The year 2015 is the deadline for most of the Education for All (EFA) goals. As this date gets closer, reviews about what has been done and reflection about future agendas will multiply. This Forum aims to contribute such a pressing debate, bringing together contributors from key international organisations within the EFA movement. They are Hiroshi Ito from UNESCO, Camilla Croso from the Global Campaign for Education and Sarah Beardmore from the Global Partnership for Education. Ito's piece situates the EFA movement historically, analysing where it comes from as well as future directions. It reflects on the tools and methods that are going to be used to assess progress towards EFA in 2015 and points to related emerging issues. One of these issues is the need to re-define some of the indicators that are being used to evaluate progress towards EFA, especially regarding key aspects such as gender parity and education quality. However, one of the main barriers to measuring progress toward EFA comes from the lack of available and reliable data, as well as from the fragmentation and discontinuity of existing data sources. This concern is also raised in Beardmore's piece in this Forum. Croso argues that the last decade has witnessed how a range of plural civil society education coalitions, such as the Global Campaign for Education, have emerged and flourished in many locations to become effective advocates and champions for the EFA goals. These coalitions, in alliance with other human rights networks, teachers and students' organisations, have actively worked for the realisation of the right to education for all, effecting significant national policy change with respect to improving teaching conditions, securing additional funds for public education and enhancing the teaching and learning environment. At the same time, civil society has become increasingly represented in international, regional and national education fora, demonstrating its capacity to engage in policy debates on EFA and hold national governments and international development agencies to account. Beardmore, in her analysis of the education and development agenda, argues against a post-2015 agenda which is narrow, neo-liberal and reductionist. She argues for a rights-based and expansive education agenda that is democratic in intent and deed and that has at its core a fundamental focus on education quality. (Contains 1 figure, 2 tables and 4 notes.)