Description: In order to evaluate the scientific quality of proposals, the following information must be provided The Technical Working Group "Quality in VET" of the European Commission has developed a Common Quality Assurance Framework (CQAF) for VET aimed at improving quality assurance systems and practices throughout Europe. The quality assurance model presented in the CQAF includes four phases:1. planning (setting goals)2. implementation (of actions to achieve the goals set)3. evaluation and assessment (evaluation of programme provision by objectives, and assessing the achieved outcomes)4. review, e.g. the discussion of the results of quality assessments among end-users, detecting causes of under-performance, and translating the conclusions into improvement actions.Despite its crucial importance the fourth phase is often the weakest. Too often evaluations become empty, legitimizing rites instead of a basis for organizational learning and the viable transformation and improvement of the educational system. Thus, in many cases improvement of IVET is not realized as performance feedback is under-utilized, goals are not fine-tuned and no strategies are designed to better accomplish the goals set. This conclusion is in line with many studies that show that in many organizations valuable evaluative information is not used, or only to a low degree. Experience from such studies is valuable when analyzing how and why the utilization of evaluative information breaks down, and this experience can also contribute to the identification of the key factors in improving the utilization of evaluative information.In the Review for improvement (REVIMP) project it is our goal to identify how IVET-providers can execute the review stage successfully. The focus area is quality assurance at the level of the providers of IVET for the health care sector as the rapid and numerable changes in this sector in combination with the increased accountability and performance requirements make quality assurance difficult but also very important there. Methodology: 1. Identify the critical success factors for the review phase based on previous research on (promoting) the utilization of evaluation findings (like the results of quality assurance assessments). 2. Analysis of the practices of 30 IVET providers in the United Kingdom, Denmark, Italy, Germany, Estonia, and The Netherlands based on the identified critical success factors: how is the review stage organized successfully, and how do IVET providers transform evaluative data into improvements of practice?3. Based on the empirical data, a comparative analysis will be carried out and a set of guidelines for initial IVET-providers for the health care sector for executing the review stage will be drawn up. 4. Testing the draft guidelines on a new group of IVET-providers, e.g. in terms of relevance, required time, resources, and skills. 5. Based on the test results, a final version of the guidelines will be developed, which will be disseminated widely among various target groups. It is our goal to use the project outcomes for specifying similar guidelines for other IVET-sectors (e.g. agriculture, commerce, metal) and other levels of IVET. In our presentation we will report on the results of the first three stages. Conclusions: Data collection is in progress now. We will present a set of guidelines for initial IVET-providers for the health care sector for executing the review stage.