The second Transnational European Evaluation Project (TEEP II) was undertaken between August 2004 and June 2006. A methodology for evaluating transnational programmes had previously been tested during 2002-2003 by ENQA (European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education) in the first Transnational European Evaluation Project (TEEP I). TEEP II was designed both to follow up and to develop further that work and so to continue to advance cross-border external quality assurance methods in an area where no single regulatory body can assume full responsibility. TEEP II had three primary objectives, to: (1) pilot the transnational quality evaluation of three different joint master's programmes; (2) test the use of comparable quality evaluation criteria for joint master's degrees; and (3) develop a method for transnational external evaluation building on previous professional experience using common criteria. The project involved many actors across several countries: six quality assurance agencies, three programmes (each with partners in a minimum of five countries) and experts from across Europe. Each programme shared its "jointness", but in other areas there was divergence: subject, philosophy, objectives, history, etc. This made it possible both to compare and to contrast the three programmes and so to draw conclusions from a more robust vantage point. The project was bracketed by two conferences, one at the beginning and one at the end of the exercise. Both conferences brought together all those involved and ensured a good level of mutual understanding with which to begin the project as well as an opportunity for shared reflection to close it. The present report emphasises the importance for joint programmes of developing quality assurance and enhancement processes which operate across the programme as a whole--wherever it is delivered. It also stresses the need to mirror the essential transnational character of the programmes in the external evaluation process--through the participation of experts and quality assurance organisations from different countries, working together. TEEP II has demonstrated successfully how that can be achieved. The report identifies a number of areas for further work and proposes that through working together with the European University Association (EUA) ENQA may be able to refine the methods for external and internal evaluation of joint master's programmes. Appended are: (1) Management group and Expert Teams; (2) Self-evaluation manual; (3) EUA Golden Rules for New Joint Masters Programmes; (4) Launch conference programme; and (5) Closing conference programme. (Contains 28 footnotes.)