COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EX-ANTE EVALUATION Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the European Solidarity Corps programme and repealing [European Solidarity Corps Regulation] and Regulation (EU) No 375/2014
Date: 2018-06-11
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: EU office or agency, EU programme, education policy, humanitarian aid, vocational training, voluntary organisation, voluntary work, young person, youth employment, youth policy

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 11.6.2018 SWD(2018) 318 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EX-ANTE EVALUATION Accompanying the document Proposal for a  REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the European Solidarity Corps programme and repealing [European Solidarity Corps Regulation] and Regulation (EU) No 375/2014    {COM(2018) 440 final} - {SWD(2018) 317 final} - {SWD(2018) 319 final}  
 
 
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. In 
response to the political resolve to do more for young people, the European Commission 
initiated the European Solidarity Corps in December 2016. It followed up with a proposal 
for a Regulation in May 2017. Given the similarities with the existing EU Aid Volunteers 
initiative,  in  2018  the  Commission  analysed  the  possibility  of  merging  the  two 
programmes.  This  would  extend  the  scope  of  European  Solidarity  Corps  activities  to 
include those in support of humanitarian aid operations. 

The  European  Solidarity  Corps  enhances  the  engagement  of  young  people  and 
organisations in accessible and high quality solidarity activities as a means to contribute 
to  strengthening  cohesion,  solidarity  and  democracy  in  Europe  and  abroad,  addressing 
societal  and  humanitarian  challenges  on  the  ground,  with  particular  effort  to  promote 
social inclusion. 

The  proposed  Regulation  is  accompanied  by  an  ex  ante  evaluation,  which  analyses  the 
benefits of extending the scope of activities. The evaluation focused on two options: 

1) to continue implementing the European Solidarity Corps without including activities 
in  support  of  humanitarian  aid  operations,  which  would  continue  to  be  implemented 
through EU Aid Volunteers; and 

2) to extend the European Solidarity Corps to include such activities. 

These two options were identified, analysed and compared taking into account relevant 
evaluations (such as the mid-term evaluations of EU Aid Volunteers and Erasmus+) and 
the recent public consultation on values and mobility. In particular, option 2 would do the 
following: 

 

 

 

 

It would consider all participants under a common roster, improving the transparency 
and speed of the recruitment process; 

It would have single branding and communication activities. This would increase the 
outreach  of  activities  to  promote  the  programme,  making  it  the  ‘one-stop-shop’  for 
solidarity activities carried out by young people; 

It  would  have  a  single  implementation  mechanism.  All  organisations  and  projects 
would  use  the  same  e-form  to  apply  for  the  quality  label  and  funding.  This  would 
simplify procedures for the organisations and reduce the overall management cost; 

It would bring significant  synergies and  cost savings  by  maintaining a single  set of 
tools and systems. 

Based on this analysis, option 2 (extending the scope of the European Solidarity Corps) 
proved to be the option that would deliver better results. This option will provide a clear 
and  single  access  point  for  organisations  and  young  people  and  will  make  solidarity 
activities  more  visible.  It  will  embed  a  more  inclusive  approach  through  a  dedicated 
inclusion  strategy.  It  will  provide  quality  placements  and  preparation  of  the  young 
participants  through  a  series  of  specific  qualitative  processes  and  criteria  (such  as  the 
quality  label  for  organisations,  training,  insurance,  etc.).  It  will  bring  new  synergies 
between the activities and their recognition as it will put them in one common framework 
and  help  create  new  networks  between  people  and  organisations  with  common 
aspirations for solidarity. Option 2 will also allow management costs to be decreased at 
the  same  time  as  the  programme’s  effects  are  increased  (resulting  in  more  value  for 
money). In particular, four main gains in efficiency are envisaged. 

1 

 
 
 

Insurance,  cost  per  participant:  savings  achieved  through  a  common  contract  with 
insurance, as opposed to having two contracts; 

  Management fee per participant: increased efficiency in  the use  of the management 
fee thanks to the use of a highly effective delivery mechanism. This is composed of 
the  Erasmus  National  Agencies  (at  decentralised 
the  European 
Commission  and  the  Education,  Audiovisual  and  Culture  Executive  Agency  (at 
centralised level); 

level)  and 

  Maintenance  of  the  web  platform,  including  the  portal  and  the  online  training 

platform: savings through maintenance of one platform instead of two; 

  Outreach and communications: increased effectiveness of the communication (in the 
number  of  young  people  and  organisations  reached)  and  its  efficiency  (in  cost  per 
participant). 

The ex ante evaluation identified several possible challenges for the programme. These 
can  arise,  firstly,  from  implementation  of  the  current  European  Solidarity  Corps 
(including  the  slow  uptake  in  the  occupational  strand,  the  need  to  improve  cooperation 
with  national  schemes  and  the  lack  of  an  inter-generational  dimension)  and,  secondly 
from  the  extension  of  the  scope  to  include  activities  in  support  of  humanitarian  aid 
operations  (the  need  to  simplify  the  process  and  procedures  governing  the  programme 
and to increase the speed at which volunteers can be deployed to carry out humanitarian 
related  activities).  Furthermore,  a  risk  assessment  was  carried  out,  which  identified 
several risks that the programme faces. The ex-ante proposes, both for the challenges and 
the  risks,  appropriate  measures  to  ensure  the  effectiveness  and  efficiency  of  the 
programme. 

With regards to the specific objective, one has been identified. It encompasses the three 
main purposes of the programme, aiming at a) providing easily accessible opportunities 
for young people in the field of solidarity, b) to ensuring that those activities are properly 
validated,  and  c)  ensuring  efforts  to  promote  social  inclusion  and  equal  opportunities. 
This specific objective was translated into two main operational objectives, one focusing 
on the types of placements offered, the other focusing on quality and support measures 
aiming at guaranteeing the highest quality standards during the implementation. 

Finally,  the  ex  ante  evaluation  also  provides  for  a  detailed  monitoring  and  evaluation 
framework which will be used to monitor the outputs of the programme and evaluate its 
impact.  The  detailed  monitoring  framework  suggested  includes  three  key  performance 
indicators  which  measure  the  outputs  of  the  programme  with  regards  to  its  specific 
objective,  plus  22  underlying  indicators,  to  monitor  the  performance  of  the  operational 
objectives.  For  future  evaluations,  the  ex  ante  suggests  an  evaluation  matrix  which 
highlights  possible  questions  and  data-gathering  methods  to  measure  the  impact  of  the 
programme. 

2