COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EX-ANTE EVALUATION Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL laying down the legal framework of the European Solidarity Corps and amending Regulations (EU) No 1288/2013, (EU) No 1293/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1305/2013, (EU) No 1306/2013 and Decision No 1313/2013/EU
Date: 2017-05-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, EU financing, EU office or agency, international voluntary worker, voluntary organisation, voluntary work, young person, youth employment

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 30.5.2017  SWD(2017) 166 final   COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EX-ANTE EVALUATION Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL laying down the legal framework of the European Solidarity Corps and amending Regulations (EU) No 1288/2013, (EU) No 1293/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013, (EU) No 1305/2013, (EU) No 1306/2013 and Decision No 1313/2013/EU {COM(2017) 262 final} {SWD(2017) 167 final} {SWD(2017) 168 final}  
 
 
Contents 

1. 

INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT ......................................................................... 4 

2.  PROBLEM ANALYSIS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT ........................................... 6 

2.1  What is the problem? ......................................................................................... 6 
2.1.1  Challenges and opportunities related to solidarity activities ............... 6 
2.1.2  Challenges and opportunities for young people .................................. 9 
2.1.3 

The  limits  of  current  instruments  supporting  the  engagement  of 
young people ..................................................................................... 12 
2.2  Causes of the problem ..................................................................................... 14 

2.2.1  A fragmented and complex landscape of supporting structures and 

enablers for solidarity activities ........................................................ 14 
2.2.2  Obstacles deterring young people from getting engaged .................. 17 
2.2.3  Varied quality standards .................................................................... 18 
Lack of validation of the solidarity activity ...................................... 19 
2.2.4 
2.3  Summary ......................................................................................................... 20 

3.  OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................... 21 

3.1  General Objective ............................................................................................ 21 
3.2  Specific Objectives .......................................................................................... 21 

4.  OPTIONS / DELIVERY MECHANISMS ............................................................... 21 

4.1  Policy Option 1: Continuation of implementation through various spending 

programmes (baseline scenario) ...................................................................... 22 

4.2  Policy  Option  2:  Self-standing  programme  with  strengthened  focus  on 

solidarity .......................................................................................................... 23 

5.  ANALYSIS OF DELIVERY MECHANISMS AND RISK ASSESSMENT .......... 26 

Indicative assumptions for the analysis of the Policy Options ........................ 26 
5.1 
5.2  Analysis and comparison of the Policy Options ............................................. 28 
5.2.1  Accessibility ...................................................................................... 29 
5.2.2  Quality ............................................................................................... 29 
Inclusiveness ..................................................................................... 30 
5.2.3 
Synergy .............................................................................................. 30 
5.2.4 
Efficiency .......................................................................................... 31 
5.2.5 
5.2.6  Comparison option ............................................................................ 31 
5.3  Delivery mechanism of the preferred option ................................................... 32 
5.3.1  Direct management............................................................................ 32 
5.3.2 
Indirect management ......................................................................... 32 
5.3.3  Combination of direct and indirect management .............................. 33 
5.4  Expected results and impact ............................................................................ 33 
Social Impacts ................................................................................... 33 
Economic impacts ............................................................................. 34 

5.4.1 
5.4.2 

2 

 
 
 
Environmental impacts ...................................................................... 34 
5.4.3 
5.4.4  Risk assessment ................................................................................. 34 

6.  EUROPEAN ADDED VALUE ................................................................................ 36 

6.1 Solidarity is a common European value .............................................................. 36 
6.2 Subsidiarity.......................................................................................................... 36 

7.  MONITORING AND EVALUATION .................................................................... 37 

8.  ANNEX:  CONSULTATION  ON  THE  EUROPEAN  SOLIDARITY  CORPS  - 

SYNOPSIS REPORT ................................................................................................ 39 

8.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 39 
8.2 Consultation strategy and activities ..................................................................... 39 
8.2.1.  Public consultation ............................................................................ 39 
8.2.2.  Targeted consultations ....................................................................... 39 
8.3 Stakeholder groups included in the consultation ................................................. 40 
8.4 Consultation findings .......................................................................................... 40 
8.4.1.  General feedback ............................................................................... 40 
8.4.2.  An attractive initiative for young people and organisations .............. 41 
8.4.3.  A  lean  and  effective  set  up  and  governance  of  the  European 

Solidarity Corps ................................................................................. 43 
8.5 Use of stakeholder feedback ............................................................................... 45 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION AND CONTEXT 

The  EU  is  built  on  solidarity:  solidarity  between  its  citizens,  solidarity  across  borders 
between its Member States, and solidarity in its action inside and outside the Union.  

Solidarity represents one of the shared values which are embedded in the Treaties governing 
the European Union. As such, it defines the European project and should be time and again 
restated  and  reinforced.  It  is  part  of  the  core  fabric  that  makes  the  European  dream  inspire 
generation after generation. The EU is about more than common rules, institutions or markets: 
it is a community of values. 

This role of solidarity was stressed by President Jean-Claude Juncker in his State of the Union 
address1  on  14  September  2016,  whereby  the  idea  of  a  European  Solidarity  Corps  was 
announced: 

"There  are  many  young,  socially  minded  people  in  Europe  willing  to  make  a  meaningful 
contribution to society and help show solidarity. We can create opportunities for them to do 
so  […]  Solidarity  is  the  glue  that  keeps  our  Union  together  […]  Young  people  across  the 
European Union will be able to  volunteer  their help where it is  needed most, to  respond to 
crisis situations […] These young people will be able to develop their skills and get not only 
work but also invaluable human experience". 

At the Bratislava summit of 16 September 2016, 27 Member States agreed to provide better 
opportunities for young Europeans and enhanced EU programmes dedicated to them. 

In  response  to  the  political  resolve  to  do  more  for  young  people,  the  Commission 
initiated the European Solidarity Corps in December 2016. 

In its first phase, the European Solidarity Corps put in place opportunities to express solidarity 
through  existing  programmes2,  building  on  the  Erasmus+  programme  (specifically  the 
European Voluntary Service (EVS)), the Employment and Social Innovation programme, the 
LIFE programme, the Europe for Citizens programme, the Asylum, Migration and Integration 
Fund,  the  European  Agricultural  Fund  for  Rural  Development  (through  Interreg),  the 
European Regional Development fund and the Health programme.  

The European Solidarity Corps has not been put in place in a vacuum: there is a multitude of 
solidarity activities and programmes in operation in the Member States. In most EU Member 
States there are long-standing traditions and experiences with volunteering, and some operate 
national civic service programmes offering young people the possibility to engage in activities 
that serve the public interest. Others facilitate activities undertaken by civil society. Moreover, 
on the EU level, the European Voluntary Service has provided volunteering opportunities for 
young people for 20 years, and policies and programmes such as the Youth Guarantee and the 
Your First Eures Job are helping young people get into traineeships and jobs.  

1   Available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-16-3043_en.html 
2   European  Commission  (2016),  A  European  Solidarity  Corps,  Communication  from  the  Commission  from 
the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of 
the Regions, COM(2016) 942 final of 7.12.2016. 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
The European Solidarity Corps will draw on these national, local and European experiences 
and traditions,  respecting different approaches  across the EU and without  replacing existing 
schemes set up by Member States.  

It  is  against  this  backdrop  that  the  Commission  is  developing  the  instruments  necessary  to 
consolidate the European Solidarity Corps beyond its current, initial phase. The Commission 
wants  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  to  contribute  to  addressing  unmet  societal  needs  by 
further enhancing and underpinning young people’s willingness to engage, whilst at the same 
time  helping  organisations  active  in  solidarity  activities.  It  should  address  unmet  needs, 
multiply  successful  projects,  and  reach  more  people  and  organisations  in  the  most  effective 
way. It seeks to offer, through a single entry point, high quality placements for young people 
to not only express solidarity but also to gain relevant skills and experience to improve their 
employability.  Thereby  it  will  ensure  that  all  interested  young  people  across  the  EU  have 
equal opportunities to join. 

Ultimately, the European Solidarity Corps aims to help strengthen cohesion and solidarity in 
Europe,  supporting  communities  and  responding  to  societal  challenges.  It  can  help  bring 
people  from  different  communities  and  ages  together.  It  can  facilitate  the  integration  of 
migrants and refugees in a new environment3. The European Solidarity Corps can eventually 
contribute  to creating a community of individuals and organisations  committed to  solidarity 
activities. The European Solidarity Corps could also increase the opportunities open to people 
to start grass root efforts to meet needs present in their local communities. 

Expressions of solidarity can inspire and promote European democratic values, tolerance and 
citizenship. Activities motivated by solidarity tend to be inclusive and embrace diversity, thus 
serving as good examples of ways to counter racism and prejudice.4  

Even  if  many  young  Europeans  are  already  active  in  their  communities,  more  young 
people, from different backgrounds, can be reached. 

Around half of young people in the EU are members of at least one organisation. Amongst the 
most  popular  activities  are  sports  clubs  (29%),  youth  clubs  or  organisations  (16%),    local 
organisations  supporting  local  communities  (11%)  and  cultural  organisations  (10%).  One  in 
four young people in the EU have been involved in an organised voluntary activity in the past 
12  months,  mainly  in  activities  related  to  charity,  humanitarian  and  development  aid, 
environmental  protection,  education,  training  and  sport.5  However,  the  less  educated  or  less 
involved young people are in social activities, the less they take part in civic activities such as 
voting or volunteering6. 

According  to  surveys,  actions  towards  increasing  equality  in  education  and  living  standards 
are  indicated  as  priorities  by  one  in  two  young  individuals.7  The  emphasis  on  equality  and 

3  Hill, M., Russell, J., and Brewis, G., (2009) Young people volunteering and youth projects. A rapid review 

of recent evidence. Institute for Volunteering Research, p.7. 

4      Sherraden,  M.,  Lough,  B.,  McBride,  A.,  (2008)  Effects  of  International  Volunteering  and  Service:               

Individual and Institutional Predictors. In: International Journal of Voluntary and Non-profit Organizations, 
Vol.19(4), p.408. 
 Eurobarometer 408 (2015) European youth. 
Joint  Report  of  the  Council  and  the  Commission  on  the  implementation  of  the  renewed  framework,  "EU 
Youth Report", 2015. 

5 
6 

7   Special Eurobarometer 451 (2016), Future of Europe. 

5 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
solidarity is also reflected in  what young people see as  global priorities. Almost  one in two 
young persons in Europe indicates fostering social equality and solidarity as an essential need 
for society.8 Last but not least, over 70% of young Europeans have expressed the belief that 
these activities are more efficient when they are provided and coordinated at EU level.9  

2.  PROBLEM ANALYSIS AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT 

2.1  What is the problem? 

The main problem is a lack of easily accessible opportunities for young people to engage in 
solidarity activities, resulting in societal challenges and needs in communities not being met 
while there is engagement of young people that goes untapped. Solidarity activities should be 
of  high  quality,  properly  validated  and  geared  to  real  and  concrete  societal  challenges, 
strengthening communities and solidarity overall. By engaging in a solidarity activity, young 
people  should  get  the  opportunity  to  improve  their  skills  and  competences  for  personal, 
educational, social, civic and professional development, as well as their employability. 

During the consultations on the proposal for the European Solidarity Corps, stakeholders have 
emphasized  the  need  for  focused  an  explicit  profile  of  the  concept  of  solidarity  activities. 
Against this backdrop, many stakeholders expect the future Commission proposal for a legal 
base to provide a clear definition of 'solidarity activities', clarifying whether a placement will 
be linked to the field in which it is carried out or to the nature of the activity. 

In the context of the European Solidarity Corps, a "solidarity activity" means an activity that 
is aimed at addressing unmet societal needs and which primarily results from the motivation 
by individuals or organisations to act to the benefit of a community. A  solidarity activity in 
the  European  Solidarity  Corps  sense  will  also  foster  the  educational,  social  civic  and 
professional development of the participants. 

2.1.1 

Challenges and opportunities related to solidarity activities 

There are concrete and growing needs for solidarity activity in Europe. 

European Solidarity Corps participants can be involved in areas such as education and youth, 
health, social and labour market integration, assistance in the provision of food and non-food 
items, shelter constructions, site construction, renovation and management, reception, support 
and  integration  of  migrants  and  refugees,  post-conflict  reconciliation,  environmental 
protection  and  nature  conservation,  climate  action  or  prevention  of  natural  disasters 
(excluding immediate responses which would require specialised skills). 

Some  areas  of  solidarity  activity  are  particularly  confronted  with  unmet  needs  and 
shortages.  
Community  needs  in  areas  as  diverse  as  health,  food  relief  and  construction  have  emerged 
with  the  need  to  cater  for  EU  citizens  as  well  as  for  newly  arrived  migrants  and  refugees. 
Societal  support  to  fulfil  these  needs  is  reliant  on  a  variety  of  actors  –  public  institutions 
(including  the  EU),  International  Organisations  and  NGOs,  as  well  as  grassroots  efforts. 
Solidarity  activities  induced  through  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  can  help  these  actors, 
including in crucial areas such as host society and job market integration.  

8   Special Eurobarometer 451 (2016), Future of Europe. 
9   Special Eurobarometer 434 (2015), Humanitarian aid. 

6 

 
 
                                                 
In view of the growing numbers and severity of natural and man-made disasters, there is an 
increasing  unmet  societal  need  for  help  e.g.  with  disaster  prevention  and  dealing  with 
recovery.  From  the  perspective  of  civil  protection  authorities,  European  Solidarity  Corps 
participants  could  be  involved  in  tasks  related  to  prevention  and  recovery  from  disasters 
affecting, among others, urban and rural areas, coastal zones, forests, water resources, cultural 
heritage, etc., complementing existing capacities and helping to fill gaps shortages. Such tasks 
could  cover  collecting  data  for  mapping  community  assets  and  infrastructure  which  are 
critical during or after a disaster, creating learning and awareness raising products on disaster 
risks,  organising  exercises  and  drills  with  schools  and  communities;  developing 
mobile/internet-based  applications  for  Early  Warning  Systems,  contingency  planning  or 
providing  psycho-social  support  programmes.  In  light  of  the  rapidly  evolving  science  and 
technology  applications  for  the  purpose  of  civil  protection/disaster  risk  management,  young 
graduates  and  professionals  could  well  provide  significant  contributions  to  Civil  Protection 
authorities. 

Solidarity-related activities cover a significant proportion of the labour market. 

With  employment  in  solidarity-related  sectors  in  the  EU  estimated  at  employing  some  45 
million  people,  these  sectors  cover  some  20%  of  the  total  labour  market.10  The  solidarity 
sector in the EU is faced with shortages: according to Eurostat, 17% of all job vacancies are 
found in the solidarity sector.11 Conversely, data from the  EURES portal shows that around 
80,000  jobseekers  are  looking  for  work  in  solidarity-related  sectors  in  another  EU  country, 
meaning that there are issues related to matching supply and demand. 

Two  areas  in  particular  stand  out  in  terms  of  the  share  of  total  employment  in  solidarity-
related sectors: education and health. Taken together, they account for 90% of employment in 
the  above  estimate,  and  offer  many  opportunities  through  their  sheer  size,  as  well  as  the 
growing labour needs that will need to be met in the future. Both sectors have been affected 
by  budgetary  restrictions  in  recent  years  that  have  impacted  on  the  ability  to  provide  the 
services needed, especially for special-need groups. 

The education sector is a growing area. According to the EU skills panorama12 in 2015, the 
share of education in total EU employment was 7.61%, and this share is projected to increase 
over the next decade. The biggest occupation group in education are teaching professionals, 
amounting  to  almost  ten  million  in  2015  (9,681,603).  The  sector  offers  a  variety  of 
occupational opportunities, besides those directly related to teaching. A priority is to support 
inclusive education for all, low performing disadvantaged students, early school leavers and 
children with special  needs,  sections of the  adult  population with  low basic skills, or  newly 
arrived refugees. Similarly, the importance of foreign language competencies is increasing. 

The  highest  number  of  so-called  bottleneck  occupations  can  be  found  among  health 
professionals,  personal  care  workers  in  health  services  and  food  preparation  assistants.  The 
health  sector  is  fast-growing  and  provides  the  possibility  for  a  wide  range  of  employment 
opportunities  across  different  skill-levels  for  young  people.  Specific  areas  where  support  is 

10  This  figure  concerns  employment  in  six  solidarity-related  fields,  including  education,  health  care,  social 

integration/social  work,  environmental  protection,  emergency  and  disaster  management  (immediate         
response, and including the reception of refugees), as well as food aid. Study commissioned end of 2016 by 
the European Commission on "Labour demand in solidarity-related sectors in the EU" (based on 2015 data). 

11  This figure concerns the six solidarity-related fields outlined in the above footnote. 
12   http://skillspanorama.cedefop.europa.eu/en/sectors/education#1 

7 

 
 
                                                 
needed  include  working  with  migrant  health,  health  promotion  and  respite  care  for  families 
looking  after  their  sick  or  disabled  members  (social  care).  Job  opportunities  also  exist  in 
highly  specialised  medical  care,  health  care  in  isolated/rural  areas,  and  care  for  the  elderly. 
However, the health sector is highly regulated. This requires that cross-border workers obtain 
appropriate national  recognition  and  accreditation  of  their  qualification  before  being  able  to 
practice in a host country. 

Other  sectors  where  solidarity  activities  can  make  a  difference  are  those  of  environmental 
protection and climate action. The Commission's Employment Package "Towards a job-rich 
recovery"  identifies  the  green  economy  as  a  job-rich  sector13.  The  creation  of  green  jobs  is 
also an important measure of progress towards ‘sustainable’ growth as part of the European 
jobs',  traineeships  as  well  as 
Commission’s  Europe  2020  strategy.  Within 
volunteering14, there is a need for both low- and high-level skills15. Moreover the shift toward 
a resource-efficient, low-carbon and climate-resilient economy will need professionals able to 
design,  develop,  use  and  apply  new  efficient  low-carbon  production  processes  and 
technologies in a broad range of sectors. The potential of employment creation linked to the 
production  of  energy  from  renewable  sources,  energy  efficiency,  waste  and  water 
management,  air  quality,  restoring  and  preserving  nature  and  biodiversity  and  developing 
green infrastructure is significant and is resilient to changes in the business cycle. 

'Green 

The area of food aid supports two groups in particular; homeless people and households on 
low incomes. The two main types of activities undertaken are the provision of ready-cooked 
meals, and the provision of ingredients to prepare meals at home. Over 120 million people, or 
24% of the EU population, are at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Another almost 9% of all 
Europeans  live  in  severe  material  deprivation.  Based  on  this  and  on  the  information  from 
foodbanks and the Salvation Army, it can be expected that the demand for paid workers will 
increase,  together  with  the  increasing  demand  for  volunteers.  In  total,  some  15,500  people 
work in foodbanks, of whom 90% are volunteers16. 

Another area of need for solidarity work is that of social work, who can be found in a variety 
of settings including schools, hospitals, mental health clinics, youth and child welfare service 
agencies, settlement houses, and community development organisations. The estimated labour 
force in the area of social integration and social work, including the reception and integration 
of  asylum  seekers  and  migrants,  currently  stands  at  170,00017,  and  this  figure  does  not 
comprise  the volunteers active in  social activities. For instance,  analysis of areas of activity 
among  EVS  volunteers  show  that  among  the  most  prevalent  activities  are  youth  support 
(leisure and information), arts and culture and social exclusion.  

A  number  of  factors  make  cross-border  placements  in  the  social  sector  more  challenging, 
including the need to communicate with persons from other cultural backgrounds in a foreign 

13    European Commission (2012) Towards a job-rich Recovery. 
14   According  to  the  study  on  the  impact  of  transnational  volunteering  through  the  European  Voluntary 

Service, ICF, 2017, +/- 15% of EVS volunteers is active on environmental issues. 

15   "Green"  jobs  according  to  the  definition  adopted  by  Eurostat  centres  on  the  environmental  goods  and 
services  industry,  comprises  "activities  which  produce  goods  and  services  to  measure,  prevent,  limit, 
minimise or correct environmental damage to water, air and soil, as well as problems related to waste, noise 
and  eco-systems."  This  includes  technologies,  products  and  services  that  reduce  environmental  risk  and 
minimise pollution and resources, OECD, 1999. 

16   The estimated size of the sector can be found by looking at the European Federation of Food Banks (FEBA). 

http://www.eurofoodbank.org/ 

17   "Labour demand in solidarity-related sectors in the EU", 2015. 

8 

 
 
                                                 
language, and the need to have an understanding of the legal, institutional and social context. 
In  rural  areas  there  are  specific  issues,  such  as  higher  rates  of  poverty  and  unemployment 
among young people, as well as more evident expressions of social exclusion compared with 
urban  areas.  This  phenomenon  is  linked  with  other  types  of  social  difficulties  such  as 
depopulation, isolation of elderly people and general problems in generational renewal.  

2.1.2 

Challenges and opportunities for young people 

Young people are keen to become active in society, but this is challenging.  

The  skills,  creativity  and  diversity  of  90  million  young  people  are  one  of  Europe's  greatest 
assets. Whilst an increasing group of young people appear to turn away from traditional forms 
of  politics  and  representation,  many  are  willing  to  take  action.  Today's  young  generation 
attaches importance to social equality and is keen to engage in community life18. Interviews 
with stakeholders and studies confirm there is no crisis of democratic participation amongst 
youth, nor major disenchantment with political issues; in fact, quite the contrary. For instance, 
young  people  who  volunteer  with  the  European  Voluntary  Service  (EVS)  want  to  make  a 
difference to people’s lives, the opportunities to learn a foreign language, meet new people, 
live abroad, develop soft skills and enhance career prospects19. National data confirm interest 
of young people in solidarity. Across all civic service programmes, youth serve more than any 
other group, as a study shows20; it depicts that 77% of the programmes engage youth. 

Transitions from childhood to adulthood have become longer and more complex. Specifically, 
the  transition  from  education  to  work  has  become  more  protracted  as  the  crisis  has 
exacerbated  young  people's  already  fragile  position  on 
labour  market.  Youth 
unemployment  in  the  EU  peaked  at  24%  in  January  2013  and  the  same  year  annual  rates 
exceeded  40  %  in  four  Member  States.  Young  people's  situation  in  the  labour  market  has 
improved  in  recent  years,  but  youth  unemployment  remains  high21,  with  3.9  million  young 
people unemployed in the EU. 

the 

Involving  young  people  in  solidarity  activities  would  constitute  a  real  investment  in  their 
personal, social, civic and professional development. Stimulating the non-formal and informal 
learning of young people through solidarity activities is thus highly relevant.  

For instance, experience from the EVS shows that participants in this volunteering experience 
learned  to  get  along  better  with  people  from  a  different  cultural  background,  that  the 
experience  helped  them  to  identify  opportunities  for  their  personal  and  professional  future 
often  made  them  more  confident  in  moving  around  on  their  own  to  travel,  study  or  work 
abroad.  Moreover,  85%  of  participants  have  become  more  aware  of  common  European 

18   According to Special Eurobarometer 451 (2016) Future of Europe, young people consider fostering  

 social equality as the most important aim for the future of Europe. Almost one in two young persons in  
 Europe indicates fostering social equality and solidarity as an essential need for society. 

19    CHE  Consult,  ICF  International,  (2017),  Study  on  the  impact  of  transnational  volunteering  through  the 

European Voluntary Service, Draft final report, EAC/2015/17. 

20    McBride, A. M., Benítez, C., Sherraden, M. (2003), The Forms and Nature of Civic Service: A Global 

  Assessment, Research Report. St. Louis: Center for Social Development, Washington University. Available  
  at: https://csd.wustl.edu/Publications/Documents/Global_Assessment_Report.pdf 

21   Eurostat, at 17.3% (February 2017). 

9 

 
 
                                                 
values.22  Today,  only  a  minority  of  young  people  gets  the  chance  to  enroll  in  the  EVS  or 
similar schemes and there is thus a largely untapped potential. 

Failing  to  provide  young  citizens  with  the  opportunity  to  get  engaged  in  solidarity 
results in a loss of personal and social capital as well as employment potential. 

Not tapping into the energy and potential of youth to get engaged puts both young people and 
the  society  at  a  disadvantage,  at  the  price  of  loss  of  social  capital.  The  concept  of  social 
capital is based on the idea that networks and relationships can serve as a resource.  Evidence 
shows that social capital produces positive returns for network members and the community 
at  large.  There  are  indicators  that  social  trust  and  strong  networks  help  buffer  against  the 
effects  of  economic  downturns.  German  data  reveal  that  engagement  in  a  range  of  social 
activities  is  positively  linked  with  job-finding  among  the  unemployed.  In  addition,  social 
capital can provide a counterweight to economic and social disadvantage. In general, research 
suggests that the influence of social capital is a benign one, associated with higher levels of 
performance,  in  terms  of  educational  attainment,  employment  and  social  inclusion,  and  that 
these appear to hold particularly true for young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. As 
one  academic  puts  it,  social  capital  can  beat  the  disadvantages  of  social  class  and  weak 
cultural capital. 

Lack  of  favourable  prospects  and  inactivity  among  young  people  can  have  wider  negative 
social  effects  and  exclusion,  and 
including  frustration, 
disappointment, or loneliness.23 About one third of young Europeans between 15 and 24 years 
of age do not have confidence in the future24. For the first time since the Second World War, 
there is a real risk that the generation of today's young adults ends up less well-off than their 
parents. Europe cannot afford to lose the most educated group it has ever had.   

trigger  negative  sentiments 

The  specific  situation  for  young  people,  and  the  risks  associated  with  not  supporting  them, 
justifies  an  initiative  targeting  young  people,  even  if  some  stakeholders  pointed  to  the 
relevance of promoting solidarity activities among other age groups. 

Challenges are compounded in the case of disadvantaged young people.  

Inactive young people deserve special attention. About 6.6 million young people are neither in 
employment,  education  or  training  (“NEETs”)  and  one  third  of  young  people  are  at  risk  of 
poverty  and  social  exclusion.  Evidence  hints  at  links  between  educational  and  professional 
activity and level of civic engagement: 28.7% of NEETs are interested in politics, compared 
to 40% of non-NEETs; 65% of NEETs declare a disposition to vote compared to more than 
75% of non-NEETs. Furthermore, NEETs have lower levels of trust in institutions.25 

22    Ongoing research-based analysis and monitoring of the EU youth programme (Youth in  
       Action/Erasmus+ Youth in Action) by means of RAY/www.researchyouth.net 
23   Unemployed and inactive young people are more likely than others to feel socially excluded, to 

feel lonely, to face a lack of social support, and to have lower levels of mental well‑being. Eurofound  
(2014), Social situation of young people in Europe, Publications Office of the European Union,  
Luxembourg.   

 24   Standard Eurobarometer 85.2 (2016). 
25   Eurofound, (2012), Youth unemployment in Europe, NEETs – young people not in employment, education or 

training. 

10 

 
 
                                                 
Those  starting  life  with  fewer  opportunities  tend  to  accumulate  disadvantages.26  Young 
people  with  no  qualifications,  with  a  migrant  background,  with  disabilities,  or  family 
responsibilities, all face additional obstacles in their transition to adulthood27.  According to 
the  latest  PISA  survey,  around  one  in  five  15-year-old  pupils  in  the  EU  today  lacks  the 
minimum level of reading, maths or science competence needed to fully participate in society.  

More  than  one  determinant  is  generally  at  play  in  producing  social  exclusion,  and  these 
determinants  often  overlap  in  the  life  trajectories  of  socially  excluded  persons.28  Research 
shows  that  some  particular  groups  of  young  people  find  specific  barriers  to  participation  in 
solidarity activities: 

  Disadvantaged young people lack confidence to take part in their society.29 
  Young people with low income lack financial independence and fear losing social benefits. 
  Young  people  living  in  rural  areas  face  the  challenges  of  geographical  spread  and  long 

travel distances. 

  Young  people  of  minority  ethnic  groups  face  challenges  based  on  language,  cultural 

differences and discrimination.30 

Despite significant efforts by Member States to improve outreach, young people in the most 
vulnerable  situations,  including  the  low-skilled  and  non-registered  NEETs,  are  for  instance 
under-represented among beneficiaries of the Youth Guarantee.31 Many disadvantaged young 
people  are  less  likely  to  be  registered  with  Public  Employment  Services  or  local  welfare 
services.32 Disadvantaged young people are benefiting less from opportunities to work abroad. 
According to the latest Your First EURES Job (YFEJ) monitoring report, the combined share 
of  the  registered  candidates  that  had  been  in  higher  education  was  70%.  Conversely, 
candidates with basic education levels represented 8% among the jobseekers registered.33 

One  of  the  key  issues  highlighted  by  stakeholders  during  the  consultation  process  was  the 
need  for  an  inclusive  approach,  in  order  to  make  sure  that  all  young  people  will  be  able  to 
participate, irrespective of their background, educational attainment, skills level, or disability. 
This  requires  sufficient  support,  financially  and  through  information  channels,  trainings, 
mentoring,  etc.    Some  stakeholders  pointed  out  that  guidelines  for  assessment  of  projects 
should clearly prioritize disadvantaged young people, by using effective methods that lead to 
a higher ranking of these projects. 

Overall  stakeholders  highlighted  the  particular  need  for  training  for  disadvantaged  young 
people.  This  is  a  group  who  face  different,  often  multiple,  barriers  to  entering  the  labour 
market and partaking in civic engagement. Therefore they can benefit from tailored support 

26    2015 Joint Report of the Council and the Commission on the implementation of the renewed framework 
       for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-18). 2015/C 417/03. OJ C 417, 15.12.2015, p. 17–24. 
27   Eurofound, (2012), Youth unemployment in Europe, NEETs – young people not in employment, education or 

training. 

28   Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) (2013), Youth Social Exclusion and 
       Lessons from Youth Work. Available at: 

http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/youth/tools/documents/social_exclusion_and_youth_work.pdf  

29   Gaskin K., Young People Volunteering and Civic Service. A Review of Literature, NCVO, 2004 p. 24. 
30   Gaskin K., Young People Volunteering and Civic Service. A Review of Literature, NCVO, 2004, p. 23. 
31    COM/2016/0646 final 

Carcillo, S., Fernández, R. and Königs, S., (2015). ‘NEET Youth in the Aftermath of the Crisis: Challenges 
and Policies’, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, OECD Publishing, Paris. 

33  Your First Eures Job Progress Monitoring Report, November 2016, p. 9. 

11 

 
 
                                                 
through  not  only  language  training,  but  also  for  instance  personal  development  courses, 
psychological or practical help and professional mentoring before and during the placement. 
Some  stakeholders  also  pointed  out  that  disadvantaged  young  people  should  benefit  from 
more flexibility in terms of type of placement, duration of placement and age bracket. 

Solidarity action is a way of improving disadvantaged young people’s prospects. 

The EVS Impact Study showed that 90% of the disadvantaged jobseekers participating in the 
EVS stated that they have a better idea about their future life. 80% of them feel prepared for 
an  international  career  path.  45%  of  youth  with  fewer  opportunities  engaging  in  the  EVS 
(compared with 35% for other groups) joined to improve and widen their career prospects and 
enhance  employability.  According  to  the  same  study,  negative  perceptions  on  the  value  of 
volunteering, including in terms of career perspectives are more frequent in social groups that 
are unfamiliar with volunteering. On this basis, one could assume that a group with much to 
gain from getting involved remains unaware of the value and thus misses out. 

As confirmed by research34, volunteering can play a role in job acquisition for marginalized 
youth  by  giving  them  opportunities  to  build  knowledge,  skills  and  competences  that  are 
transferable from non-profit to business settings (general employment skills, people skills, life 
skills). It also prepares them for employment by making them more confident, more socially 
connected, and more aware of their work interests and aptitudes.35 Traineeships can provide 
another  good  bridge  to  work.  There  is  broad  consensus  that  traineeships  represents  a  useful 
experience to acquire relevant practical, personal and social skills, which facilitate access to 
employment. 

During  the  consultations  for  the  preparation  of  the  legal  base  for  the  European  Solidarity 
Corps,  stakeholders  stressed  the  importance  of  offering  relevant  trainings,  such  as  for 
languages, to these groups. The same is true for validation of the experiences gained. 

2.1.3 
people 

The  limits  of  current  instruments  supporting  the  engagement  of  young 

The  availability  of  a  broad  range  of  solidarity  projects,  as  well  as  efficient  information  and 
awareness  of  these  opportunities,  is  crucial  to  increase  the  motivation  particularly  among 
disadvantaged youth. 

However, the existing supply falls short of meeting the interest among the young to get 
engaged in solidarity.  

Only 6% of young people have stayed abroad for the purpose of volunteering; over 80% of 
young Europeans aged 15-24 said to have never been offered such opportunity. 

Erasmus+ Youth, which contains the European Voluntary Service (EVS), demonstrates high 
demand and decreasing share of projects receiving grant support. From 50.7% of success rate 
in 2014 to only 33.5% in 2016 of submitted projects which could be granted. This leaves only 
in 2016 more than 8 000 volunteering placements unfunded due to the lack of available funds. 

34   EU Youth Report 2015. 
       for European cooperation in the youth field (2010-18). 2015/C 417/03. OJ C 417, 15.12.2015, p. 17–24. 
35    European Commission, Literature review for "Study on the impact of transnational volunteering through the    
       European Voluntary Service", June 2016, p. 14-15. 

12 

 
 
                                                 
Or, since the start of the Your First EURES Job Scheme under the EaSI programme (2010-
2020),  only  1469  placements  could  be  made  following  8615  registrations  and  requests  for 
assistance. 

To foster intra-EU labour mobility for young, the Commission tested between 2011 and 2013 
a scheme called "Your first EURES job" (YFEJ to help the EU citizens aged 18-30 to find a 
job, traineeship or apprenticeship in another EU Member State, to offer a full package of pre- 
and post-placement support as well as to assist employers with finding workers in other EU 
country.  Since  2014,  YFEJ  is  implemented  in  the  framework  of  the  2014-2020  EU 
Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI)36 as a "targeted mobility scheme"37 
but it remains small-scale and did not focus on solidarity sectors.  

Particularly  in  the  case  of  traineeships,  barriers  to  mobility  appear  to  be  high;  cross-border 
traineeships are underrepresented on the European labour market.38 Stakeholders see a great 
potential  for  traineeship  placements  in  solidarity  sectors,  as  revealed  during  the  targeted 
consultations. 

In  April  2013  the  EU  launched  the  Youth  Guarantee  with  the  objective  to  ensure  that  all 
young people up to the age of 25 receive a quality offer of employment, continued education, 
an  apprenticeship  or  a  traineeship  within  four  months  of  becoming  unemployed  or  leaving 
formal  education.39  Since  then,  this  initiative  has  significantly  contributed  to  increase 
opportunities  for  young  people  on  the  labour  market.40  Yet,  the  Youth  Guarantee  does  not 
specifically target the solidarity sector and in this regard, the European Solidarity Corps can 
complement Member States’ efforts. 

In-country  mobility  schemes  are  usually  not  specifically  targeting  young  people  nor  the 
solidarity  sector  per  se.  While  many  Member  States  have  supportive  measures  in  place  to 
foster  in-country  geographical  mobility  for  jobs,  traineeships  or  voluntary  placements,  few 
invest in measures for intra-EU labour mobility. In this respect, they rely to a large extent on 
the European Employment Services (EURES) network services. 

Young people get involved in solidarity to varying degrees in the EU and structures are 
differently organised across the EU. 

Evidence shows that  addressing solidarity  and building social, economic and civic cohesion 
benefits  from  the  existence  of  a  rich  tissue  of  dynamic  organisations  and  associations41.  A 
comparison of funding and support schemes available to volunteering in the Member States 
shows  that  there  is  a  wide  variety  in  the  availability  of  opportunities  in  each  country,  with 
differences in the way they are managed, organised or funded42. 

36   http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1081.  
37   Targeting young nationals aged 18-35 and employers from the European Economic Area (EEA, i.e. the EU 

28 countries, Norway and Iceland) 

38   Your First Eures Job: Monitoring Report, November 2016 
39   Fourteen Member States have extended the upper age limit beyond 25, see section 2.1.1.2 below.    
40   European  Commission  (2016)  "The  Youth  Guarantee  and  Youth  Employment  Initiative  three  years  on", 

COM/2016/0646 final 

41   See, for example, Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone (Simon & Schuster, 2000) and Robert D. Putnam and 

Lewis Feldstein, Better Together (Simon & Schuster, 2003). 

42   Comparative youth research in preparation for the upcoming Youth Wiki. 

13 

 
 
                                                 
According  to  a  Eurobarometer  survey43,  a  quarter  of  young  people  in  the  EU  have  been 
involved in an organised voluntary activity in the past 12 months. These activities were more 
often aimed at making a change to circumstances in the local community (66%) than in the 
country  as  a  whole  (27%),  in  other  European  countries  (7%)  or  other  parts  of  the  world 
(11%).  

There  is  considerable  variation  by  Member  State:44  More  than  a  third  of  young  people  in 
Ireland  (42%),  Denmark  (39%)  and  the  Netherlands  (38%)  have  participated  in  organised 
voluntary activities, while respondents in Bulgaria (10%), Greece (13%) and Sweden (15%) 
are the least likely to have done so. Respondents who finished their education at the age of 20 
or over are more likely to have participated in organised voluntary activities (26%) than those 
who  ended  education  at  the  age  of  16-19  (20%)  or  at  the  age  of  15  or  under  (15%). 
Participation is also lower among manual workers (17% compared with 25%-27% in the other 
occupation groups).  

Respondents  in  the  Netherlands  (11%)  and  Ireland  (10%)  are  the  most  likely  to  have 
volunteered abroad at some point. Young people are least likely to have had the opportunity 
to  volunteer  abroad  in  Italy  (98%  have  never  had  the  opportunity),  Portugal  (97%),  Cyprus 
(95%) and Romania (95%). 

In 2008 the EU adopted a Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers with 
the aim of promoting and overcoming barriers to cross-border mobility. An evaluation45 of the 
Recommendation  showed  that  the  obstacles  which  it  aimed  at  overcoming  almost  a  decade 
ago,  are  relevant  still  today.  These  include  quality  in  volunteer  management,  availability  of 
information, access of disadvantages young people, visa issues, linguistic support, insurance 
and protection, and simplification of application procedures. The evaluation recommended to 
make a more explicit link with funding opportunities. 

2.2 

Causes of the problem 

2.2.1 
enablers for solidarity activities 

A  fragmented  and  complex  landscape  of  supporting  structures  and 

To the extent that opportunities to engage exist, solidarity activities are designed in line 
with national structures and are unevenly distributed across Member States.  

Thus, young people who wish to make a positive contribution to society and have identified 
opportunities  to  do  so  are  often  confronted  with  a  complex  and  heterogonous  institutional 
landscape across the EU. 

At  EU  level,  the  European  Voluntary  Service  (EVS)  reaches  only  a  small  proportion  of  the 
target  population,  its  placements  are  not  exclusively  with  solidarity  activities  addressing 
unmet societal needs and it does not allow for placement of volunteers in their home country. 
As  far  as  opportunities  for  traineeships  and  jobs  are  concerned,  there  are  no  existing 

43   Eurobarometer 408 "European Youth", 2015. 
44   The variety by country is confirmed in SOLIDUS (2015), Concept paper for research and policy analysis of 
the  spatial dimension  of  solidarity (Horizon 2020  project “Solidarity  in  European  societies:  empowerment, 
social justice and citizenship). 

45  Evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy and the Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers     
      across the EU, ICF, 2016. 

14 

 
 
                                                 
instruments  or  programmes  supporting  placements  exclusively  with  solidarity  activities 
addressing unmet societal needs, and that do so across the whole of the EU. 

According  to  a  study,  organisations  active  in  transnational  solidarity  in  the  EU  are 
facing several problems46: 

 

 

 

 

the  majority  of  organisations  reported  shrinking  funding  opportunities  in  times  of 
increasing activities. Since the start of the crisis, solidarity activities had increased due to 
growing  numbers  of  people  in  need.  Lack  of  adequate  funding  was  reported  as  the 
highest/extremely pressing constraint for about half of the studied organisations; 
the  studied  organisations  reported  problems  associated  with  disjointed  and  discontinued 
funding  schemes,  often  as  a  result  of  shifting  public  attention  and  priorities.  Even  if 
solidarity  practices  are  focused  on  meeting  urgent  needs,  the  organisations  stressed  the 
need for a more enduring and sustained collective effort; 
the organisations were concerned about the need to improve cooperation and coordination, 
not  only  to  regarding  relationships  between  public  authorities  and  the  organisations,  but 
also  the  coordination  between  organisations.  Transnational  cooperation  was  considered 
important to exchange knowledge and experience, foster learning processes and enhance 
the discussion capacity in the field; 
it  was  recommended  to  consider  public  assistance  and  professional  services  for 
volunteers,  e.g.,  in  the  area  of  support,  mentoring  and  supervision  of  volunteers,  and 
voluntary associations to cope with the problems of burnout and work overload. 

The  study  concluded  that  –  in  light  of  the  above  and  against  the  backdrop  of  the  current 
political  and  social  climate  of  national  retrenchment  and  growing  populism  –  it  would  be 
advisable to refortify social investment and provide civil society with the necessary financial 
resources  to  maintain  and  reinforce  transnational  solidarity  cooperation.  Moreover,  public 
institutions were called upon to intensify their efforts in assisting civil society organisations to 
foster cross-national encounters and deliberations amongst local and national solidarity actors 
in order to facilitate the exchange of knowledge, experience and practices. 

While there are volunteering traditions in all Member States they are quite different, and, as 
also  emphasised  by  stakeholders,  entail  different  concepts,  purposes,  activities  and  legal 
provisions.  

By way of example, one can observe the following kind of differences: 

  Schemes apply different notions of the learning, duration or recognition of outcomes. For 
instance,  national  programmes  tend  to  focus  on  the  benefits  of  the  server,  and  less  on 
skills. Conversely, international programmes tend to focus more on those who are being 
served and skills are more often needed47. 

  Volunteering  schemes,  programmes  and  activities  also  have  different  perceptions  on 
social protection (young people might lose their unemployment and other social benefits 
when volunteering) and varying legal status.  

46   TransSOL  research  consortium  (November,  2016),  Policy  Implications  Arising  from  the  Analysis  of 
Innovative  Practices  of  Transnational  Solidarity  Organisations,  European  Policy  Brief  2  (Horizon  2020 
project, Transnational solidarity at times of crisis). Based on a sample of 2408 organisations. 

47 Global Service Institute, Center for Social Development, Washington University in St. Louis, The forms and 

Nature of Civic Service: A Global Assessment, 2003. 

15 

 
 
                                                 
 

In  some  countries,  there  is  a  preference  for  state  intervention  whereas  in  others,  civic 
society is in the lead. Member States also have different connotations of volunteering. 

These  changes  imply  differences  in  access  to  opportunities  to  engage  in  solidarity and,  in  a 
cross-border context, limited scope to upscale. 

Stakeholders who were consulted on the future legal base for the European Solidarity Corps 
suggested the use of lessons learnt from the variety of experiences across Member States in 
the future implementation of the Corps, and pointed to the potential of boosting volunteering 
in those Member States where it is less prevalent today. 

The development and dissemination of a social innovation and solidarity approach on a larger 
scale in the EU is hampered by: 

 

Insufficient knowledge of the needs and capabilities of civil society  organisations, social 
enterprises and social entrepreneurs and  public sector organisations;  

  Fragmentation  of  efforts  and  resources,  lack  of  transparency  and  visibility,  limited 
financial support and insufficient technical skills that can support organisations to develop 
and deliver social innovations; 

  Low  levels  of  involvement  of  citizens  and  business48;  civic  participation  has  undergone 
significant  change  and  the  modern  societies  have  gradually  developed  towards  greater 
individualism.  The  sector  has  to  cope  with  new  types  and  forms  of  participation, 
characterised by selective short-term engagement.49 
  Poor diffusion, and little scale-up of good practices; 
  Emergence of new forms of solidarity fostered by the digitalisation that revolutionise or 

even replace traditional expressions of solidarity; 

  Poor methods of impact evaluation of actions and policies50. 

Traineeships  are  becoming  increasingly  common  for  young  people  as  part  of  their 
transition from education to work.51 

As mentioned earlier, there is a wide consensus about the usefulness of traineeships and their 
role  in  finding  employment.  According  to  a  Eurobarometer  survey,  almost  every  second 
young person in the age group 18-35 had at least one traineeship experience and 70% of ex-
trainees stated that such experience was useful in finding a regular job.52 

The  availability  and  scope  of  traineeships  are  uneven  across  Member  States,  although  they 
could be grouped into two broad categories – active labour market policy (ALMP)53 and open 

48   Study on Social Innovation, prepared by the Social Innovation eXchange (SIX) and the Young  

Foundation for the Bureau of European Policy Advisors, 2010. 

49   EU Youth Report 2015. 
  Union, pp. 242-253 
50   See  BEPA  (2010),  Empowering  people,  driving  change:  Social  innovation  in  the  European  Union;  OECD 

(2011), 'Fostering innovation to address social challenges.  

51     I.a. Apprenticeship and Traineeship schemes in EU 27: Key success factors. A guidebook for policy  
       planners and practitioners. European Commission / Ecorys 2013. 
52   Flash Eurobarometer 378, 2013: The experience of traineeships in the EU. 
53    Offered  to  young  persons  by  public  institutions  (typically  the  public  employment  services)  acting  as  an 

intermediary between the host organisation and the trainee. 

16 

 
 
                                                 
market54  traineeships.  Moreover,  there  is  a  plurality  of  regulatory  frameworks  ranging  from 
provisions in the labour law, specific acts to collective agreements or no regulation at all. 

Acknowledging the existing fragmentation, stakeholders still warned against ignoring existing 
national, regional and local activities and called to ensure synergy and avoid overlaps. 

2.2.2 

Obstacles deterring young people from getting engaged 

Even  where  opportunities  exist,  information  does  not  sufficiently  reach  the  target 
groups.  

Lack  of  awareness  and  information  about  existing  volunteering  opportunities  is  a  recurrent 
challenge  in  volunteering  and  has  been  tackled  by  the  Council  Recommendation  in  the 
Mobility  of  Young  Volunteers55,  one  action  of  which  was  to  raise  awareness  about 
volunteering. As is highlighted by the EU Youth Report 2015, the Council Recommendation 
puts  a  strong  emphasis  on  the  sharing  of  information  on  volunteering  –  such  as  existing 
opportunities, information and training for youth workers, organisations and other actors.  

More organisations could benefit from EU support to  volunteering if the support was better 
known56.  The  European  Voluntary  Service  (EVS)  mainly  attracts  a  segment  of  the  youth 
population that is higher educated and already engaged: 70% of young people getting into the 
EVS  already  had  volunteering  experience57.  According  the  EVS  impact  study,  the  of 
awareness tends to go hand in hand with general level of engagement in education, formal and 
non-formal, and youth activities.  

Thus,  there  is  scope  to  improve  outreach  to  those  young  people  who  not  yet  engaged  in  or 
familiar with volunteering and other civic activities. This was confirmed by stakeholders who 
said there was a need for both awareness and for practical information. Stakeholders thereby 
suggested making better use of the channels and the language used by young people, such as 
personal stories and sharing of experiences on social media. 

“IVO4ALL, international volunteering opportunities for all” explored access of young people 
to  voluntary  opportunities  abroad58;  as  part  of  an  evaluation  process  of  national  voluntary 
schemes.  Thanks  to  an  experimentation  process,  204  young  people  could  benefit  from  new 
information  and  support  measures,  such  as  pre-departure  and  voluntary  training.  To  ensure 
inclusive  and  accessible  programmes, 
improved 
communication,  adapted  selections,  specific  support,  upskilled  staff  and  mentors,  post-
placement  follow-up  and  adapted  placements.  The  project  furthermore  provided  advice 
around programme set-up and project management, including for instance a clear vision and 
targets,  remove  legal  barriers,  strong  partnerships,  adequate  support  for  practitioners  and 
quality assurance to e.g. enable field trials. 

the  project  recommended  having 

54    Open  market  traineeships,  there  is  no  third  party  apart  from  the  trainee  and  the  host  organisation  which 

makes quality assurance more difficult. 

55    Council Recommendation on the Mobility of Young Volunteers across the EU. 
56  EVS Communication Campaign – Mapping of target audiences (May 2016). 
57   Study on the impact of transnational volunteering through the EVS, 2017. 
58   IVO4ALL involved seven ministries and youth agencies, from France, the UK, Lithuania, Luxembourg and 

Italy and was co-funded by Erasmus+. 

17 

 
 
                                                 
Although  overall  awareness  of  the  Youth  Guarantee  among  young  people  has  increased  in 
recent years – from 21% in 2014 to 24% in 2016  59 – figures indicate an increase in young 
people's awareness in countries which have invested in awareness-raising activities and/or in 
which media coverage of the Youth Guarantee was high.  

Cross-border occupational services are essentially made available through EURES and these 
are not sufficiently well-known to the public according to youth organisations. According to 
the latest YFEJ monitoring report, 40 % of registered candidates are between 23  - 26 years, 
33% between 27-30 years old and only 11 % are between 18 - 22 years old.  

Financial obstacles deter getting engaged in voluntary activities. 

A  survey  conducted  in  2014  that  addresses  young  people's  propensity  to  volunteer,  60  are  a 
first  factor:  Only  16%  of  young  volunteers  said  to  have  received  contributions  for  the 
expenses incurred in voluntary activities, whereas 28% of respondents had incurred expenses 
but did not receive any contributions (a slight majority did not incur expenses). About a third 
of young volunteers received a contributions towards expenses incurred. For young volunteers 
who  received  financial  compensation,  the  main  source  is  the  organisations  for  which  they 
volunteer (11%), followed by governments and public bodies (3%), family and friends (3%) 
or  businesses  (2%).  When  it  comes  to  volunteering  abroad,  38%  respondents  did  not  incur 
expenses,  and  among  those  getting  compensation  received  it  from  the  organisation  they 
volunteered  for  (20%),  government  and  public  bodies  (10%),  family  and  friends  (13%)  and 
commercial businesses (3%). 

And there are further, personal barriers to participation.  

There  are  further  factors  holding  young  people  back  from  getting  engaged  in  solidarity, 
related  to  one's  personal  abilities  and  circumstances.  For  instance,  the  inability  to  express 
oneself in a foreign language also limits possibilities to spend time abroad. On average one in 
five  young  Europeans  reports  not  knowing  any  foreign  language.61  Other  reasons  that  the 
EVS impact study62 mentions for not engaging were related to work responsibilities (lack of 
time and opportunities) or family obligations. 

2.2.3 

Varied quality standards 

Ensuring quality placements to young people is essential to ensure their engagement in 
the solidarity sector is not a one-off experience. 

The idea of placements should be to step up civic engagement and to serve as a stepping stone 
into the labour market by improving, in particular, their skills and employability. 

10  out  of  the  25  Erasmus+  programme  countries  participating  in  the  Youth  Wiki63  report 
having  put  in  place  systems  for  monitoring  the  quality  of  the  volunteering  programmes  in 

59   Flash  Eurobarometer  of  the  European  Parliament  (EP  EB395),  European  Youth  in  2014;  Special 
Eurobarometer  of  the  European  Parliament,  European  Youth  in  2016.  These  figures  refer  to  the  share  of 
young  people  who  answer  'yes'  in  response  to  the  questions  "Have  you  ever  heard  of  the  EU's  initiative 
called 'Youth Guarantee' which is intended to combat youth unemployment?" . 

60   Flash Eurobarometer 408 (2014) European Youth. 
61   Eurostat UOE [edat_aes_l22] 

63   A forthcoming information tool for youth policy information in EU Member States. 

18 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
which young people are involved. In the remaining majority of countries, no formal system of 
quality assurance is in place. In some cases (for example in the Netherlands and Sweden), the 
high degree of decentralisation of volunteering regulations and the tradition of organisations' 
self-regulation  are  reasons  behind  the  absence  of  national  QA  systems.  In  ten  out  of  the  25 
countries covered by the Youth Wiki, there are no pre-defined support schemes or regulations 
on the reimbursement of expenses. 

The  EVS  impact  study  concluded  that  strengthening  quality  systems  in  EVS  is  necessary, 
including  raising  capacity  of  organisations  and  greater  monitoring  on  the  ground.  It  also 
recommended improving measures to ensure consistently high quality activities and provide 
high-quality  pre-departure  preparation  and  follow-up.  The  evaluation  of  the  Council 
Recommendation on mobility of young volunteers64 confirmed the need for better quality in 
volunteer management, notably in terms of sufficient training, capacity-building and funding. 

Similarly,  a  recent  report  by  the  Commission,  staking  stock  of  the  implementation  of  the 
Youth Guarantee since January 2014, underscored while over 16 million young people have 
entered a national Youth Guarantee schemes and around 10 million have taken up an offer of 
employment, continued education, a traineeship, or an apprenticeship, the quality of the offers 
which  they have  received  are  of  varied  quality.65  Challenges  relate  to  the  fact  that  offers  of 
continued education do not always ensure that a learning outcome has been achieved or lead 
to a recognised qualification. Other challenges relate to the lack of regulation of traineeships 
offers in the open market as regards transparency of hiring, duration and recognition. A 2013 
Eurobarometer  survey  underscored  similar  concerns66.  Variations  in  the  quality  of  offers 
depend primarily on the national labour market, they also result from whether and how ‘good-
quality’ offers have been defined and provided in practice.  

To ensure quality placements under the European Solidarity Corps, quality standards should 
be  ensured  for  all  participants  irrespective  of  the  host  country  in  which  they  based  and  the 
type of placements  they are engaged in (job, traineeship or volunteering). This expectation to 
meet high quality standards also resonated in the stakeholder consultation on the legal base. 
While  solidarity  jobs  should  comply  with  national  laws,  regulations  and  collective 
agreements,  an  important  yardstick  for  gauging  the  quality  of  traineeships  is  the  European 
Quality Framework in adopted in March 2014.67  

2.2.4 

Lack of validation of the solidarity activity 

Formal validation of skills is still limited. 

On average, only a quarter of young volunteers received a certificate or diploma identifying 
and documenting their experience and the skills they have demonstrated. 

In most cases certificates – though they can support young people's CVs and might be taken 
into account by future employers – are not part of a more formal process of validation of the 

64   Evaluation of the EU Youth Strategy and the Council Recommendation on the mobility of young volunteers 

across the EU. 

65   European  Commission  (2016)  The  Youth  Guarantee  and  Youth  Employment  Initiative  three  years  on, 

COM/2016/0646 final. 

66   Eurobarometer 378 (2013) "the experience of traineeships in the EU". 
67   Council Recommendation on a Quality Framework for Traineeships, 2014/C 88/01 

European Commission (2016), staff working document, Applying the quality framework for traineeships. 

19 

 
 
                                                 
knowledge, skills and competences acquired. Only very few education systems report to have 
established – or to be in the process of establishing – validation mechanisms through which 
voluntary work can contribute to obtaining a qualification or degree. 

In  2007  the  EU  launched  the  Youthpass,  which  supports  the  visibility  and  validation  of  the 
outcomes  of  non-formal  and  informal  learning  in  projects  funded  by  Erasmus+  Youth  in 
Action. Youthpass Certificates come with a guided process that helps young people become 
aware of and describe the experiences and key competences gained in the activities.  

The  2013  Youthpass  Impact  Study68  confirmed  that  participants  consider  Youthpass  useful 
when  applying  for  a  job,  traineeship  or  formal  education.  The  study  identified  the  need  to 
increase  its  awareness  and  acceptance  among  employers,  vocational  training  providers  and 
higher education institutions. Links need to be established with wider policy developments, at 
EU and national level, in the area of validation of non-formal and informal learning and youth 
work.  The  study  pointed  to  the  need  to  strengthen  the  quality  aspects  of  Youthpass 
implementation  and  further  develop  the  certificates  and  technical  tools.  Stakeholders 
suggested to use the experience of tools such as Youthpass, but also to develop it further.  

The  validation  of  skills  of  non-formal  and  informal  learning  is  a  way  to  recognise  the  full 
range  of  an  individual’s  knowledge,  skills  and  competences,  making  them  more  visible  and 
usable  for  further  studies  or  employment.  Such  validation  -  as  outlined  in  the  Council 
Recommendation of 20 December 2012 on the validation of non-formal and informal learning 
-  is  still  limited  and  Member  states  have  been  invited  to  put  the  necessary  arrangement  in 
place by 2018. 

As regards the validation of the knowledge, skills and competences gained through engaging 
in a solidarity action, many countries report69 that young volunteers receive certificates, such 
as a "passport", "card", "record book" or "award" from the organisations that engaged them.  

The  on-going  review  of  the  European  Framework  of  Key  Competences  provides  an 
opportunity  to  review  validation  of  experiences  within  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  and 
seek synergies with other instruments. 

2.3 

Summary 

Summarising the problems, needs and causes, the messages below should guide the choice of 
options to foster engagement of young people and organisations in solidarity. This is why the 
EU needs to address the following challenges in the framework of consolidating the European 
Solidarity Corps:  

  mobilise  and  enable  organisations  to  provide  more  opportunities  for  solidarity  activities 

through volunteering, jobs and traineeships to address unmet societal needs;   

  ensure easy and equal access through lean procedures and possibilities for placements of 
young people also in their own local communities, along with other measures facilitating 
the inclusion of disadvantaged young people; 

68   https://www.youthpass.eu/en/about-youthpass/youthpass-impact-study/ 
69   Source: Information relayed by Member States to Youth WIKI ( not yet published)  

20 

 
 
                                                 
  ensure European added value by promoting placements according to shared standards for 
quality and a common understanding of the acquisition of skills and competences  to be 
recognised across borders;  

  ensure  synergies  between  all  organisations  in  a  variety  of  sectors    at  local,  regional, 

national or EU level; 

  create  greater  awareness  for  and  transparency  about  other  existing  programmes  which 
contribute  to  solidarity,  national  or  European,  and  harness  their  potential  to  expand  the 
scope and outreach of their activities, in complement to the European Solidarity Corps. 

The major challenges are i) the insufficient supply of offers for placements; ii) addressing the 
current fragmentation resulting from a large variety in the understanding and organisation of 
iii)  bringing  volunteering  and  occupational  solidarity  activity 
solidarity  schemes, 
opportunities  under  one  umbrella  with  a  shared  quality  approach;  iv)  creating  a  visible  and 
broad recognition for the learning experience gained, regardless whether this experience took 
place in a voluntary or an occupational context. 

3.  OBJECTIVES  

3.1  General Objective  

The  intended  objective  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  is  to  enhance  the  engagement  of 
young  people  and  organisations  in  accessible  and  high  quality  solidarity  activities  to 
contribute  to  strengthening  cohesion  and  solidarity  in  Europe,  supporting  communities  and 
responding to societal challenges. 

3.2 

Specific Objectives 

Individual Level: provide opportunities for young people to engage in quality solidarity 
activities while improving their skills and competences  

The European Solidarity Corps would provide young people, with the support of participating 
organisations,  with  easily  accessible  opportunities  for  engagement  in  solidarity  activities 
while  improving  their  skills  and  competences  for  personal,  educational,  social,  civic  and 
professional  development,  as  well  as  their  employability  and  facilitating  transition  into  the 
labour  market,  including  by  supporting  the  mobility  of  young  volunteers,  trainees  and 
workers. 

Societal Level: offer quality solidarity activities that address unmet societal needs 

The European Solidarity Corps would ensure that the solidarity activities that are offered to 
the European Solidarity Corps participants contribute to addressing concrete, unmet societal 
needs and strengthening communities, are of high quality and properly validated. 

4.  OPTIONS / DELIVERY MECHANISMS  

This section describes the relevant policy options which are further analysed and compared. 
The possibility of using a legal base of one of the existing programmes was discarded due to 
the fact that it would result in a programme with complex set of overlapping objectives and 
limited visibility of solidarity actions in a broader frame. Furthermore, such approach would 
lead to disengagement of stakeholders from the other programmes. Consequently, two policy 
options have been identified.    

21 

 
 
Policy  Option  1:  Continuation  of  implementation  through  various  spending 

4.1 
programmes (baseline scenario) 

Option 1 would be to continue implementation through various spending programmes as it is 
the case since the launch of the European Solidarity Corps in December 201670.  

There are currently eight programmes71 funding European Solidarity Corps activities: in terms 
of size, the two main ones are Erasmus+ with its European Voluntary Service (EVS), which 
today  supports  the  European  Solidarity  Corps’  volunteering  placements  and  the  Programme 
for  Employment  and  Social  Innovation  (EaSI)  that  supports  its  occupational  placements  (in 
this first phase, solidarity jobs, traineeships and apprenticeships). 

Since December 2016, interested young people can register to participate in one of these eight 
programmes through an online single entry point accessible via the European Youth Portal.72 
By  the  end  of  April  2016,  some  28.000  people  had  registered  with  the  database  of 
participants.  Since  March  2016,  accredited  organisations  involved  in  one  of  the  eight 
programmes  have  been  able  to  search  the  database  to  find  suitable  candidates  for  their 
activities and to subsequently contact them to offer and agree on a placement.  

In  2017,  the  European  Voluntary  Service  provides  approximately  €  58  million  for 
volunteering  placements  addressing  more  than  5000  EVS  accredited  organisations.  The 
implementation  through  a  system  of  National  Agencies  ensures  that  the  targeted  8  000 
placements will be available in each Erasmus+ Programme Country73. 

The EaSI progamme is the largest provider of occupational placements under the European 
Solidarity Corps. The Commission launched one call for proposals under EaSI with a budget 
of € 14.2 million aiming to support 4,000 to 6,000 cross-border placements (job, traineeship 
or  apprenticeship)  over  a  24-month  period.  The  call  required  the  establishment  of  a 
Consortium  of  at  least  5  organisations  from  5  different  Member  States,  including  at  least  2 
Public Employment Services. 

The LIFE Programme launched a specific call for proposals for volunteer activities linked to 
the  conservation  of  Natura  2000  to  allow  for  in-country  placements  of  European  Solidarity 
Corps participants. Furthermore, in 2017 LIFE has partnered with Erasmus+ to reinforce the 
environment  strand  of  the  European  Voluntary  Service  and  extend  it  to  environmental  and 
climate action cross-country placements. 

In  2017,  the  Europe  for  Citizens  programme  is  encouraging  project  promoters  to  engage 
young people registered in the European Solidarity Corps. The approximate budget is up to € 
3.5 million.  

70   European  Commission  (2016),  A  European  Solidarity  Corps,  Communication  from  the  Commission  from 
the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of 
the Regions, COM(2016) 942 final of 7.12.2016. 

71   The  Erasmus+  programme,  the  Employment  and  Social  Innovation  programme  (EaSI),  the  LIFE 
programme,  the  Asylum,  Migration  and  Integration  Fund,  the  Health  Programme,  the  Europe  for  Citizens 
programme,  the  European  Regional  Development  Fund  (through  Interreg)  and  the  Agricultural  Fund  for 
Rural Development. 

72     https://europa.eu/youth/solidarity_en  
73   EU Member States, Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Turkey and former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.  

22 

 
 
                                                 
There are a minimum of € 9.5 million for projects financed by the Asylum, Migration and 
Integration Fund in 2017 aiming at promoting the integration of third-country nationals. The 
beneficiaries have been encouraged to involve European Solidarity Corps participants.   

The Interreg Volunteer Youth initiative offers the possibility to European Solidarity Corps 
participants to serve as volunteers in cross-border, transnational or interregional programmes 
and related projects. The total budget of this initiative is € 1 million.  

In  2017,  the  European  Agricultural  Fund  for  Rural  Development  provides  support  for 
projects with an agricultural or rural development component involving European Solidarity 
Corps participants. The funding earmarked for those projects is € 1.8 million  

In  2017,  beneficiaries  of  operating  grants  of  the  Health  Programme  are  encouraged  to 
involve European Solidarity Corps participants in the health sector. An estimated € 60,000 are 
available for these activities. 

None of the eight programmes have an exclusive focus on solidarity activities; their objectives 
have a broader scope. Some allow for placements of young people only in a different country 
than their own. Each of the eight programmes has its own legal basis, objectives and budget, 
resulting in a situation where the programmes are not aligned in terms of scope and conditions 
for participation. 

4.2 

Policy Option 2: Self-standing programme with strengthened focus on solidarity 

This option would consist of developing a new spending programme to the benefit of youth 
focussing  which  will  address  unmet  societal  needs  through  solidarity  activities  offered  by 
organisations  and  performed  by  the  young  European  Solidarity  Corps  participants.  This 
option would build on the experiences of the funding programmes currently underpinning the 
European  Solidarity  Corps  and  aim  to  attract,  on  the  one  hand,  new  solidarity  placement 
providers, but also, on the other hand, be attractive to the organisations that are involved in 
the implementation as it operates currently. A clear set of objectives would allow activities to 
focus on solidarity and contribute to clarity for organisations on the purpose of the activities. 

The  opportunity to  express  solidarity  and  gain  experience should  be  accessible to  all  young 
people  from  the  EU.  Disadvantaged  young  people  constitute  a  highly  heterogeneous  group 
with different, and often multiple, barriers to participation in work and civic life. For instance, 
and  as  called  for  by  stakeholders  during  the  consultations,  young  people  without 
qualifications, with disabilities, or with  parental responsibilities, should receive targeted and 
tailored support to ensure their participation in the European Solidarity Corps.  

To make the European Solidarity Corps attractive and accessible, participants would be able 
to choose from a menu of options. This is in line with stakeholder expectations, which pointed 
to the importance of tailored support and flexibility to enable participation of disadvantaged 
youth. It will allow everyone to get an offer tailored to his or her needs and abilities. 

Options/parameters would include: 
  different  type  of  placements  (volunteering,  jobs  and  traineeships)  which  best  suits  the 

young person's profile, goals and professional pathway/trajectory;  
flexibility in terms of choice in terms of the duration of a placement; 

 
  a broad range of skills-level to include young people no matter their level of skills;  
 

in-country and cross-country placements.  

23 

 
 
Cross-country placements offer the opportunity for the participant to do a placement outside 
his/her  home  country.  Strict  national  legislation  on  the  qualifications  required  for  jobs  in 
certain  sectors  (health,  construction)  should  not  deter  cross-border  mobility  and  European 
Solidarity  Corps  participants  should  be  supported  in  the  process  of  recognition  of  their 
qualifications.  In-country  placements  will  allow  young  people  to  express  their  solidarity 
within  their  local  communities  and  in  some  cases  may  be  more  suitable  for  certain  young 
people (lack of language skills, young people with a disability). 

 The programme would hence be implemented through three types of activities: 
1.  Placements (cross-border and in-country). 
2.  Project-based initiatives 
3.  Networking activities 

Placements would consist of individual volunteering, volunteering in teams, traineeships and 
jobs placements74 and typically last between 2 and 12 months75. Moreover, based on feedback 
during  the  consultation,  the  activities  can  also  be  shorter  than  2  months  to  encourage  the 
involvement of disadvantaged youth.   

Project  based  initiatives  would  be  local  initiatives,  set  up  and  carried  out  by  groups  of 
minimum 5 participants. They would be youth-led volunteering activities where young people 
participate  actively  in  designing  and  implementing  their  own  ideas  for  the  benefit  of  their 
local  communities.  They  would  be  aimed  at  equipping  participants  with  the  necessary 
resources (seed money) and support to be themselves drivers of solidarity actions 

Networking activities would consist of dedicated activities aiming at:   

  building a sense of belonging among European Solidarity Corps participants; 
  enhancing the impact and the benefits of the placement experience on the individual;   
 

reinforcing the capacities of participating organisations to offer better quality placements, 
to an increasing number of European Solidarity Corps participants; 

  attracting  newcomers  -  both  youngsters  and  participating  organisations  –  into  the 

European Solidarity Corps initiative; 

  offering  participants  and  participating  organisations  the  opportunity  to  give  feedback  to 
the European Commission and National Agencies on the state of art of the implementation 
of European Solidarity Corps.   

In order to maximise the attractiveness for organisations, businesses and public authorities to 
offer  solidarity  placements,  a  number  of  modalities  related  to  the  financing  of  the  activities 
will  be  open  to  such  participating  organisations,  who  may  either  i)  use  funding  from  the 
European Solidarity Corps; ii) use funding from a different EU funding programme and iii) 
use no EU funding at all.  

With  a  clear  implementation  structure  based  on  the  system  of  National  Agencies  (indirect 
management mode) the accessibility of the programme even for small organisations should be 
ensured. Moreover, bearing in mind the role of National Agencies, a natural contact point for 

74 Apprenticeships will not be available under the European Solidarity Corps in order to avoid overlaps with the 

ErasmusPro initiative. 

75 Traineeships will typically last up to 6 months. 

24 

 
 
                                                 
solidarity  activities  would  be  created  at  national  level  with  the  capacity  of  linking  EU 
objectives  to  national  realities.  This  structure  would  then  build  on  the  existing  Erasmus+ 
experience but, in order to provide the necessary link with labour markets, also open the door 
to  labour  market  actors,  such  as  public  and  private  employment  services,  Chambers  of 
Commerce and other organisations interested in facilitating occupational placements.  

This  governance  structure  would  avoid  the  multiplication  of  structures  at  national  level  and 
ensures a degree of continuity vis-à-vis stakeholders engaged under Erasmus+ as well as the 
consortia that will be involved in the European Solidarity Corps Call under EaSI (Phase 1). 

Quality measures would be applied in the form of a set of procedures and criteria to ensure 
that placements are of high quality, including: 

  Certification procedures for organisations: ensure a lean, but clear certification mechanism 
to  ensure  the  integrity  of  the  organisations  involved  and  clearly  enable  to  qualify 
activities, either as volunteering, traineeships or jobs. 
Insurance:  complementary  health  and  accident  insurance  for  insurance-related  expenses 
which are not already covered by the European Health Insurance Card  or other insurance 
schemes to which participants may be enrolled. 

 

  Online  Linguistic  Support  (for  cross-border  placements):  European  Solidarity  Corps 
participants are to be given access to an online tool allowing them to assess and improve 
(through an online language course) their competences in the foreign language they will 
use to carry out their placement abroad.  

 

  General  Online  training:  an  open-access  training  provided  prior  to  departure  via  the 
European  Solidarity  Corps’  portal.  This  is  a  general  online  induction  with  various 
modules, such as: the mission of the European Solidarity Corps, ethics and integrity of the 
European  Solidarity  Corps,  roles  and  responsibilities  of  participants  and  placement 
providers,  European  values  and  democracy,  inter-cultural  awareness,  and  health  and 
safety, etc.  
In addition, the following specific training to those European Solidarity Corps participants 
carrying  out  individually  a  cross-border  placement:  on-arrival  training,  which  aims  to 
serve  as  a  welcoming  training  in  the  placement  country,  mentorship  and  continuous 
training, to equip the participant with the skills needed to carry out the tasks envisaged by 
the  placement;  (optional)  pre-departure  training,  for  participants  with  disadvantages  and 
mid-term evaluation sessions, for participants in placements lasting more than six months. 
  European  Solidarity  Corps  certificate:  participants  would  be  entitled  to  a  certificate  of 
participation in a European Solidarity Corps' placement, to be issued compulsorily at the 
end  of  the  placement  by  the  placement  provider.  The  European  Solidarity  Corps' 
participants who so wish will have the opportunity to receive a certificate identifying and 
documenting  the  main  learning  outcomes  of  their  experience.  The  responsibility  for 
issuing  the  Skills  passport/Youthpass  certificates  to  the  participants  would  be  with  the 
placement provider. 

  Post-placement  support:  participants  would  be  provided  with  guidance  and  support 
services  at  the  end  of  their  placement,  with  a  view  to  encourage  there  continued 
involvement 
(alumni  network; 
training/mentoring to future participants), as well providing them career guidance and/or 
support to sustainable labour market integration in their home country or other.  

the  European  Solidarity  Corps 

initiative 

in 

The European Solidarity Corps would also strive to develop quality of solidarity activities for 
young people more generally. This will be done through supporting partnerships between the 

25 

 
 
Commission  and  organisations  active  in  solidarity  by  awarding  to  those  fulfilling  the 
necessary  criteria  a  Quality  Label.  Such  a  label,  which  was  also  suggested  by  several 
stakeholders  during  the  consultations,  would  allow  them  to  benefit  from  limited  horizontal 
services without being a grant-holder. In doing so, this will allow to get synergy with other 
financial resources for solidarity. 

Awareness  and  visibility  of  the  opportunities  available  to  young  people  would  be  further 
enhanced  by  developing  the  single  access  through  the  European  Youth  Portal.  This 
development  was  widely  endorsed  by  stakeholders  during  the  consultations.  Yet,  some 
pointed  to  the  need  to  cater  for  the  specific  needs  of  disadvantaged  youth,  such  as  disabled 
people, or those with little access to on-line tools. 

Building  on  the  experience  of  its  programmes  so  far,  the  Commission  would  provide 
implementing  measures  to  ensure  that  the  programme  reaches  all  young  people  and  that  it 
provides the recognition of the learning outcomes. 

In  order  to  ensure  continuity,  coherence  and  complementarity  among  the  volunteering 
activities supported at EU level, those activities that have been supported under the European 
Voluntary  Service  and  that  fall  within  the  geographical  scope  of  the  European  Solidarity 
Corps will be supported by the latter in the form of cross-border volunteering placements. In 
parallel,  the  other  European  Voluntary  Service  activities  that  do  not  fall  under  the 
geographical scope of the European Solidarity Corps will continue to be supported under the 
Programme established by Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013. 

The Commission will foresee lean but accurate reporting and quality control, building on but 
at the same time improving the procedures in place today. Stakeholders for instance pointed to 
a need for rapid treatment of certification and placements. High quality of activities under the 
European Solidarity Corps will be essential in ensuring real and effective recognition of the 
skills  and  competences  gained  through  participation  on  a  person's  CV  by  employers,  even 
beyond the solidarity sector. Some stakeholders pointed to the possibilities of new technology 
in managing future developments of the  European Solidarity corps, in terms of information, 
awareness-raising, trainings and preparations, matching and reporting. Stakeholders suggested 
making  a  clear  distinction  between  voluntary  and  occupational  activities,  which  will  be 
addressed through subscribing to the European Solidarity Corps' charter and the certification 
procedure.  They  were  split  as  regards  the  involvement  of  different  types  of  organisations, 
especially commercial undertakings. 

5.  ANALYSIS OF DELIVERY MECHANISMS AND RISK ASSESSMENT 

5.1 

Indicative assumptions for the analysis of the Policy Options 

The analysis and comparison of options in this section are based on the following hypothesis: 

  Sufficient  and  consistent  financial  resources  are  essential  to  ensure  the  success  of  the 
European Solidarity Corps with the objective to "engage" 100.000 young people by 2020. 
Whilst at least 12,000 young people are foreseen to take part under the current  set-up of 
the European Solidarity Corps drawing on existing financing programmes, about 88,000 
young people could take part in the second phase of the European Solidarity Corps on the 
basis of the legislative proposal by the end of 2020. The financing will require a mix of 
'fresh  money'    (25%)  and  direct  redeployment  from  existing  programmes  (75%)  in  line 
with the precedents set by other important Commission initiatives. An overall budget of 

26 

 
 
341, € 5 million will be required for the period 2018-2020, of which EUR 294.2 million 
under  Heading  1a  being  the  financial  envelope76  of  the  Solidarity  Corps  and  EUR  47.3 
million  of contributions coming from  other Headings and programmes. The calculation 
of the budget is based on average costs of similar activities in other EU-programmes. The 
average costs for the placements of participants in the European Solidarity Corps depend 
on the type of activity and the foreseen average duration of the placement; 

  Below is an overview of the different sources of funding including the Global Margin for 
Commitments for the 2018 year and the unallocated margin under Heading 1a for 2019-20 
period  which  will  constitute  the  total  amount  of  €  341,5  million  to  be  financed  as 
mentioned above: 

Sources of funding for the European 
Solidarity Corps (in euro million- rounded 
figures) 
Erasmus+, of which: 

15 02 01 01 - Promoting excellence and cooperation 
in the European education and training area and its 
relevance to the labour market 
15 02 01 02- Promoting excellence and cooperation 
in the European youth area and the participation of 
young people in European democratic life 

2018 

2019 

2020  TOTAL 

51.9 

2.1 

69.2 

76.6 

197.7 

2.1 

1.8 

5.9 

49.9 

67.1 

74.8 

191.8 

European  Union  Programme  for  Employment 
and Social Innovation (EaSI) , of  which: 

2.5 

3.5 

4.0 

10.0 

the 
04  03  02  01-  Progress  —  Supporting 
development, 
implementation,  monitoring  and 
evaluation  of  Union  employment  and  social  policy 
and working conditions legislation 

The Union Civil Protection Mechanism, of which: 

23  03  01 01-  Disaster  prevention  and  preparedness 
within the Union 

LIFE, of which: 

34  02  03-  Better  climate  governance  and 
information at all levels 
07  02  03-  Supporting  better  environmental 
governance and information at all levels 

2.5 

3.5 

4.0 

10.0 

2.0 

2.0 

1.5 

0.5 

1.0 

2.0 

2.0 

1.5 

0.5 

1.0 

2.0 

6.0 

2.0 

6.0 

1.5 

0.5 

4.5 

1.5 

1.0 

3.0 

European Social Fund  (ESF)* 

11.1 

12.1 

11.8 

35.0 

76      This  financial  envelope  constitutes  the  prime  reference  amount  within  the  meaning  of  point  17  of  the 
Interinstitutional  Agreement  (2013/C  373/01)  between  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the 
Commission  on  budgetary  discipline,  on  cooperation  in  budgetary  matters  and  on  sound  financial 
management. 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
European  Agricultural  Fund 
Development (EAFRD) * 

for  Rural 

1.8 

0.0 

0.0 

1.8 

Unallocated margin under Heading 1a (including 
Global Margin for Commitments) 

18.4 

30.5 

37.7 

86.5 

Total  Contribution 
Corps 

to  European  Solidarity 

89.2 

118.7 

133.6 

341.5 

* The contribution from EAFRD and ESF comes from the overall technical assistance envelope included in the 
financial programming and not yet allocated.  

The Commission would propose to apply the necessary equivalent reductions on the indicated 
budget lines and funds in the financial programming of different schemes for the remaining 3 
years of the current MFF (2018-2020). 

Taking  into  account  the  current  schemes  (EVS,  ESC-Phase  I)  and  to  maximize  the 
achievements of the set objectives, the following working assumption have been considered: 
the activities funded will be indicatively constituted of 80% volunteering activities and 20% 
jobs and traineeships placements. 

The budget calculation takes account of the need to maintain high quality standards and keep 
due focus on inclusion, as is the case under EVS. Therefore, costs dedicated to the placements 
and projects will be complemented by specific expenditure related to quality (certification of 
organisations,  dedicated  training,  insurance,  language  support  and  additional  support  for 
disadvantaged  young  persons).  The  Commission  will  foresee  a  possibility  to  ask  additional 
support related to participation of disadvantaged young people in a flexible manner, to cater 
for all possible types of barriers of participation. Detailed budget calculations will depend on 
the  demand  for  such  additional  support  by  future  participating  organisations.  Based  on 
experience  on  past  implementation  of  the  EVS  and  goals  set  for  the  European  Solidarity 
Corps, the Commission anticipates that around one in four participants will benefit from such 
additional support. 

5.2 

Analysis and comparison of the Policy Options 

The comparison of options is based on a multi-criteria analysis, whereby each option has been 
assessed  against  a  set  of  criteria  relating  to  different  potential  benefits  and  costs.  Lack  of 
certain data prevented to quantify the likely impact of each option in monetary terms and thus 
impacts were only assessed in qualitative terms. 

The following criteria are used in the analysis: 

  Accessibility– visibility and clarity for organisations, young people and other stakeholders 

how to participate and access funding for solidarity activities. 

  Quality  –  procedures  and  criteria  that  ensure  quality  and  safe  placements,  through  the 
simplest possible procedures and conditions that do not undermine quality standards. 
Inclusiveness – measures to ensure the participation disadvantaged young people. 

 
  Synergy  -  involvement  and  synergy  between  organisations  active  in  solidarity  action 

regardless of their local, regional, national or European scope. 

  Efficiency and simplicity of management provisions and low administrative costs.  

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
5.2.1 

Accessibility 

Option 1 makes it complicated for organisations and young people to gain an overview of all 
opportunities.  It  also  obliges  organisations  to  adhere  to  more  than  one  quality  approach, 
accreditation  requirements  and  reporting.  Furthermore,  operating  through  eight  programmes 
today results in a lack of visibility and clear identity of the action. 

This  option  would  imply  that  organisations  continue  applying  for  funding  under  different 
structures. Moreover, due to the different decision-making processes for each programme, a 
complete overview on offer for solidarity activities will not be available at the same time. 

The  scope  for  setting  common  horizontal  services  would  remain  limited  and  therefore  the 
offer  for  participants  and  organisations  cannot  be  made  more  coherent  across  all  spending 
programmes in this option. This would lead to unequal levels of support to young people and 
participating organisations, and a lack of clarity. 

Option 2 would give a clear and single access point for organisations and young people and 
make solidarity actions more visible. This would respond to stakeholders' wish for clear and 
practical  information  and  help  overcome  current  lack  of  awareness  for relevant  activities  as 
pointed out in section 2.2.2. An important message resulting from stakeholder consultations is 
the  need  to  communicate  effectively  and  widely  on  the  European  Solidarity  Corps.  By 
pooling  activities  under  one  legal  base,  this  will  facilitate  communicating  messages  around 
the  value  that  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  can  bring  to  a  young  person's  personal 
development  and  employability.  As  a  separate  initiative,  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  can 
become a strong and identifiable brand. 

Stakeholders generally welcomed flexibility in the options for young people and organisations 
to  participate,  including  the  possibilities  for  in-country  placements  as  ways  of  integrating 
more young people and grass-root movements. Option 2 is also the best approach to optimally 
diversify the menu of options offering a combination of in-country and cross-border activities 
of various natures.  

5.2.2 

Quality 

Despite efforts for coherence and harmonisation in  Option 1 quality measures like training, 
insurance,  accreditation  and  recognition  are  provided  through  different  structures  in  a 
heterogeneous way, leading to variable standards and approaches. 

Furthermore,  there  is  limited  scope  for  a  common  improvement  of  quality  of  solidarity 
placements due to different funding rules, legislative bases and implementation modalities. At 
present,  the  eight  programmes  apply  a  baseline  for  uniform  quality  assurance  criteria.  For 
instance,  participating  organisations  in  each  of  the  funding  programmes  need  to  respect  the 
principles in the European Solidarity Corps Charter. However, as each programme has its own 
quality measures, they are implemented through different structures in a different way. 

The  consultations  revealed  that  stakeholders  overall  stressed  the  importance  of  quality.  The 
general  view  of  stakeholders  was  that  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  should  have  an  even 
stronger  focus  and  stronger  emphasis  on  addressing  solidarity  needs  than  existing 
programmes.  

29 

 
 
Option  2  will  in  a  number  of  ways,  allow  for  a  high  overall  quality  of  placements  and  of 
preparedness of the young people. Placement offers will be personalised and match the skills, 
interests, and learning potential of the individual European Solidarity Corps participant.  

The following different qualitative processes and criteria can be established under Option 2:  

  All organisations offering quality placements will need to comply with the principles and 
requirements  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps'  Charter.  This  will  lead  to  award  of  a 
Quality Label, to be reached according to one process for all participating organisations.  
  To ensure high quality placements, they would fulfil specific predefined quality standards. 
Solidarity jobs will be based on an employment contract in accordance with the national 
regulatory  framework  of  that  participating  country.  Similarly,  the  principles  of  the 
European  Quality  Framework  for  Traineeships  (QFT)  will  guide  the  traineeship 
placements being offered under the European Solidarity Corps.  

  A training offer for individuals will be developed according to common quality principles, 
thereby  taking  into  account  the  different  types  of  activities.  Such  offer  will  be 
complemented  by  networking  activities  for  participating  organisations  to  build  their 
capacity to offer quality placements. 

  Harmonised  complementary  insurance  coverage  will  be  put  in  place  as  well  as  a 
possibility  to  identify  and  document  the  main  learning  outcomes  of  participants' 
experience through a certificate. 

5.2.3 

Inclusiveness 

As  shown  in  chapter  2,  and  highlighted  by  stakeholders,  assuring  inclusiveness  to  the 
European Solidarity Corps is of high importance. 

In Option 1 there is limited potential for a coherent approach across all funding programmes. 
It  would  also  be  particularly  hard  for  those  with  the  fewest  means  and  information  to  find 
their  way  through  the  manifold  and  complex  conditions  and  application  procedures.  It  thus 
exacerbates  inequality  in  access  and  opportunity.  Dedicated  strategies  and  support  for 
including disadvantaged young people are available only in some of the funding programmes. 
For  instance,  the  EaSI  programme  and  EVS  are  providing  supplementary  funds  for 
disadvantaged  young  people.  An  extension  across  all  programmes  is  not  possible  due  to 
different objectives and delivery mechanisms. 

 Option  2  allows  for  a  focus  on  clarity  and  simplicity  on  conditions  and  application 
procedures.  It  will  build  on  the  experiences  with  targeted  inclusion  efforts  under  Erasmus+ 
programme (25% of participants are from disadvantaged backgrounds in EVS) and embed the 
inclusiveness approach in the programme design through a dedicated inclusion strategy. This 
may  include  additional  funding  to  enable  participation  of  young  people  with  fewer 
opportunities on equal terms as others or to support the organisations involving them. 

5.2.4 

Synergy 

Option  1  fails  to  tap  the  potential  synergies  between  the  activities  of  the  different 
programmes. For instance, when it comes to recognition of experiences, there is limited scope 
beyond  a  particular  segment  or  sector  and  accessibility  will  be  restricted.  Moreover,  the 
networking  and  exchange  of  organisations  from  different  sectors  working  on  solidarity  will 
remain limited. 

30 

 
 
Option 2 will benefit from new synergies between the activities and their recognition, which 
are  currently  implemented  through  different  programmes.  It  will  put  them  in  one  common 
framework  and  help  create  new  networks  between  people  and  organisations  with  common 
aspirations for solidarity and towards new communities built around solidarity.  

5.2.5 

Efficiency 

Option 1 is characterised  by a complex system of  multiple  implementation modes  which is 
not  only  difficult  to  access,  but  offers  a  limited  scope  for  simplification  and  fast  treatment, 
issues that stakeholders said to consider important: it needs to take into account the design of 
all eight programmes. 

This  complex  structure  (8  programmes)  would  definitely  require  major  administrative  costs 
inside  the  Commission  at  different  levels:  high  number  of  officials  involved  in  different 
Commission  services  and  more  need  for  coordination  between  Commission  services. 
Furthermore,  additional  costs  related  to  the  administrative  management  of  8  programmes 
committee considering that each programme committee would need to address the European 
Solidarity Corps would be needed as well as more communications costs are to be expected. 

Option  2  will  allow  for  the  simultaneous  decrease  of  management  costs  while  reaching 
greater  effects  (more  value  for  less  money).  This  will  be  done  by  seeking  administrative 
simplification  and  economies  of  scale  and  scope,  notably  to  ensure  fast  treatment  of 
applications,  user-friendly  information  and  forms,  no  red  tape,  no  costs  and  no  need  for 
specific  expertise  to  apply.  These  procedures  will  be  developed  gradually  during  the 
implementation, building and improving based on the experience of existing programmes, for 
instance the use of simplified grants. 

Common implementation of horizontal services like insurance, training and recognition will 
bring higher efficiency for the programme management and for the organisations it supports, 
whilst not increasing average costs of placements for the organisation. To ensure consistency, 
some  horizontal  services  will  be  made  available  also  to  programmes  not  contributing 
financially to this regulation due to their specificities. 

5.2.6 

Comparison option 

The  table  hereunder  provides  on  overview  of  the  comparison  of  the  two  identified  policy 
options as made in the sub-chapters 5.2.1 – 5.2.5. 

Criterion 

Policy Option 1 

Policy Option 2 

Accessibility 

Inclusiveness 

Quality 

Synergy 

Efficiency 

Neutral 

Neutral 

Neutral 

Neutral 

Neutral 

Positive 

Slightly Positive 

Positive 

Positive 

Slightly Positive 

31 

 
 
Based  on  the  multi-criteria  analysis,  the  preferred  option  to  address  the  needs  described  in 
chapter 2 and reaching the objectives is option 2. 

5.3 

Delivery mechanism of the preferred option 

The  preferred  option  –  a  self-standing  programme  with  strengthened  focus  on  solidarity  – 
could  be  implemented  through  different  delivery  mechanisms.  This  chapter  presents  and 
compares alternative mechanisms and their suitability for reaching the programme objectives 
in the most efficient manner. It also takes into account that stakeholders highlighted the need 
for a division of roles and competencies among implementing bodies, for clarifying the rules 
for accreditation of organisations, for a well-functioning matching tool between organisations 
and  volunteers  and  for  a  high  quality  support  system  for  the  European  Solidarity  Corps 
participants as important factors to reach the goal of high quality placements. 

5.3.1 

Direct management 

The  delivery  through  only  direct  management  would  mean  that  all  programme  actions 
(placements,  quality  measures,  networking  and  community  building  activities)  have  to  be 
implemented at centralised level.  

Implementing the whole programme at centralised level would result in uniform programme 
implementation (one call for proposals, one pool of experts assessing the projects etc.) and a 
single entry point for all organisations. 

The shortcomings of this implementation are in the results. To create a strong link to national 
realities  and  needs  would  be  very  difficult;  the  access  for  small  organisations  would  be 
problematic  as  well  as  ensuring  effective  inclusion  of  the  disadvantaged  groups  of  youth 
which differ across Member States, 

5.3.2 

Indirect management 

The  delivery  through  only  indirect  management  would  mean  that  the  implementation  of  all 
programme  actions  (placements,  quality  measures,  networking  and  community  building 
activities)  will  be  decentralised  to  national  actors  through  the  system  of  National  Agencies. 
There  would  be  one  call  for  proposals  with  common  eligibility  and  award  criteria,  but  it 
would be implemented by structures in each Member State.  

Such implementation would result in good effects in terms of inclusion (adaptation to national 
realities)  and  access  for  organisations  (single  contact  point  in  each  country).  The  uniform 
offer  to  organisation  and  participants  would  be  ensured  through  the  existence  of  common 
rules stated in the call for proposals. 

Although  this  implementation  mode  offers  potentially  very  good  results  in  programme 
implementation, shortcomings would particularly appear in terms of efficiency. Some services 
could  be  provided  easily  at  horizontal  level,  like  insurance,  induction  training,  online 
language  training  would  need  to  be  re-invented  at  each  national  level.  The  risk  of  variable 
quality of service between the Member States would need to be mitigated by fairly thorough 
programme monitoring steered at centralised level. 

32 

 
 
5.3.3 

Combination of direct and indirect management 

Governance  and  implementation  structures  for  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  as  a  whole 
would best be built on the current Erasmus+ set-up, i.e. by indirect management via National 
Agencies, to support all types of placements under the European Solidarity Corps, albeit with 
leaner  and  simpler  processes.  This  governance  structure  should  foresee  the  necessary  link 
with  labour  markets  and  open  the  door  to  labour  market  actors,  such  as  public  and  private 
employment  services,  Chambers  of  Commerce  and  other  organisations  interested  in 
facilitating occupational placements. 

The  combination  of  direct  and  indirect  management  modes  is  based  on  the  experience  of 
Erasmus+  programme  implementation  and  also  withheld  the  preference  of  a  majority  of 
stakeholders  consulted.  Many  emphasized  a  wish  to  preserve  what  has  been  built  up  and 
learnt during 20 years of implementing the EVS. 

In  this  delivery  mechanism,  the  placements,  placement-related  quality  measures  (i.e.  on-
arrival trainings, award of quality label to organisations active at local, regional and national 
level)  and  part  of  the  networking  activities  would  be  implemented  through  indirect 
management and benefiting from a strong effectiveness of this implementation mode.  

Horizontal  quality  measures  (online  induction  training,  insurance  coverage,  online  language 
training)  as  well  as  quality  label  for  organisations  active  at  EU  level  would  be  provided  by 
direct  management  at  centralised  level.  This  ensures  highly  efficient  implementation  of 
horizontal  activities  where  the  need  to  adapt  to  national  realities  is  minimal.  The  exact 
management  body  (DG  EAC  or  delegation  EACEA)  will  be  determined  through  a  Cost-
Benefit Analysis. 

Bearing  in  mind  the  programme  objectives  and  the  focus  on  quality  in  the  targeted 
quantitative  level  (100 000  placements  by  2020),  the  combination  of  direct  and  indirect 
management will ensure the most cost-effective implementation. 

5.4 

Expected results and impact 

5.4.1 

Social Impacts 

Increasingly respond to unmet societal needs through the solidarity actions involving young 
people can have a two-pronged societal impact. 

Firstly,  and  fundamentally,  at  a  societal  level,  unmet  needs  in  communities  will  become 
addressed and  this  will  have  effects  on  social welfare  and  well-being.  Secondly,  there  is  an 
impact  of  addressing  those  needs  by  young  people  who  chose  to  engage  on  the  basis  of  a 
sense of solidarity, advocating solidarity itself. Equally important, being involved in solidarity 
actions in an EU context can instil a greater sense of citizenship and  understanding of one's 
neighbours.  European  Solidarity  Corps  participants  can  be  a  considerable  resource  to 
Europe’s  future  social  tissue  and  their  activities  could  assist  EU  policy  goals  such  as  youth 
participation, civil protection, social inclusion, regional development and the environment.  

At  the  level  of  the  young  persons,  allowing  to  improve  their  knowledge,  skills  and 
competences  through  the  non-formal  and  informal  learning  experience  of  a  solidarity 
placement  is  a  strategic  intervention  that  contributes  to  their  personal,  social,  civic  and 
professional fulfilment and will facilitate transition into the labour market. This is confirmed 

33 

 
 
by survey results of EVS participants regarding learning and changing attitudes, underscoring 
that volunteering can have very encouraging and positive outcomes. 

5.4.2 

Economic impacts  

Promoting youth participation and social capital is closely connected with economic growth. 
"Youth  citizenship  affects  economic  outcomes  through  three  channels:  by  enhancing  the 
human and social capital of individuals (in particular by upgrading their knowledge, skills and 
competences),  by  promoting  government  accountability  for  basic  service  delivery,  and  by 
enhancing  the  overall  climate  for  investment  and  private  decision  making77".  Increased 
participation  and  employability  of  young  people  will  ultimately  have  positive  consequences 
for employment and macro-economic growth. 

However, the small size of the proposed interventions makes it difficult to measure the real 
impact in macro-economic terms, especially as impacts will be spread out throughout Europe 
and not concentrated on one particular Member State or sector. 

5.4.3 

Environmental impacts 

The  areas  of  environmental  protection  and  climate  action  are  areas  where  various  solidarity 
activities  particularly  can  make  a  tangible,  positive  contribution,  such  as  cleaner  forests. 
Currently,  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  –  through  the  LIFE  programme  –  can  support 
placements  that  will  concretely  help  with  the  conservation  of  Natura  2000  protected  areas, 
and this will be possible also with the preferred option. 

Any programme involving increased mobility will generate a demand for transport, 
which in turn may lead to the increased emission of greenhouse gases. This increased demand 
for  transport  is  however  relatively  negligible  and  thus  an  in-depth  analysis  of  this  kind  of 
environmental impacts has not been performed. 

5.4.4 

Risk assessment 

Considering  feedback  received  during  the  consultation  and  from  regular  exchanges  with 
stakeholders,  the  following  risks  preventing  the  fulfilment  of  the  objectives  identified  in 
chapter 3 have been identified in the implementation of the preferred policy option: 

1.  The newly created self-standing programme with a stronger focus on solidarity might not 
be  accepted  by  the  beneficiaries  of  the  different  programmes  contributing  to  solidarity 
activities; 

2.  There are not enough young people registered in the database with necessary motivation 

for the solidarity activities on offer; 

3.  There are not enough offers from organisations, or the offers do not match the interests of 

the young European Solidarity Corps participants; 

4.  The  envisaged  quality  label  for  organisations  ensuring  the  minimal  quality  standards  of 
solidarity  activities  is  not  attractive  for  organisations  and/or  the  process  leading  to  get 
such label is perceived as too bureaucratic; 

5.  Involved organisations to commit fraud of irregularities with received funds. 

77   World Bank (2007), World development report 2007: Development and the next generation. 

34 

 
 
                                                 
All  identified  risks  are  not  of  a  critical  nature  and  concrete  mitigating  measures  have  been 
identified  in  order  to  minimise  their  possible  impact.  As  regards  the  last  risk  on  fraud  or 
irregularities,  the  risk  is  low  as  the  management  of  activities  will  be  based  on  good  past 
experiences in Erasmus+ which has an error rate well below 2%.  

The table hereunder summarises the assessment of the risks looking at the probability and the 
effect  of  identified  risks.  For  each  of  the  risks  the  envisaged  mitigating  measures  are 
mentioned. 

Probability 

Effect 

Mitigating measure 

Broad  consultation  of  stakeholders 
from  various  sectors  on  the  definition 
of 
the 
implementation  details  of 
European Solidarity Corps. 

Low 

Medium 

Risk 
The  newly  created  self-
programme 
standing 
with  strengthened  focus 
on  solidarity  will  not  be 
the 
accepted 
the 
beneficiaries 
different 
programmes 
contributing  to  solidarity 
activities. 

by 

of 

communication 

Effective 
targeted  groups  of 
funding streams. 

towards 
the  previous 

Networking activities of organisations.  

Communication 
young people. 

activities 

towards 

development 

Continuous 
the 
European  Solidarity  Corps  portal  in 
line with the user's feedback. 

of 

Community  Building  activities  of 
already registered young people. 

General  induction  training  ensuring 
awareness  about  the  mission  of  the 
European  Solidarity  Corps  and  the 
possible type of solidarity activities. 

Communication 
organisations. 

activities 

towards 

among 
Networking 
organisations  to  enable  peer  learning 
and sharing of good experience. 

activities 

and 

Guidance 
organisations 
implementing structures. 

through 

support 

and 

Guidance 
organisations 
implementing structures. 

through 

support 

for 
the 

for 
the 

Medium  Medium 

Simple  and  user-friendly  process  with 
clear time limits. 

Networking 
organisations 

activities 
including 

of 
the 
dedicated 

35 

There  are  not  enough 
young  people  registered 
in 
the  database  with 
necessary  motivation  for 
solidarity activities. 

Low 

High 

Medium 

High 

Not  enough  offers  from 
organisations  or  offers 
that  do  not  match  the 
interests  of  the  young 
European 
Solidarity 
Corps participants 

The  envisaged  quality 
label  for  organisations 
the  minimal 
ensuring 
quality 
of 
standards 
solidarity activities is not 
for 
attractive 
the 
organisations  and 

 
 
 
process  leading  to  get 
such label is perceived as 
too bureaucratic. 

training.  

screening  of  organisations 

Prior 
through granting the quality label. 

of 

Monitoring 
implementation 
structures  and  monitoring  system  of 
implementation  of  activities  including 
checks on grant beneficiaries 

Reporting 
completion. 

obligations 

after 

Involved organisations to 
of 
commit 
irregularities 
with 
received funds 

fraud 

Low 

High 

6.  EUROPEAN ADDED VALUE 

6.1 Solidarity is a common European value 

There  are  well-known  close  links  and  spill-overs  between  many  of  the  societal  demands 
facing  EU Member  States.  While  for  some  areas  of  unmet  demands,  such  as  environmental 
protection, EU action is prevalent, the responsibility addressing demands in some other areas, 
such  as  social  protection  and  education,  rests  primarily  with  Member  States  and  regions.,In 
whichever case, however, the EU has a role to play since the objective of the acitvities of the 
European Solidarity Corps is to strengthening solidarity between Europeans. 

By  the  European  Solidarity  Corps,  the  EU  aims  to  enhance  the  European  dimension  to 
solidarity by addressing unmet societal needs, i.e. situations where needs among communities 
and citizens are – e.g. for reasons of lacking resources – not being met by the labour market or 
by  existing  volunteering  or  other  types  of  solidarity  programmes.  Hence,  the  Corps  will 
complement,  not  compete  with,  existing  public  and  private  policies,  programmes  and 
activities,  both  at  national  and  European  level.  By  applying  a  number  of  quality  safeguards 
such as the European Solidarity Corps Charter, quality labeling and the principles outlined in 
the Quality Framework for Traineeships, the European Solidarity Corps can help improve the 
quality of various placements for young people in Europe and their recognition. By bringing 
the  different  types  of  placements  under  one  European  Solidarity  Corps  brand,  awareness 
about and visibility of the opportunities available to young people can be improved. 

6.2 Subsidiarity 

In  light  of  the  European  scale  of  the  proposed  objectives  –  to  mobilise  young  people  for 
solidarity causes throughout the European Union – an action at EU level is appropriate. The 
EU has a role to play in supporting a Europe-wide approach to solidarity. EU action through 
the  European  Solidarity  Corps  will  not  replace  similar  actions  by  Member  States,  but  will 
serve  to  complement  and  support  them,  in  full  respect  of  the  subsidiarity  principle.  While 
there  are traditions  in  all  Member  States  for running  programs  and  instruments  that support 
activities  that  serve  the  public  interest,  in  particular  through  volunteering,  these  are  quite 
diverse, with some countries preferring state intervention, and others letting civil society be in 
the  lead.  There  are  also  different  concepts  and  connotations  of  solidarity  activities  and 
volunteering, and the types of activities are different in content and duration. Moreover, there 
are  quite  different  perceptions  of  how  social  protection  relates  to  volunteering,  as  well  as 
various degrees of legal status, learning and recognition. All this leads to fragmentation at EU 

36 

 
 
level, which means that young people across the EU have uneven access to the opportunities 
on offer.  

EU  action  through  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  will  contribute  to  addressing  the  need  to 
overcome  this  fragmentation,  as  evidenced  by  the  ex-ante  evaluation  that  accompanies  this 
proposal.  At  the  same  time,  it  will  be  an  occasion  to  build  on  the  lessons  learnt  from  the 
variety  of  experiences  across  Member  States,  while  boosting  volunteering  in  those  Member 
States where it is less prevalent today, as suggested by the stakeholders who were consulted 
during the preparation of this proposal. The European Solidarity Corps will complement the 
existing public and private policies, programmes and activities, both at national and European 
level.  By  applying  a  number  of  quality  safeguards  such  as  the  European  Solidarity  Corps 
Charter,  a  quality  label  for  participating  organisations  and  the  principles  outlined  in  the 
Quality  Framework  for  Traineeships,  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  can  help  improve  the 
quality of various placements for young people across the EU as well as the validation of their 
learning outcomes.  

Furthermore,  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  will  offer  a  single  entry  point  to  high  quality 
volunteering and occupational solidarity placements for young people across the EU, whereas 
currently these are only accessible via a multitude of schemes. It will therefore ensure that all 
interested young people across the EU have equal opportunities to join and easier access to a 
broader variety of activities. Bringing the different types of placements under one brand can 
also contribute to improving awareness about and visibility of the opportunities available to 
young people. 

The European Solidarity Corps will offer both placements that can be undertaken in a country 
other than the country of residence of the participants (cross-border) and placements that can 
be undertaken in the country of residence of the participants (in-country). This flexibility is in 
line  with  the  proposals  received  from  the  consulted  stakeholders.  As  far  as  cross-border 
placements  are  concerned,  especially  in  view  of  the  fragmentation  in  structures  and 
programmes offering volunteering, traineeships as well as the diversity in understanding and 
concepts  of  the  sector  offering  solidarity  activities,  individual  Member  State  action  cannot 
replace  EU  action.  As  far  as  in-country  placements  are  concerned,  the  European  Solidarity 
Corps can be expected to have an innovative character, while helping address local or national 
challenges from a broader European perspective. In particular, EU action can help overcome 
fragmentation  in  the  offer  of  placements  and  ensure  inclusiveness  for  all  young  people, 
including  those  who  face  obstacles  to  engage  in  international  activities.  It  can  also  offer  a 
European  context  and  help  find  European  solutions  to  specific  challenges  that  are  not 
confined to national borders. 

Last  but  not  least,  the  use  of  existing  structures  that  have  proved  their  efficiency  and 
effectiveness will ensure an efficient and effective implementation of the European Solidarity 
Corps  as  well  synergies  and  complementarities  with  Member  States'  actions  in  favour  of 
youth.    

7.  MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

The  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  initiative  in  achieving  the 
objectives will consist of permanent monitoring to assess progress and an evaluation to assess 
the  existing  evidence  on  the  effectiveness  of  the  initiative  results.  At  the  latest  six  months 
after entry into force of the proposal, the Commission will establish a detailed programme for 
monitoring the outputs, results and impacts of the Regulation. To ensure consistency across 
Member States, the Commission will produce guidance on the data to be collected. 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The operational objectives will aim at: 

  To improve the supply and variety of  solidarity opportunities offered to young people 
by way of supporting the supply by organisations of volunteering, job and traineeship 
placements, as well as the availability of local, project based activities; 

  To improve the sharing of knowledge, information and contacts among the European 
Solidarity  Corps  stakeholders  and  in  solidarity  sectors  through  the  creation  of 
networks and an increase in networking activities; 

  To  improve  the  quality  of  solidarity  activities  through  the  establishment  of,  and 
subsequent  sign-up  by  organisation  to,  a  European  Solidarity  Corps  quality  label;  as 
well  as  ensure  the  availability  of  various  aspects  of  training  for  European  Solidarity 
Corps participants. 

The  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  initiative  in  achieving  the 
objectives will consist of permanent monitoring to assess progress and a review to assess the 
existing evidence on the effectiveness of the initiative results.  

Monitoring arrangements will be based on an extensive analysis of the quantitative outputs of 
the  Programme,  via  dedicated  IT  systems,  which  will  ease  the  collection  of  necessary 
information  about  activities  and  projects  implemented.  The  indicators  that  will  be  collected 
will include inter alia: 

  number of participants in volunteering placements (in-country and cross-border); 
  number of participants traineeship placements (in-country and cross-border); 
  number of participants in job placements (in-country and cross-border); 
  number of participants in solidarity projects; 
  number of organisations holding a European Solidarity Corps quality label. 

At  the  latest  six  months  after  the  entry  into  force  of  the  Regulation  laying  down  the  legal 
framework  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps,  the  Commission  shall  establish  a  detailed 
programme for monitoring the outputs, results and impacts of this Regulation. 

In  2020  the  Commission  will  publish  a  Report  taking  stock  of  the  progress  made  towards 
achieving  its  results,  including  the  target  of  offering  100.000  young  people  opportunities 
under  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  by  2020  (covering  individual  and  team  volunteering, 
traineeships, jobs, cross-border and in country). 

The Commission will perform an independent evaluation four years after its date of adoption 
of  the  Regulation  to  assess  qualitative  outcomes  that  serve  to  measure  the  action’s 
effectiveness  and  impact  on  the  young  people,  unmet  societal  demands  and  participating 
organisations.  The  main  components  of  this  evaluation  will  concentrate  on  a  change  in 
knowledge,  attitudes,  values,  skills  and  practices  occurring in  individuals,  organisations  and 
communities  as  a  direct  result  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  activities.    The  sources  of 
verification  for  the  evaluation  will  include  the  analysis  of  work  plans  and  reports  from  the 
National Authorities and Agencies, results arising from dissemination, evidence-based studies 
and  surveys  focussing  on  measuring  effects.  The  process  will  involve  the  collection  and 
selection of the most significant change stories emanating from the field level, i.e. by panels 
of  designated  stakeholders  or  staff.  The  focus  will  be  on  the  continuous  process  of  the 
European  Solidarity  Corps  monitoring  and  management  and  will  be  used  to  help  assess  the 
performance of the European Solidarity Corps as a whole. 

38 

 
 
 
8.  ANNEX: CONSULTATION ON THE EUROPEAN SOLIDARITY CORPS - SYNOPSIS REPORT 

8.1 Introduction 

This  report  aims  to  provide  a  summary  of  the  results  of  consultation  activities  during  the 
period  of  January  to  April  2017  related  to  the  preparation  of  the  legislative  proposal  of  the 
European Solidarity Corps. The report is meant to: 

 

 

inform policy-makers on the outcome of all consultation activities; 

inform  stakeholders  on  how  their  input  has  been  taken  into  account  and  to  explain  why 
certain suggestions could not be taken up. 

8.2 Consultation strategy and activities 

The  objective  of  the  consultation  was  to  define key  priorities  and  contribute  to  shaping  the 
legislative proposal for the European Solidarity Corps. The consultation results have informed 
the  Commission's  legislative  proposal,  as  further  explained  in  chapter  5,  as  well  as  its 
accompanying  ex-ante  evaluation,  including  the  analysis  of  policy  options  related  to  the 
implementation of the initiative. Both the public and targeted consultations build on an initial, 
targeted  consultation  of  a  selection  of  key  stakeholders  in  late  2016  in  the  lead-up  to  the 
launch of the European Solidarity Corps on 7 December 201678.  

8.1.1. 

 Public consultation 

The public was consulted via an on-line questionnaire (open public consultation) consisting of 
introductory questions about the persons/organisations completing the questionnaire, general 
questions to all respondents and specific questions either for persons replying as individuals 
or questions for persons replying on behalf of organisations. The public consultation was open 
for eight weeks, from 06/02/2017 till 02/04/2017. 

A number of general and specific questions were multiple-choice. In addition, if stakeholders 
had  the  option  of  ticking  'other'  in  the  list  of  possible  answers,  they  were  given  the 
opportunity,  via  a  free  text  field,  to  further  specify  their  views  or  add  elements  that  they 
considered missing. The questionnaire also offered a possibility to upload documents such as 
position papers. In addition, the stakeholders had the opportunity to add further information, 
in  particular  regarding  good  practice  examples  which  could  serve  as  a  model  for  future 
European Solidarity Corps activities.  

The consultation was fully translated and made available in official EU languages, and replies 
were accepted in all these languages.79 

8.1.2. 

Targeted consultations 

An  issues  paper,  setting  out  the  key  issues  and  options  for  the  legislative  initiative  under 
preparation, was sent to targeted stakeholders in order to inform these consultations.  

78 See http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1481272643295&uri=COM:2016:942:FIN 
79 The full report of the public consultations can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/info/content/public-consultation-
european-solidarity-corps_en 

39 

 
 
                                                 
The  questions  of  the  targeted  consultations  were  broad,  focusing  on  the  potential  and  the 
challenges of creating the European Solidarity Corps and identifying the possibilities for the 
different sectors. The key issues for discussion were focused around the following topics: 

  Eligibility for the placements  

  Key parameters for the placements 

  Budget and implementation 

 

Interest and opportunities in different sectors 

In addition to targeted stakeholders' meetings, the idea of the European Solidarity Corps was 
also presented and discussed in a wide range of fora, seminars, meetings and events, engaging 
a broad variety of stakeholders from the different sectors covered by the initiative. Moreover, 
a Stakeholder Forum, gathering around 700 people, was held on 12 April  2017 in Brussels. 
The  Forum  encompassed  three  workshops  where  stakeholders  could  discuss  various  issues 
and  identify  key  elements  on  how  to  make  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  an  attractive 
initiative  for  young  people  and  organisations,  how  to  set-up  and  govern  the  European 
Solidarity Corps in efficient way and how to support young people's employability and reach 
out to disadvantaged young people.    

All targeted stakeholders were also invited to submit their input in written format. A total of 
82  position  papers  and  inputs  from  stakeholder  organisations,  Member  States,  EFTA/EEA 
countries,  regional  authorities,  national  agencies,  public  employment  services,  civil  society 
organisations, Youth Guarantee Coordinators and social partners were received and analysed 
in  particular in  order  to  identify key  messages,  feedback, ideas and experience from  a  wide 
range of stakeholders.  

8.3 Stakeholder groups included in the consultation 

The European Commission engaged with a broad range of stakeholders at all levels, reaching 
out to the public, key stakeholders within the policy areas of youth, employment, agriculture 
and health, and young people registered in the European Solidarity Corps portal. 

Key stakeholders consulted included EU-level umbrella organisations in the fields of youth, 
education, health, volunteering and employment in the solidarity sector, National Authorities 
in  the  field  of  youth  though  the  Council's  Youth  Working  party,  National  Agencies  for 
Erasmus+  Youth,  Member  States'  Public  Employment  Services,  the  European  Employment 
Services  (EURES)  network,  Youth  Guarantee  coordinators,  LEADER  organisations,  social 
partners and civil society. The European Parliament, the Council of the EU, the Committee of 
the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee were also involved in the consultation. 

8.4 Consultation findings 

8.1.3. 

 General feedback 

The stakeholders expressed an overall appreciation of the visibility and political recognition 
given to young people’s engagement for solidarity. They welcomed the new opportunities for 
young people to make a change thanks to the European Solidarity Corps and get recognised 
for  this.  Overall  stakeholders  emphasised  the  potential  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  to 
foster  integration  and  inter-European  solidarity  and  to  promote  common  values.  Yet,  they 

40 

 
 
highlighted  the  need  for  additional  funding  for  an  inclusive  and  non-elitist  approach  and 
quality placements, while building upon already existing structures. 

8.1.4. 

An attractive initiative for young people and organisations 

The  stakeholders  believe  that  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  should  offer  an  attractive 
package that would provide young people with valuable experience, a safe environment and a 
strong learning dimension so that it could result in a rewarding experience and investment in 
their  personal  development  and  skills  in  view  of  supporting  their  future  labour  market 
integration.  

8.1.4.1.  Quality placements in solidarity activities 

The  consultations  revealed  that  stakeholders  overall  stressed  the  importance  of  quality.  The 
general  view  of  stakeholders  was  that  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  should  have  an  even 
stronger  focus  and  stronger  emphasis  on  addressing  solidarity  needs  than  existing 
programmes.  

Stakeholders  highlighted  the  need  for  a  clear  division  of  roles  and  competencies  among 
implementing  bodies,  clarifying  the  rules  for  accreditation  of  organisations,  a  well-
functioning  matching  tool  between  organisations  and  volunteers  and  a  high  quality  support 
system for the European Solidarity Corps participants as important factors to reach the goal of 
high quality placements. 

More  than  half  of  the  organisations  requested  a  clear  distinction  between  the  volunteering 
activities,  traineeships  and  job  placements.  The  concern  of  some  stakeholders  was  that 
European  Solidarity  Corps  placements  would  become  a  source  of  cheap  labour  and  that 
volunteering  would  replace  paid  work.  The  stakeholders  where  split  on  whether  only  non-
profit and non-governmental organisations, as well as public authorities should be eligible, or 
if also other organisations or  employers could  be considered. The overall view was  that the 
'solidarity sector' should be broadly yet clearly defined. Stakeholders believed that the fields 
proposed in the December Communication80 formed a good basis.  

The strong focus on solidarity should affect what areas of activities the European Solidarity 
Corps could support, and stakeholders were therefore stressing the need for a clear definition 
of 'solidarity activities'.  

8.1.4.2. 

Inclusiveness and sufficient support 

One of the key issues highlighted by stakeholders was the need for an inclusive and non-elitist 
approach, in order to make sure that all young people will be able to participate, irrespective 
of their background, educational attainment, skills level, or disability. This requires sufficient 
support, financially and through information channels, trainings, mentoring, etc.  

Some  stakeholders  pointed  out  that  guidelines  for  assessment  of  projects  should  clearly 
prioritize  disadvantaged  young  people,  by  using  effective  methods  that  lead  to  a  higher 
ranking of these projects.  

80 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1481272643295&uri=COM:2016:942:FIN 

41 

 
 
                                                 
The  stakeholders  overall  expressed  that  the  level  of  the  financial  support  for  individuals 
should be attractive enough to ensure that all young people can participate without the support 
of  their  families.  Moreover,  such  support  to  participants  should  be  offered  under  equal  and 
fair  conditions,  taking  into  account  the  specific  economic  situation  of  each  country.  Some 
stakeholders  also  highlighted  the  need  for  a  fair  treatment  of  participants  in  all  types  of 
placements offered under the European Solidarity Corps, be they volunteering, traineeships of 
jobs. The stakeholders also overall expressed that participants should receive social security 
coverage, including health-care.  

Stakeholders  stressed  that  participants  should  receive  easily  accessible  and  relevant 
trainings, especially language trainings, before their placements. The stakeholders were split 
on who should be responsible for these trainings, but  overall they highlighted  the particular 
need  for  training  for  disadvantaged young  people.  This  is  a group  who  face  different,  often 
multiple, barriers to entering the labour market and partaking in civic engagement. Therefore 
they  can  benefit  from  tailored  support  through  not  only  language  training,  but  also  for 
instance  personal  development  courses,  psychological  or  practical  help  and  professional 
mentoring before and during the placement.  

Some  stakeholders  also  pointed  out  that  disadvantaged  young  people  should  benefit  from 
more flexibility in  terms  of type of  placement, duration of  placement and age  bracket. The 
possibility  of  in  country-placements,  part-time  work  or  volunteering  or  shorter  placements 
would mean that the European Solidarity Corps could reach a larger group of young people 
than  the  existing  programmes  are  doing  today.  The  need  to  allow  the  participation  of  small 
organisations in the scheme was also underlined. 

Targeted consultations have revealed the stakeholders shared the view that the validation of 
acquired  skills  after  the  end  of  the  placement  is  an  important  element  to  ensure  that 
participation in the European Solidarity Corps leads to better employability and a stable job in 
the long run. The stakeholders believe that a European Solidarity Corps Certificate should be 
more than a certificate of participation. It could be complemented with learning outcomes that 
would  encompass  a  guided  process  supporting  the  participants  to  define  learning  targets, 
guides  them  throughout  the  service  and  helps  them  describe  their  experience  and  the 
competences acquired in the Certificate. To this end, some stakeholders mentioned that Youth 
Pass81  could  be  further  developed,  especially  to  also  meet  the  requirements  of  the 
occupational activities.  

8.1.4.3.  Communication and outreach 

The  stakeholders  overall  highlighted  that  financial  support  needs  to  be  accompanied  by 
appropriate communication and outreach measures targeted to traditionally excluded groups. 
A  serious  marketing  effort  with  targeted  information  to  promote  the  programme  towards 
young people and organisations is needed. This should include easily accessible, informative 
and inspirational information on the benefits of joining the European Solidarity Corps.  

Some stakeholders emphasised that in order to reach young people the Commission needs to 
speak their language, for example by using social media and providing visual material about 
the European Solidarity Corps that would give young people an overview of the diversity of 

81 https://www.youthpass.eu/en/ 

42 

 
 
                                                 
solidarity sectors and the types of placements on offer. In addition to social media and online 
tools,  stakeholders  believe  that  the  involvement  of  easily  accessible  information  and 
registration points is necessary, especially for certain groups of young people who cannot be 
reached through online channels. Employment offices, Universities, training centres, Erasmus 
+  national  agencies  or  regional  offices  could  support  the  implementation  of  the  European 
Solidarity Corps and make the process easier and more accessible also for these groups. 

8.1.5. 

A lean and effective set up and governance of the European Solidarity 

Corps 

Stakeholders expressed the need to have a simple and effective governance of the European 
Solidarity  Corps.  The  legal  proposal  should  be  designed  in  a  way  to  valuably  build  on  the 
experience of the existing structures while seeking new ways to further simplifying the access 
to EU funds.  

8.1.5.1.  Complementarity 

to  existing  schemes  and  national 

regulations 

The  implementation  structure  should  be  lean  and  effective  whilst  complying  with  the  rules  and 
regulations  in  place  at  EU  level.  Stakeholders  overall  expressed  that  the  European  Solidarity 
Corps should create synergies and build on experience from already existing schemes of high 
quality,  such  as  the  European  Voluntary  Service  (EVS),  which  has  been  developed  over  20 
years.  Several  stakeholders  advocated  a  concept  based  on  the  EVS,  or  using  at  least  some 
elements from this programme in the implementation.  

The  stakeholders  also  stressed  that  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  should  not  take  over  or 
override existing national schemes. There should be a close and continuous dialogue between 
the  European  Solidarity  Corps  and  national  schemes.  Lessons  learnt  from  national  schemes 
should  inform  the  design  and  implementation.  On  the  other  hand,  some  stakeholders 
highlighted that the European Solidarity Corps also has the potential to support the growth of 
volunteering, particularly in certain Member States where there is no tradition for it. 

Some  stakeholders  mentioned  that  the  different  legal  frameworks  across  Member  States 
means that a 'one-size-fits-all' model may not be possible as laws pertaining to volunteering, 
jobs  and  traineeships  may  differ.  One  possible  challenge  that  was  mentioned  during  the 
consultations was that national regulations of tax or social benefits could provide an obstacle 
to  young  people  who  want  to  join  the  European  Solidarity  Corps.  Some  stakeholders 
mentioned that a European status for volunteers could help solve this issue by forcing national 
legislation to be adopted to promote volunteering. 

8.1.5.2.  Accreditation and access to the matching tool 

Stakeholders  believed  that  participating  organisations  should  be  required  to  comply  with 
criteria  and  procedures  to  ensure  that  they  provide  quality  offers.  A  thorough  but  non-
bureaucratic  accreditation  process  for  interested  organisations  should  be  in  place  before  the 
organisation  can  access  the  pool  of  young  people  registered  for  the  European  Solidarity 
Corps.  Some  stakeholders  mentioned  that  the  European  Voluntary  Service  has  developed 
several quality procedures that could be used as a model and be adapted to also apply to the 
occupational activities.  

43 

 
 
The  stakeholders  were  overall  positive  to  the  development  of  the  matching  tool,  as  it  could 
make  the application process easier both  for young people who wants  to participate and for 
the  accredited  organisations.  Some  stakeholders  stressed  that  the  Commission  should  make 
sure that the portal is accessible to vulnerable people, in particular disabled young people and 
people with less knowledge or access to IT tools. 

8.1.5.3.  Budget 

One of the main concerns of the stakeholders was that there would not be sufficient funding. 
The  majority  of  stakeholders  expressed  that  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  needs  to  be 
provided  with  sufficient  additional  funds,  staff  and  resources  to  meet  the  currently  existing 
and  future  needs.  Numerous  stakeholders  requested  a  separate  budget  for  the  European 
Solidarity  Corps,  ensuring  that  already  existing  schemes,  such  as  Erasmus  +  and  the  Youth 
Guarantee,  would  not  be  affected  by  the  new  initiative.  The  interest  and  added  value  to 
associate  European  Solidarity  Corps  in  the  implementation  of  a  number  of  EU  projects 
supported under shared management was also highlighted. 

While  many  stakeholders  expressed  sufficient  funding  as  necessary  for  organisations  to  be 
able to take part in the programme, some stakeholders suggested that organisations could be 
interested in taking part in the European Solidarity Corps without requesting or receiving EU 
funding  if  there  was  an  attractive  European  Solidarity  Corps  "label"  and/  or  if  participation 
meant having access to useful structures, such as the pool of young people, the matching tool 
and training opportunities. 

8.1.5.4.  Geographical scope and duration 

In  the  current,  initial  phase  the  geographical  scope  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  primarily 
covers the EU but also third countries participating in the existing eight contributing programmes. 
The  majority  of  those  stakeholders  that  mentioned  geographical  scope  argued  to  keep  this 
scope, arguing that it would ensure consistency with other European Programmes and be in 
line  with  the  principle  of  free  movement  for  workers  within  EFTA/EEA  countries.  A  few 
stakeholders  argued  to  expand  the  geographical  scope  further,  to  also  include  candidate 
countries or neighbouring countries to the EU. However, some stakeholders also pointed out 
that  extending  it  beyond  these  borders  could lead  to  challenges  such  as  regarding  visas  and 
work permits. 

No stakeholders were negative to the proposed possibility to support solidarity activities at the 
local  level.  Stakeholders  both  in  the  public  and  the  targeted  consultations  also  expressed  a 
need for short-term placements. This would also allow for an extended range of activities to 
be covered, complement already existing schemes and make the programme more accessible, 
in particular to disadvantaged young people. 

Stakeholders  were  split  on  the  question  about  the  possibility  to  allow  very  short  terms 
placements  (<  2  months).  Even  if  the  programme  could  open  up  for  more  short-term 
placements,  especially  in  the  case  of  volunteering,  some  stakeholders  did  express  that  long 
term volunteering, jobs and internships should be favoured. 

8.1.5.5.  Age limit 

The European Solidarity Corps in its current first phase is targeted at young people (18-30 years, 
application possible as of 17 years). Some stakeholders argued for a possible widening of age 
limit for volunteers, exceeding 30 years. Other stakeholders, however, argued for keeping the 

44 

 
 
current age limits. A few also argued for lowering the age limit under certain conditions, as 
this could open possibilities for young people in NEET situation, early school leavers, etc.  

8.5 Use of stakeholder feedback 

the  European  Solidarity  Corps 

The  proposal  for 
the  views  and 
recommendations  collected  during  the  consultations.  While  several  aspects  are  explicitly 
referred to in the legislative proposal, other details will be further defined at implementation 
stage in the future calls for proposals. 

largely  reflects 

Most stakeholders agreed that accessibility, quality and inclusiveness are core principles that 
should  underpin  the  development  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps.  In  line  with  these 
recommendations, the European Solidarity Corps will offer new opportunities accessible to 
all young people, with stronger emphasis on addressing solidarity needs and on encouraging 
the  participation  of  disadvantaged  young  people,  including  by  envisaging  additional 
financial support when relevant. It will also place special emphasis on ensuring the relevance 
and  quality  of  the  activities  to  be  supported.  Quality  and  support  measures,  such  as 
insurance, online linguistic support, general online training and specific training, a European 
Solidarity Corps certificate and post placement support will be offered to the participants. All 
these  measures  were  also  highlighted  by  stakeholders  during  the  consultations.  Quality  will 
also  apply  to  the  organisations  willing  to  offer  placements,  implement  projects  and  recruit 
participants under the European Solidarity Corps. To this end, and in line with the suggestions 
gathered  during  the  consultations,  a  quality  label  will  be  introduced  as  a  pre-condition  for 
participation  for  all  interested  organisations.  It  will  aim  at  checking  their  complicance  with 
the  principles  and  requirements  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  Charter,  as  regards  their 
rights and responsibilities during all stages of the solidarity experience. 

Another key point highlighted by stakeholders during the consultations was the importance to 
build  on  the  experience  and  structures  of  existing  programmes  in  order  to  maximise 
efficiency.  The  Commission's  proposal  does  just  that  by  including  provisions  for  the  use  of 
existing implementation structures (such as the national agencies and national authorities for 
Erasmus  +  Youth  as  well  as  the  Education,  Audiovisual  and  Culture  Executive  Agency). 
These  structures  will  also  contribute  to  ensuring  visibility  and  relevant  support  in  the 
implementation  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps.  In  cooperation  with  Member  States  and 
stakeholders  at  national  and  EU  level,  the  European  Commission  should  also  endeavour  to 
ensure  complementarity  between  existing  national  solidarity  schemes  and  the  European 
Solidarity Corps, building on good practices where appropriate. A European Solidarity Corps 
implementing  bodies  (National 
to  assist 
Resource  Centre  will  be 
Agencies/Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency/European Commission), the 
participating organisations and the young people taking part in the European Solidarity Corps 
in  order  to  raise  the  quality  of  the  implementation  and  of  the  activities  of  the  European 
Solidarity Corps. 

identified 

the 

In line with stakeholders' recommendations, the European Commission will strive to improve 
the  user-friendliness  and  to  reduce  the  administrative  burden  of  the  registration  and 
application  process  for  both  young  people  and  organisations.  The  development  of  the 
European  Solidarity  Corps  portal  is  already  a  step  in  this  direction.  The  portal  and  the 
matching tool provide a single entry point for solidarity activities throughout the EU. 

One  of  the  main  concerns  by  stakeholders  in  the  consultation  process  was  the  need  for  a 
dedicated  budget  to  ensure  that  existing  schemes  would  not  be  affected.  The  Commission 

45 

 
 
proposal for a European Solidarity Corps does entail funding through its own budget, drawing 
on  contributions  from  a  number  of  instruments:  the  Erasmus+,  the  European  Union 
Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI), the European Social Fund; Union 
Civil Protection Mechanism; the LIFE programme; the European Agricultural Fund for Rural 
Development,  as  well  as  from  the  unallocated  margin  under  Heading  1a..  Stakeholders  also 
advocated  for  a  clear  split  and  distinction  between  volunteering  and  occupational  activities. 
The  draft  proposal  clearly  distinguishes  between  jobs,  volunteering  and  traineeships  and 
introduces  an  indicative  split  for  the  financial  support  to  solidarity  placements  and  projects 
(80%  for  volunteering  placements  and  solidarity  projects  on  the  one  hand  and  20%  for 
traineeships and jobs on the other hand), which should also contribute to ensuring continuity 
in the activities supported by the programmes contributing to the European Solidarity Corps. 

The draft Regulation proposes an initial geographical scope covering the EU Member States 
only,  but  provides  for  the  possibility  to  open  up  to  third  countries  on  the  basis  of  bilateral 
agreements. Moreover, in order to ensure the kind of continuity and coherence identified by 
some  stakeholders,  volunteering  activities  that  have  been  supported  under  the  European 
Voluntary  Service  and  that  fall  within  the  geographical  scope  of  the  European  Solidarity 
Corps will be supported by the latter in the form of cross-border volunteering placements. In 
parallel,  the  remaining  European  Voluntary  Service  activities  that  do  not  fall  under  the 
geographical scope of the European Solidarity Corps, will continue to be supported under the 
Programme established by Regulation (EU) No 1288/2013. 

46