountable obstacles for European businesses, “inflated” budgets for non-existent trainees, and the threat of major financial corrections.
Single “packages” in favor of the powerful
The first structural problem identified concerns the architecture of the tenders. The Commission examined seven tender notices concerning a wide range of functionally distinct services (consulting, training, internship, certification). The main finding was that the contracting authorities grouped all these activities into a single contract (into one “lot”), refusing to split them up.
By creating gigantic contracts, the design favored the large operators in the market. Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) and specialized providers were excluded from the role of main contractor and confined to the role of subcontractor, reducing competition.
While national legislation explicitly states that the certification body must not be corporately linked to the training provider in order to ensure integrity, the Greek authorities insisted on including training and certification in the same “package”.
As the Commission notes, “by grouping all activities and services into a single high-value contract, the design of the public contract favored large operators and groups of economic operators, while smaller or specialized providers were to a large extent confined to the level of subcontracting. This may have reduced competition and increased the risk of market concentration, especially given the limited number of authorized certification bodies”.
It is worth noting, however, that the JDT Managing Authority (Just Development Transition) was a partial exception. As recorded in the report, this Authority, in two of the three audited cases (Economic Chamber and EYDE-BEK), showed greater flexibility by launching separate tenders for training and certification. The Commission partly accepted this explanation; however, it recommended that in the future separation into “lots” within the same tender be made in order to reduce the administrative burden.
“Penalty” of 25% for excluding European companies
The second audit finding entails the greatest fiscal risk. The auditors found that the tender documents required candidates to have in advance (before submitting a bid) a national Lifelong Learning Center (KDVM) license and an approved physical establishment in Greece.
This requirement was deemed by the Commission to be disproportionate and contrary to the European principles of equal treatment, as it prevented EU economic operators from participating. Although the Greek authorities argued that this was a lawful capacity criterion, the Commission rejected the claims, ruling that access to the market was being illegally obstructed. For this irregularity, the Commission proposes the imposition of a flat-rate fine (financial correction) of 25% on the relevant contracts.
Yannis pours the drinks…
The Commission found that the managing authorities selected beneficiaries on the basis of a “Specialization Document”, which was drafted with the active participation of the potential beneficiaries themselves, a practice reminiscent of the well-known “Yannis pours, Yannis drinks”.
Subsequently, the calls were addressed exclusively to them, functioning as a disguised direct award, without independent market research and without independent assessment of their operational capacity. Blind trust in the data provided by the bodies themselves led to unrealistic targets being set, violating the principle of sound financial management.
Trainees who get lost… on the way
The lack of independent assessment led to chaotic deviations in implementation. The underperformance rates are indicative:
- SEPE project: Instead of 1,600 unemployed persons, only 209 were ultimately trained (13%).
- ESAmeA project: Out of 3,000 persons with disabilities, 882 participated (29%).
- ESEE project: Instead of 3,700 young unemployed persons, 1,750 participated (50%).
Despite the reduced participation, the authorities mechanically applied the highest possible unit cost for each activity, without taking into account the method of delivery of the training. In addition, the subject matter of the contract was unclear, as the distinction between in-person and online education was left until after the signing of the contract, preventing transparent costing.
The Commission strongly criticizes the practice of charging “asynchronous” education (e-learning via pre-recorded videos without a teacher) at the same hourly cost charged for “synchronous” distance education, emphasizing that e-learning has a fundamentally lower cost structure.
For the ambiguities in defining the subject matter and pricing, the Commission proposes an additional fine of 10%. It is noted that, under EU rules, this fine is not imposed cumulatively with the 25% fine, which prevails and is the one that will ultimately be requested.
The quality of distance learning and the concessions
The quality of the training provided is strongly questioned. In the audited projects, e-learning dominated at rates of 80% to 100%, while practical training was often replaced by theoretical “case studies”, creating serious doubts about the effectiveness of the education.
The systems recorded only the connection hours of users, without verification of whether the trainees were actually following or understanding the material.
At this point, however, the Greek authorities did not fully reject the findings. As the Commission states, the Authorities’ response to the Commission’s recommendation was recorded as “Partially accepted”.
The Human Resources Managing Authority (HR) acknowledged the importance of strengthening control mechanisms in e-learning (such as by introducing embedded tests per module).
Indeed, the Intermediate Body (IB YEKA) submitted evidence proving that in one of the projects (6016661), 15 participants attended the training in person, overturning the auditors’ initial assessment of 100% e-learning in all of the body’s projects. Following these explanations, the Commission closed this specific recommendation.
The 24 million prison fiasco
The most glaring case of program mismanagement, which the Greek authorities were ultimately forced to withdraw from European funding, concerns the large Crime Prevention program (reintegration of released prisoners), with a budget of 24 million euros.
Out of the target of 7,500 prisoners (5,500 adults, 2,000 minors), 4,195 participated, with minors reaching only 330 (17% of the target).
The auditors found a host of violations in a sample of 30 prisoners:
- The training was carried out via tablet (e-learning), instead of in person, as required by the contract.
- There were language barriers that prevented understanding by foreign prisoners. In other words, a training program in Greek was attended by prisoners who did not speak Greek!
- 26 of the 30 prisoners examined did not complete the prescribed hours.
- No exam answer sheets were found, nor the trainees’ signatures on the attendance sheets.
The Greek authorities ultimately sounded a retreat, as all the evidence showed that this was a phantom program. As officially recorded, the managing authority itself, through its own “preventive audit” (during the on-site visit on 15-18 October 2024), identified the inaccuracies and withdrew the project before European funds were disbursed.
The Commission accepted the explanations and the timely withdrawal, closing the audit without imposing a fine, but criticized the fact that the national audit report was unjustifiably delayed for a whole year (it was issued on 19/11/2025).
The nightmare of mass fines
Based on the table of financial corrections, the total proposed fine for the audited sample amounts to 1,622,018.85 euros. This amount results from the imposition of the maximum rate of 25% on audited expenditure amounting to 6,488,075.40 euros.
Specifically, for the ESF+ program the fine is set at 316,674.60 euros, while for the JTF at 1,305,344.25 euros. Due to EU rules on the non-cumulative nature of corrections, the 10% fine is absorbed by the larger 25% one and is not imposed cumulatively.
These fines are only the beginning, as the Commission sees a systemic risk and requests the extension of the fines beyond the sample that was audited.
Although the Greek authorities rejected the recommendations on fines (invoking national legislation, the audits of the Court of Audit, and the fact that the expenditures for the 2024-2025 period had been temporarily withdrawn for re-examination), the Commission insists that it must be determined whether the irregularities are systemic in nature, requesting horizontal fines of 25% for all programs of the same managing authorities where the same violations are found.
More broadly, however, the Commission opens a much larger issue for all training programs in Greece, given that the terms concerning European training companies and leading to their exclusion from Greek tenders apply everywhere.
The Commission is placing… a mortgage on very large fines that could be imposed in the future. And it is obvious that it would constitute a fiscal nightmare for Athens if the Commission were to request the return of 25% of the total funds of the training programs, amounting to hundreds of millions of euros…