Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL) has had such an exponential and rapid uptake across Europe that the adequacy of its grassroots implementation in certain contexts has sometimes been called into question. Concerns for a rough-and-ready realisation of CLIL due to insufficient teacher training, theoretical grounding, and practical orientation have been voiced. Considering that CLIL schemes have been running for a full decade in most monolingual areas or for two (or more) in certain bilingual ones, it is the perfect time to stop and do some much-needed stocktaking into the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of these programs. This article will explore how program evaluation has been approached and carried out and will identify common trends in the chief assets and pitfalls of CLIL programs, pinpointing those areas of successful practice on which we should continue to capitalise and those challenges which still need to be addressed. Practical orientations will be derived from this overview of program evaluation pertaining to aspects such as methodology, materials and resources, assessment, or coordination.