COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Interim Evaluation of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Interim Evaluation of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative for the period mid-2014 to mid-2017
Date: 2018-06-28
Institutions: Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO), European Commission
Subjects: EU initiative, aid to disaster victims, emergency aid, financial aid, international voluntary worker, man-made disaster, natural disaster, third country, voluntary organisation

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 28.6.2018 SWD(2018) 353 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Interim Evaluation of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council  on the Interim Evaluation of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative for the period mid-2014 to mid-2017 {COM(2018) 496 final}  
 
 
Contents 

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................................ 2 

1. 

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 3 

1.1  Purpose of the evaluation .................................................................................. 3 
1.2  Scope of the evaluation ..................................................................................... 4 

2. 

BACKGROUND TO THE INITIATIVE ............................................................................................. 5 

2.1  Description of the initiative and its objectives .................................................. 5 
2.2  Baseline and points of comparison .................................................................... 7 

3. 

IMPLEMENTATION / STATE OF PLAY .......................................................................................... 9 

3.1  Action implementation ...................................................................................... 9 
3.2  Monitoring ....................................................................................................... 17 

4.  METHOD ........................................................................................................................................... 17 

4.1  Short description of methodology ................................................................... 17 
4.2  Limitations and reliability of findings ............................................................. 19 

5.  ANALYSIS OF ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS .............................................. 20 

5.1  Relevance ........................................................................................................ 20 
5.1.1  Relevance of the objectives to end beneficiaries, sending- and 

hosting organisations, and volunteers ................................................ 20 

5.1.2  Relevance  of  actions  under  the  initiative  in  relation  to 

objectives ........................................................................................... 21 
5.2  Effectiveness .................................................................................................... 24 
5.2.1  Degree of achievement of the objectives ........................................... 24 
5.2.2  Other results from the initiative ......................................................... 25 
5.3  Efficiency ........................................................................................................ 26 
5.4  Coherence ........................................................................................................ 29 
5.5  EU added value ................................................................................................ 30 

6. 

CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 31 

ANNEX 1: PROCEDURAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 34 

ANNEX 2: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ....................................................................................... 36 

ANALYSIS OF THE OPEN PUBLIC CONSULTATION ..................................................... 37 
OPC  RESULTS  FROM  RESPONDENTS  WITH  IN-DEPTH  KNOWLEDGE 

ABOUT EU AID VOLUNTEERS ............................................................. 39 

OPC  RESULTS 

FROM  RESPONDENTS  WITHOUT 

IN-DEPTH 

KNOWLEDGE ABOUT EU AID VOLUNTEERS ....................................... 44 

ANNEX 3: FACTS & FIGURES ............................................................................................................... 46 

ANNEX 4: INTERVENTION LOGIC EU AID VOLUNTEERS ............................................................... 50 

ANNEX 5: LIST OF EVALUATION QUESTIONS ................................................................................... 51 

 
 
 
 
 
 
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 

Term or acronym 

Meaning or definition 

CB 

DG DEVCO 

DG DIGIT 

DG ECHO 

DRM 

EACEA 

EEAS 

EU 

EU13 

EUAV 

EVS 

FPA 

ISG 

MFF 

NGO 

OPC 

TA 

Capacity Building 

Directorate-General for International Cooperation and 
Development 

Directorate-General for Informatics  

Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and 
Humanitarian Aid Operations 

Disaster Risk Management 

Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency  

European External Action Service 

European Union 

Countries which became EU members in 2004 or later 

EU Aid Volunteers or EUAV initiative 

European Voluntary Service 

Framework Partnership Agreement 

Interservice Group 

Multiannual Financial Framework 

Non-Governmental Organisation 

Open public consultation 

Technical Assistance 

2 

 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

1.1 

Purpose of the evaluation 

This  staff  working  document  presents  the  results  of  the  interim  evaluation  (‘the 
evaluation’) of the EU Aid Volunteers initiative (‘the initiative’). The evaluation covers 
the  implementation  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  375/20141  (‘the  Regulation’)  as  well  as  the 
subsequently  adopted  Commission  Delegated  Regulation2  (EU)  No  1398/2014  and 
Commission  Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  No  1244/2014.3  In  Article  27(4)(b),  the 
Regulation states that the European Commission (‘the Commission’) must submit to the 
European  Parliament  and  the  Council  ‘an  interim  evaluation  report  on  the  results 
obtained  and  the  qualitative  and  quantitative  aspects  of  the  implementation  of  this 
Regulation, including on the impact of EU Aid Volunteers initiative in the humanitarian 
sector  and  the  cost-effectiveness  of  the  programme,  during  the  first  three  years  of  its 
implementation no later than 31 December 2017’. 

The  Regulation  also  requires  the  Commission  to  submit  a  Communication  on  the 
Regulation’s  continued  implementation  by  31  December  2018,  based  on  the  interim 
evaluation report mentioned above. Furthermore, by 1 September 2019 the Commission 
must  review  the  measures  set  out  in  the  Regulation.  Where  appropriate  following  the 
conclusion  of  the  interim  evaluation  report,  this  review  must  be  accompanied  by  a 
legislative proposal for amending the Regulation. 

The  evaluation’s  findings  form  part  of  ongoing  reflections  on  the  future  of  the  EU’s 
programmes under the next multiannual financial framework.  

The evaluation aims to assess: 

the initiative’s results so far; 
the qualitative and quantitative aspects of implementation; 
the initiative’s impact on the humanitarian sector; 

 
 
 
  cost-effectiveness. 

The Directorate-General for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations 
(DG  ECHO)  tasked  an  external  consultant  with  carrying  out  an  independent  study 
supporting  this  evaluation.  This  study  covered  the  first  three  years  of  the  initiative’s 
implementation, from mid-2014 to mid-2017. The evaluation roadmap was published4 on 
2 May 2017 and included an opportunity to give feedback between 22 May and 19 June 
2017.  The  contract  was  signed  on  3  May  2017  and  the  final  report  submitted  on  27 
November  2017.  The  outcome  of  the  call  for  capacity  building  /  technical  assistance 

1 Regulation (EU) No 375/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council of 3 April 2014 establishes the 
European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps (‘EU Aid Volunteers initiative’). 
2 Commission Delegated Regulation2 (EU) No 1398/2014 of 24 October 2014 sets out standards regarding 
potential volunteers. 
3 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1244/20143 of 20 November 2014 sets out rules for the 
implementation  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  375/2014  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council 
establishing the European Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps (‘EU Aid Volunteers initiative’). 
4 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/initiatives/ares-2017-2585948_en. 

 
 
                                                            
launched in spring 2017 is also presented in this staff working document. The results of 
this call were only available in November 2017 after the evaluation period had ended and 
were therefore not assessed by the external evaluator.  

1.2 

Scope of the evaluation 

Based  on  the  requirements  of  the  Commission’s  Better  Regulation  Guidelines,  the 
evaluation  used  the  criteria  of  (i)  relevance,  (i)  effectiveness,  (iii)  efficiency,  (iv) 
coherence and (v) EU added value. 

The evaluation essentially covers the following actions set out in the Regulation: 

  Certification 

As the initiative’s main actions, the  Commission has developed standards to ensure the 
effective, efficient and consistent recruitment and preparation of candidate volunteers and 
the deployment and management of EU aid volunteers. The standards ensure the duty of 
care is met and cover the responsibilities of the sending and hosting organisations with 
regard  to  the  safety  and  wellbeing  of  volunteers,  minimum  requirements  for  covering 
subsistence  costs,  accommodation  and  other  expenses,  insurance  and  other  relevant 
issues. 

Sending  and  hosting  organisations  need  to  be  certified  as  compliant  with  the  standards 
and  procedures  related  to  candidate  volunteers  before  they  can  receive  funding  for  the 
deployment  of  EU  aid  volunteers.  A  call  for  applications  for  certification  is  open  until 
2020. 

  Capacity building of hosting organisations 

After  the  Commission  adopts  the  initiative’s  annual  work  programme,  the  Education, 
Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA), with the Commission’s approval, 
publishes calls for proposals for capacity-building projects. This funding supports actions 
aimed at strengthening the hosting organisations’ capacity to deliver humanitarian aid in 
order  to  improve  local  preparedness  and  response  to  humanitarian  crises  and  natural 
disasters and to ensure effective and sustainable impact of the EU aid volunteers’ work 
on the ground. This action of the initiative shall enable organisations to deploy EU Aid 
Volunteers in line with the quality standards set out in the Regulation. 

  Technical assistance for sending organisations 

After  the  Commission  adopts  the  initiative’s  annual  work  programme,  the  Education, 
Audiovisual  &  Culture  Executive  Agency,  with  the  Commission’s  approval,  publishes 
calls for proposals for technical assistance. Based on a prior assessment of needs, sending 
organisations  based  in  the  EU  and  wanting  to  be  certified  may  benefit  from  technical 
assistance  aimed  at  strengthening  their  capacity  to  participate  in  the  initiative  and 
ensuring compliance with the standards and procedures. 

  Deployment of EU aid volunteers in third countries and apprenticeships 

4 

 
Based on the initiative’s annual work programme, the Education, Audiovisual & Culture 
Executive Agency, with the Commission’s approval, publishes calls for proposals for the 
deployment  of  EU  aid  volunteers  by  consortia  of  certified  sending  and  hosting 
organisations. Sending organisations that are awarded contracts in response to these calls 
select  volunteers  jointly  with  the  hosting  organisations  through  the  publication  of 
vacancy  announcements  on  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers  Platform.  EU  aid  volunteers  can 
either  start  their  deployment  directly  after  their  training  or  be  required  to  do  an 
apprenticeship for a maximum of six months in the office of the sending organisation in 
Europe  and  be  deployed  afterwards.  The  financial  envelope  allocated  to  the  initiative 
from 2014-2020 would allow for the deployment of 4 000 EU Aid Volunteers until 2020. 

  Training programme for candidate volunteers 

The  selected  candidates  participate  in  a  training  programme.  The  training  includes  an 
assessment of candidates' readiness for deployment in third countries. 

  Database of EU aid volunteers 

After the training, candidate volunteers are assessed for their preparedness to be deployed 
in  third  countries.  If  successful,  they  are  included  in  a  database  of  EU  aid  volunteers 
eligible for deployment (on the EU Aid Volunteers Platform).  

  EU Aid Volunteers’ Network  

A  network  of  candidate  volunteers,  sending  and  hosting  organisations,  Member  States 
and European Parliament representatives was set up in order to facilitate interaction and 
promote the exchange of knowledge and sharing of experiences. 

  Communication and awareness raising 

The Commission has developed the EU Aid Volunteers’ External Communication Plan 
specifying  communication  objectives  such  as:  promoting  the  initiative  and  solidarity  in 
general; developing a volunteering identity among participants; and generating interest in 
and support for the initiative by the general public. Communication activities include the 
development of visual materials explaining the purpose of the initiative, the set-up of a 
photo library, and the gathering of stories from the field. 

  Online volunteering 

Online volunteering opportunities can be included in projects related to the initiative. The 
first  six  online  assignments  were  only  recently  published  on  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers 
Platform  (October  2017).  It  is  therefore  too  early  to  assess  the  impact  of  online 
volunteering on ongoing projects.    

2.  BACKGROUND TO THE INITIATIVE 

2.1 

Description of the initiative and its objectives 

Article  214(5)  of  the  Treaty  of  Lisbon  provides  for  the  setting  up  of  a  European 
Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps: 

5 

 
‘In order to establish a framework for joint contributions from young Europeans to the 
humanitarian  aid  operations  of  the  Union,  a  European  Voluntary  Humanitarian  Aid 
Corps  shall  be  set  up.  The  European  Parliament  and  the  Council,  acting  by  means  of 
regulations  in  accordance  with  the  ordinary  legislative  procedure,  shall  determine  the 
rules and procedures for the operation of the Corps.’ 

A  pilot  action  to  guide  the  development  of  the  legislative  acts  setting  up  the  European 
Voluntary Humanitarian Aid Corps was carried out from 2011 to 2014, in three phases. 
Twelve  pilot  projects  were  funded  under  the  pilot  action  and  through  these  289 
volunteers were deployed to 148 hosting organisations in various third countries. 

On  3  April  2014,  Regulation  (EU)  No  375/2014  of  the  European  Parliament  and  the 
Council  establishing  the  European  Voluntary  Humanitarian  Aid  Corps  was  adopted.  It 
was followed by: 

  a Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1398/2014 adopted on 24 October 

2014, and 

  a  Commission  Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  No  1244/2014  adopted  on  20 

November 2014. 

The initiative’s overall objective is set out in Article 4 of the Regulation: ‘The objective 
of  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers  initiative  shall  be  to  contribute  to  strengthening  the  Union’s 
capacity  to  provide  needs-based  humanitarian  aid  aimed  at  preserving  life,  preventing 
and alleviating human suffering and maintaining human dignity and to strengthening the 
capacity and resilience of vulnerable or disaster-affected communities in third countries, 
particularly by means of disaster preparedness, disaster risk reduction and by enhancing 
the link between relief, rehabilitation and development. That objective shall be attained 
through  the  added  value  of  joint  contributions  of  EU  aid  volunteers,  expressing  the 
Union’s  values  and  solidarity  with  people  in  need  and  visibly  promoting  a  sense  of 
European citizenship’. 

This general objective is broken down into five operational objectives which are listed in 
Article 7 of the Regulation: 

 

 

 

 

 

to  contribute  to  increasing  and  improving  the  EU’s  capacity  to  provide 
humanitarian aid; 
to  improve  the  skills,  knowledge  and  competences  of  volunteers  in  the  field  of 
humanitarian aid and the terms and conditions of their engagement; 
to  build  the  capacity  of  hosting  organisations  and  foster  volunteering  in  third 
countries; 
to  communicate  the  EU’s  humanitarian  aid  principles  agreed  in  the  European 
Consensus on Humanitarian Aid; 
to  improve  coherence  and  consistency  of  volunteering  across  Member  States  in 
order to improve opportunities for EU citizens to participate in humanitarian aid 
activities and operations. 

6 

 
 
The  impact  assessment5  carried  out  as  part  of  the  initiative’s  preparation  identified  the 
following problems to be addressed: 

lack of a structured EU approach to volunteering; 

 
  poor awareness of EU humanitarian action and solidarity among people in need; 
 

lack  of  consistent  identification  and  selection  mechanisms  for  volunteers  across 
EU Member States; 
lack of availability of sufficiently qualified volunteers for humanitarian aid; 

 
  shortcomings  in  capacity  to  respond  to  increased  numbers  and  magnitude  of 

humanitarian crises; 

  hosting organisations’ lack of capacity due to poor institutional support available. 

The  intervention  logic  of  the  initiative  is  explained  in  Annex  4.  It  links  the  activities 
carried out under the initiative to specific results, operational objectives and to the overall 
objective as set out in Article 4 of the Regulation. 

The Commission has delegated the project management of the initiative to the Education, 
Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency through a Commission Decision6. The Agency 
is tasked with the preparation and launch of the calls for proposals and calls for tender, as 
well  as  the  contract  management  and  implementation  of  the  corresponding  budget 
appropriations  in  line  with  the  annual  work  programmes  adopted  by  the  Commission. 
The  Commission  is  responsible  for  the  overall  coordination  of  the  initiative,  providing 
the Agency with guidance and advice on implementing the initiative and interpreting the 
legal  base,  communicating  on  the  initiative,  management  of  the  partner  and  volunteer 
network, and overseeing the EU Aid Volunteers Platform. 

2.2 

Baseline and points of comparison 

Before  the  initiative  was  launched,  the  main  programmes  in  the  field  of  internationally 
deployed volunteers were offered by the United Nations, the International Federation of 
the Red Cross and Red Crescent, and several individual EU Member States. 

The main EU volunteering programme in existence when the initiative was launched in 
2014 was the European Voluntary Service (EVS). The EVS was created in 1996 and 
offers funding opportunities for NGOs and other organisations for placements of young 
volunteers (18-30 years old) in a variety of areas. The main goal of the EVS is to foster 
solidarity among young people, and to provide learning experiences for volunteers. The 
projects focus on themes such as culture, youth, sports, social care, cultural heritage, arts, 
civil protection, environment, and development cooperation. Only a small proportion of 
EVS volunteers are deployed in the framework of external aid initiatives, mainly as part 
of  development  cooperation  projects.  Humanitarian  aid  interventions  in  post-crisis 
situations are out of scope. 

5 SWD(2012) 265 final of 19.9.2012. 
6  Commission  Decision  C  (2013)  9189  delegating  powers  to  the  Education,  Audiovisual  and  Culture 
Executive Agency. 

7 

 
 
 
                                                            
In May 2017, the European Commission proposed to the European Parliament and to the 
Council  a  legal  framework  for  a  European  Solidarity  Corps.7  This  aimed  to  create 
opportunities  for  young  people  between  the  age  of  18  and  30  to  volunteer  or  work  in 
projects  in  their  own  country  or  abroad  to  benefit  communities  and  people  mainly  in 
Europe.  

The  EU  Aid  Volunteers  initiative  creates  additional  volunteering  opportunities  in  the 
humanitarian  field  for  people  of  all  ages.  Centralised  EU  management  of  an  external 
volunteering  programme  opens  up  opportunities  to  all  EU  citizens.  Providing  common 
training for volunteers to be deployed to third countries is especially beneficial to those 
sending organisations which do not have such training in place and for which this would 
be too costly. Finally, implementing an EU-level initiative like this one would improve 
the EU’s visibility in this area. 

The initiative was created in 2014 with a total budget of EUR 147  936  000 for the period 
2014-2020.  The  total  appropriations  per  year  (including  the  administrative  costs  of 
around EUR 7 000 000 for the Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency) and 
the expected numbers of deployed volunteers at the start of the initiative are as follows: 

Table 1: Planned budget allocation per year (under the multiannual financial framework) and 
number of volunteers expected 

Year 

Budget in 
mln EUR 
Number of 
volunteers 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Total 

12.7 

14.8 

17.9 

22.0 

26.3 

26.8 

27.5 

147.9 

n/a 

≥350 

≥350 

≥550 

≥800  ≥1 000m 

≥1 250 

≥4 300 

Regulation  No  375/2014  sets  out  high-level  thematic  priorities  in  Annex  1.  These 
influence  the  proportional  allocation  of  the  budget  set  aside  for  implementing  the 
Regulation.  It  is  important  to  note  that  the  majority  of  funds  (about  55 %)  are 
dedicated  to  capacity  building  of  third-country  organisations,  training  of  EU  aid 
volunteers, and technical assistance for EU-based organisations. The rest is allocated 
as follows: 31 % for the deployment of volunteers, 10 % for deployment for emergency 
support, and 4 % for programme support measures. 

Figure 1: EUAV thematic priorities and budget share8 

7 https://europa.eu/youth/solidarity_en. 
8 External evaluation report p. 17. 

8 

 
 
 
   
                                                            
3. 

IMPLEMENTATION / STATE OF PLAY 

3.1 

Action implementation 

Activities  under  the  initiative  started  in  December  2014,  after  the  adoption  of  the 
Commission  Implementing  Regulation  on  20  November.  As  the  first  step,  a  call  for 
tender for an insurance contract for EU aid volunteers was published in late 2014. A call 
for  certification  and  the  first  call  for  capacity  building  and  technical  assistance  were 
published  in  January  2015.  The  first  six  capacity-building  projects  and  four  technical 
assistance  projects  were  contracted  at  the  end  of  2015  for  a  duration  of  24  months. 
Therefore, no final project reports were available over the external evaluation period and 
only  one  report  was  available  when  this  staff  working  document  was  being  drafted. 
Interim reports are not required for these projects. 

The  first  call  for  deployment  of  volunteers  was  published  on  30  July  2015.  Selection 
results were published on 3 March 2016. The first projects started on 1 June 2016 and 1 
July 2016 and run until 31 May 2018. Therefore, as for the calls mentioned above, final 
reports were not available as input into this evaluation. 

The initiative’s first years were mainly dedicated to putting in place the provisions set out 
in  the  Regulation,  the  Delegated  Regulation  and  the  Implementing  Regulation.  Service 
contracts for insuring volunteers and for setting up and running the training programme 
were concluded. Guidelines were agreed to explain the legal obligations to applicants and 
beneficiaries. The EU Aid Volunteers Platform was set up in compliance with the legal 
obligations  to  provide  beneficiaries  with  a  tool  for  the  management  and  monitoring  of 
volunteers.  

The response to the first deployment call was unexpectedly low, with only two proposals 
that led to the deployment of 44 EU aid volunteers starting from December 2016. Given 
that the initiative had been prepared over many years with a three-year pilot phase and 
strong involvement  from  stakeholders throughout  the  whole  period, this  result  was  less 
than  expected.  The  Commission  has  therefore  continuously  sought  feedback  from 
9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
interested  stakeholders  in  order  to  learn  about  their  needs  and  how  the  initiative  could 
help address them. As a result of this feedback process: 

 

 

 

 

the  budget  per  project  was  doubled  from  the  initial  EUR  700 000  to                 
EUR 1 400 000; 
the number of mandatory partners per project was reduced from six to four (two 
EU partners plus two non-EU partners); 
the  threshold  for  capacity-building  activities  within  deployment  projects  (20 %) 
was abolished;  
the  costs  of  managing  online  volunteering  assignments  were  made  eligible  for 
reimbursement. 

The following table provides an overview of capacity-building, technical assistance and 
deployment projects selected for funding over the 2015-2017 period. 

Table 2: EUAV co-funded projects by type and year (calls for proposals 2015–2017) 

Application year 

Total co-funding by year 
(in €) 

Number of projects 

Type 

Capacity building 

2015 
2016 
2017 

Capacity building (2015 – 2017) 
Deployment 

2015 
2016 
2017 

Deployment (2015-2017) 
Technical assistance 

2015 
2016 
2017 

Technical assistance (2015-2017) 
Total  
Source: EACEA data tables, December 2017 

3 303 072 
1 259 294 
7 877 044 
12 439 410 
1 365 045 
4 789 980 
5 726 880 
11 881 905 
1 524 642 
1 543 730 
2 032 301 
5 100 673 
29 421 988 

6 
2 
14 
22 
2 
4 
6 
12 
4 
3 
4 
11 
45 

The  annual  work  programmes  for  the  initiative  adopted  by  the  Commission  set 
implementation targets and allocate funds to achieve these annual targets. They are based 
on  the  overall  targets  that  were  set  in  the  Multiannual  Financial  Framework  before  the 
initiative was launched. The following table shows the allocated amounts in the annual 
work programmes for 2015–2017 and the actual commitments in the same period. 

In  both  2015  and  2016,  the  committed  amounts  remained  below  50 %  of  the  allocated 
budget for the respective actions. Due to a surge in applications for capacity-building and 
technical  assistance  projects  and  more  project  applications  for  deployment,  the 
committed amount reached 80 % in 2017. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3: EU Aid Volunteers budget allocated against budget committed (2015 – 2017) 

2015  
Allocated 
€ 
8 400 000 
6 948 000 

Committed 
€ 
1 365 045 
4 827 716 

% 
comm. 
16.3 % 
69.5 % 

2016   
Allocated 
€ 
8 400 000 
7 960 000 

Committed 
€ 
4 789 981 
2 803 026 

% 
comm. 
57.0 % 
35.2 % 

15 348 000 

6 192 761 

40.3 % 

16 360 000 

7 593 006 

46.4 % 

2017  
Allocated 
€ 
12 600 000 
7 607 000 

Committed 
€ 
5 726 880 
9 909 346 

% comm. 

45.5 % 
130.3 %9 

Heading 

Deployment 
Technical 
assistance / 
Capacity 
building 

Heading 

Deployment 
Technical 
assistance / 
Capacity 
building 

20 207 000 

15 636 226 

77.4 % 

Source: EACEA data tables, December 2017 (figures do not include organisations’ self-contributions) 

Deployment of EU aid volunteers 

Based on responses to the calls for proposals, two deployment projects were selected for 
funding  in  2015  (for  the  deployment  of  44  volunteers),  four  projects  were  selected  in 
2016  (162  volunteers)  and  six  projects  were  selected  in  2017  (175  volunteers).  The 
number  of  projects  was  not  sufficient  to  reach  the  deployment  targets  set  by  the 
Multiannual Financial Framework, as shown below. 

The first deployments of the 44 volunteers trained in 2015 started in December 2016 and 
continued in the first half of 2017. The deployment of the 162 volunteers trained in 2016 
started in February 2017 and continues until end of 2018. 

9 The Commission has some flexibility to re-allocate funding to specific actions up to a maximum of 20 % 
of  the  total  annual  operational  budget  for  the  EUAV  initiative  (Article  3  of  Commission  Implementing 
Decision C(2016) 8989 final of 6 January 2017). 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 2: EU aid volunteer vacancies 2015 – 2017 

Source: Annual work programme and information provided by EACEA (September 2017) 

Figure 3: Map with planned deployments of EU aid volunteers 2016 – 2017 

The  volunteer  skills  areas  requested  most  often  were  in  the  fields  of  disaster  risk 
management, communication, finance and accounting, project management and climate 

12 

Deployment of EUAVs                  2016 (44) / 2017 (162)Cuba -3SierrraLeone -3St. Vincent -15Angola -2Malawi -2Uganda -16Ethiopia -5Tunisia -5Guatemala -5Nicaragua -11Colombia-9Ecuador -38Bolivia -4Zambia-1IvoryCoast -1Senegal -8Lebanon -10Jordan -4Turkey -5Kyrgyzstan -2Georgia -1Tajikistan -1Nepal -9Myanmar -2Cambodia -18Philippines -2Total: 206 volunteersHaiti 22 Palistinian Territory -2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
change  adaptation.  An  overview  of  profiles  ranked  according  to  their  occurrence  in 
published vacancies is provided below. 

Table 4: Volunteer skills profiles requested most by sending and hosting organisations 

Source: EU Aid Volunteers Platform 

Training 

The training curriculum and duration of training for potential volunteers are regulated by 
the Implementing Regulation. The curriculum with mandatory and optional modules was 
drawn  up  through  a  service  contract  with  an  external  consortium  of  education  and 
training  partners.10  Altogether,  15  group  training  sessions  for  potential  volunteers  were 
organised in 2016 and 2017. The potential volunteers sent on the training were selected 
jointly by their sending and hosting organisation. 275 selected potential volunteers were 
assessed  as  ready  for  deployment  in  the  2015–2017  period.  The  success  rate  of  the 
training was 99.3 % and its overall satisfaction rating from potential volunteers was 9 out 
of 10 points.11 

The groups of volunteers trained show the following characteristics:  

10 (ICF (leader), MDF Training & Consultancy, Punto Sud, Scuola Sant’Anna, Austrian Institute for Peace 
and Conflict Studies and GOPA). 
11 Data provided by the training consortium. 

13 

Volunteer skills areas requested most often (2016/2017 deployments)%1Disaster risk management26%2Communication13%3Finance and accounting11%4Project management8%5Climate change adaptation8%6Gender equality6%7Community-based development / livelihoods6%8Resilience building4%9Education3%10Food security / nutrition2%11Monitoring & evaluation2%12Logistics2%13Agriculture & rural development2%14Protection2%15Water, sanitation, hygiene 2%16Human resources2%17Post-disaster / conflict management1%18Social protection1%19Research and development1%20Integrated natural resource management1% 
 
 
 
                                                            
Figure 5: Candidate volunteers by gender (2015–2017)12 

  Source: Information provided by the EACEA 

A clear majority of the candidate volunteers (selected) were female (72 %). 

Figure 6: Candidate volunteers by age group (2015–2017)13 

Source: Information provided by the EACEA 

Most of the EU aid volunteers trained in 2016 and 2017 were between 25 and 34 years 
old. 14 % were older than 34 and 9 % were younger than 25.  

12 External evaluation report p. 19. 
13 External evaluation report p. 19. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Source: Information provided by the EACEA 

Figure 7: Candidate volunteers by nationality (2015–2017) 

Most of the candidate volunteers were citizens of Italy, Spain or France (71 %) and a low 
percentage came from the EU13 countries (20 volunteers or less than 7 %). 

Capacity building 

A total of 22 capacity-building projects have so far been selected for co-funding: six in 
2015, two in 2016 and 14 in 2017. The projects involved 82 EU partners14 and provided 
capacity-building measures  to 160 third-country organisations (partners or  associates in 
these projects). They focused on improving volunteer management, increasing resilience, 
preparing  hosting  organisations  to  participate  in  the  initiative,  strengthening  the 
organisational  capacity  of  hosting  organisations,  gender-sensitive  humanitarian 
volunteering, approaches to  community-based protection to  build resilience  and  linking 
relief,  rehabilitation  and  development  and  on  the  development  of  capacity  to  improve 
people’s livelihoods. A detailed overview is provided in Annex 3. 

Technical assistance 

Altogether,  11  technical  assistance  projects  were  selected  for  co-funding  during  the 
2015–2017 period. Most of them aim to prepare project partners to successfully undergo 
the certification process for sending organisations. A list of projects is provided in Annex 
3. 

Certification 
The following table shows the number of successfully certified organisations in the 2015-
2017 period.15 

14 The actual number of EU partners is lower due to the fact that some EU organisations are involved in 
more than one project. 
15 Lists of all certified organisations can be found at: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/eu-aid-volunteers/selection-
results/selection-results-certification-mechanism-for-sending-and-hosting-organisations_en. 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                            
Table 5: Number of certified sending and hosting organisations (2015–2017) 

Sending organisations 
Hosting organisations 
Total 

2015 
13 
7 
20 

2016 
10 
52 
62 

2017  2015-2017 

13 
50 
63 

36 
109 
145 

Organisations need to be certified to apply for deployment funding and to deploy EU aid 
volunteers.  Of  the  36  certified  EU-based  sending  organisations,  around  58 %  actively 
deploy EU aid volunteers, while 42 % have not yet applied for funding for deployment 
and hence have not yet deployed volunteers. A list of organisations is provided in Annex 
3. 

EU Aid Volunteers Platform and database of EU aid volunteers 

The  development  of  a  database  of  EU  aid  volunteers  (part  of  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers 
Platform) started at the end of 2015 with a Memorandum of Understanding between DG 
ECHO  and  the  Directorate-General  for  Informatics  (DG  DIGIT).  The  most  important 
functionalities  were  developed  first:  publication  of  EU  aid  volunteer  vacancies, 
description of projects, registration of EU aid volunteers, creation of volunteer profiles. 
The project continued until mid-2017 and a number of other functionalities were added: 
learning and development plans for volunteers, a mentoring space, a forum for exchange 
and  networking,  publication  of  online  volunteering  opportunities,  publication  of  stories 
from the field, etc.   

In  this  way,  an  EU  Humanitarian  Aid  Corps  of  qualified  and  trained  junior  and  senior 
humanitarian  aid  professionals  is  being  created.  It  includes  all  successfully  trained  and 
selected EU aid volunteers, deployed volunteers and former volunteers. The reserve list 
should  grow  in  coming  years;  the  database  currently  lists  275  successfully  trained 
volunteers  and  this  is  expected  to  double  in  2018.  Sending  organisations  can  use  the 
reserve  pool  if  there  are  dropouts  and  for  short-term  requests  to  support  emergency 
response operations.  

EU Aid Volunteers’ Network  

The EU Aid Volunteers’ Network consists of sending and hosting organisations, current 
and former EU aid volunteers, Member States and Members of European Parliament. 

Networking  activities  happen  face-to-face  and  through  virtual  exchanges.  A  ‘Back-to-
Base’ conference was organised in 2015 with former volunteers from the pilot phase. A 
first  EU  Aid  Volunteers’  Network  conference  was  organised  by  the  Commission  in 
February  2017.  The  93  participants  active  in  EU  aid  volunteer  projects  exchanged 
information  about  their  activities  and  provided  the  Commission  with  feedback  on  the 
initiative’s implementation.  

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  forum  that  is  part  of  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers  Platform  is  available  for  virtual 
exchanges between participating organisations, volunteers and the general public to share 
information on aspects related to the initiative. 

Communication and awareness raising 

Responsibility  for  communication  is  shared  between  the  Commission  and  all  project 
partners  that  receive  funding  under  the  initiative.  In  the  2015-2017  period,  project 
partners  published  information  about  their  activities  via  social  media,  created  project 
websites  and  produced  materials  such  as  ‘The  EU  Aid  Volunteer  Guidelines  for  Local 
Organisations’,16 which was developed as part of a capacity-building project and provides 
practical  guidance  for  the  certification  of  local  organisations  under  the  initiative.  A 
technical  assistance  project  ran  webinars  for  organisations  interested  in  participating  in 
the  initiative.17  The  Commission  communicates  about  EU  aid  volunteers  via  the  DG 
ECHO website18. The EACEA19 provides targeted information to organisations interested 
in  responding  to  the  calls  for  proposals.  The  EU  Aid  Volunteers’  Platform20  is  where 
general  information  about  project  activities  and  volunteers’  stories  from  the  field  are 
published.  It  also  provides  a  discussion  forum  for  the  general  public.  Furthermore, 
leaflets, brochures and videos were published on DG ECHO's website.  

Several  EU  Member  States  supported  the  Commission’s  awareness-raising  activities 
about the initiative and helped organise workshops to inform national non-governmental 
organisations. 

3.2  Monitoring 

A monitoring framework was agreed between the Commission and EACEA based on the 
intervention  logic  of  the  initiative  that  links  the  activities  of  the  initiative  with  its 
outcomes and overall ovjectives.21 EACEA is in charge of the monitoring and provides 6-
monthly monitoring reports to DG ECHO.  

In  addition,  Article  27  of  the  Regulation  requires  the  Commission  to  submit  to  the 
European  Parliament  and  the  Council  annual  reports  that  examine  progress  made  in 
implementing the initiative, including outputs and, as far as possible, the main outcomes. 
The annual reports are published on DG ECHO’s website.22 

4.  METHOD 

4.1 

Short description of methodology 

This  interim  evaluation  builds  on  the  external  evaluation  that  was  carried  out  between 
May and November 2017. Overall, the approach and methodology used by the external 

16 http://www.gvc-italia.org/eu_aid_volunteers_guidelines_for_local_organisations.html. 
17 https://volonteurope.eu/euav-training-webinars/. 
18 https://ec.europa.eu/echo/what/humanitarian-aid/eu-aid-volunteers_en. 
19 https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/eu-aid-volunteers_en. 
20 https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/echo/eu-aid-volunteers_en/. 
21 Annex 4. 
22 http://ec.europa.eu/echo/who/accountability/annual-reports_en. 

17 

 
                                                            
contractor  was  satisfactory.  It  included  a  research  phase  that  consisted  of  reviewing 
documents  (legislation,  studies  conducted  during  the  pilot  phase  of  the  initiative,  the 
annual work programmes, annual reports, project proposals, and monitoring reports) and 
conducting  six  targeted  written  surveys  (questionnaires)  that  addressed  the  following 
stakeholder groups: 

(1) Framework  Partnership  Agreement  partners  (international  non-governmental 
organisations)  that  are  not  engaged in  the  initiative  and  have  not  participated  in 
pilot projects. 

(2) Organisations that participated in the pilot phase, but are not yet engaged in the 

initiative. 

(3) EU-based  organisations  that  are  certified,  have  received  technical  assistance  or 

have provided technical assistance. 

(4) Non-EU-based  organisations  that  have  received  capacity-building  assistance  or 

hosted volunteers. 

(5) EU aid volunteers (selected, trained, about to be trained, deployed, and returned). 

(6) Member State representatives (Council Working Group on Humanitarian Aid and 
Food  Aid,  Council  Working  Group  on  Civil  Protection,  Humanitarian  Aid 
Committee). 

Furthermore, the external contractor conducted more than 120 individual interviews with 
representatives of 52 organisations, DG ECHO officials, officials from other Directorate-
Generals,  the  Education,  Audiovisual  &  Culture  Executive  Agency,  Member  State 
representatives and other stakeholders: 

Table 6: Individual interviews by target group 

Stakeholder group 

Individual 
interviews 

Organisations / 
institutions 

EU Aid Volunteers sending organisations / EU partners / 
Recipients of technical assistance 

EU Aid Volunteers hosting organisations 

EU aid volunteers (deployed and during training) 

European Commission and services (including: DG ECHO 
and its field offices, DG DEVCO23, DG EAC24, EEAS25, and 
EACEA)  

Sector service organisations, associations / Universities 

Member State representatives 
Others (e.g. DG ECHO's Framework Partnership 
Agreement partners and International Organisations, 
the training consortium) 

41 

26 

20 

18 

8 

4 

5 

Source: External evaluation report p. 12 

Total 

122 

23 Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development 
24 Directorate General for Education and Culture 
25 European External Action Service 

18 

15 

22 

n/a 

5 

4 

2 

4 

52 

 
                                                            
The  external  contractor  conducted  three  field  missions  (Haiti  and  Ecuador,  Jordan  and 
Lebanon  and  Cambodia  and  Myanmar).  These  regions  were  selected  based  on:  the 
number of projects in the country, the possibility of covering several thematic priorities, 
ensuring  wide  geographical  coverage  (Asia,  Middle  East,  and  Caribbean  and  Latin 
America),  the  existence  of  a  variety  of  different  sending  and  hosting  organisations 
implementing  the  projects,  and  the  presence  of  volunteers  during  the  visits.  A  detailed 
overview of the organisations interviewed is provided in Annex 2. 

An open public consultation (OPC) was launched at the end of July 2017. It ran until 31 
October  2017  and  had  30  responses.  A  detailed  analysis  of  the  replies  is  provided  in 
Annex 2. 

4.2 

Limitations and reliability of findings 

The short evaluation period (May to November 2017)26 did not leave much time for desk 
research. Almost all co-funded activities (deployment, technical assistance and capacity 
building under the initiative) were still ongoing, with no interim or final reports available. 
In  addition,  the  initiative  did  not  operate  at  full  capacity  at  the  start;  as  explained  in 
section 3.1, several of its activities have only been in place for a short time, which made 
it difficult to evaluate their effectiveness and efficiency. For example: 

  An  assessment  if  the  budget  would  have  been  sufficient  if  the  initiative  would 
have  operated  at  full  capacity  from  the  start  (more  volunteers  deployed,  more 
projects funded). 
If  all  actions  could  be  carried  out  as  planned  and  all  services  provided  with 
sufficient performance if the initiative would have achieved the objectives set in 
the multiannual financial framework. 

 

Furthermore,  the  results  of  the  call  for  proposals  on  capacity  building  and  technical 
assistance launched in spring 2017 were only published on 28 November 2017 and could 
therefore not be taken into account in the external evaluation report. The evaluators relied 
to a large extent on the opinions or perceptions of interviewed stakeholders. 

Overall, the surveys and comments gathered from the interviews provide useful insights 
into  the  management  of  volunteers.  The  unavailability  of  final  project  reports  was  a 
limitation, but the opinions and perceptions of non-EU-based organisations gathered as a 
result  of  the  field  missions  were  of    interest.  The  limited  uptake  in  the  initiative’s  first 
years meant that there was a reduced number of potential interviewees with an in-depth 
and  diverse experience of  the  initiative.  Therefore,  the results  of  the  interim  evaluation 
can only give an indication of its overall impact on local communities, the improvement 
of  capacity  of  stakeholders  participating  in  the  initiative,  and  volunteers’  skills 
development and their potential impact on the humanitarian sector.   

26 The evaluation road map indicates a start date of Q4/2016 (Ref. Ares(2017)2585948 – 22/05/2017). 

19 

 
 
 
                                                            
5.  ANALYSIS OF ANSWERS TO THE EVALUATION QUESTIONS 

The  analysis  of  answers  to  the  evaluation  questions27  is  organised  around  the  five 
objectives of the initiative as set out in Regulation 375/2014: 

  Objective  1:  to  contribute  to  increasing  and  improving  the  EU’s  capacity  to 

provide humanitarian aid. 

  Objective 2: to improve the skills, knowledge and competences of volunteers in 
the field of humanitarian aid and the terms and conditions of their engagement. 
  Objective 3: to build the capacity of hosting organisations and foster volunteering 

in third countries. 

  Objective  4:  to  communicate  on  the  EU’s  humanitarian  aid  principles  agreed  in 

the European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid. 

  Objective  5:  to  improve  coherence  and  consistency  of  volunteering  across 
Member States in order to improve opportunities for EU citizens to participate in 
humanitarian aid and activities. 

5.1 

Relevance 

5.1.1  Relevance  of 

the  objectives  to  end  beneficiaries,  sending-  and  hosting 

organisations, and volunteers 

The EU Aid Volunteers initiative is relevant for end beneficiaries. It aims to support end 
beneficiaries (local communities) by sending EU citizens to third countries to support 
and build the capacity of communities to respond to disasters and to deliver humanitarian 
aid in partnership with EU-based organisations. However, Objective 3 could in principle 
also be achieved through direct funding to end beneficiaries without the involvement of 
European  volunteers.  Nonetheless,  well-trained,  senior  EU  aid  volunteers  with  specific 
knowledge or skills could have a positive impact, as multipliers or trainers, on improving 
the  skills  and  knowledge  of  local  communities.  Local  communities  also  benefit  from 
activities carried out by the hosting organisations directly involved in the initiative (e.g. 
through  training  or  preparedness  exercises)  to  foster  volunteering  and  support  the 
development of their skills in, for example, disaster prevention and preparedness. 

initiative 

The  EU  Aid  Volunteers 
is  also  relevant  for  sending  and  hosting 
organisations,  because  they  can  directly  benefit  from  funding  provided  through  the 
initiative. This funding enables them to develop activities that improve their capacity to 
provide  humanitarian  aid  and  this  contributes  to  the  EU’s  overall  capacity  to  provide 
humanitarian  aid.  Organisations  can  deploy  junior  or  senior  professionals  as  EU  aid 
volunteers and build a pool of staff for the future. Objective 3 is also relevant to sending 
and hosting organisations, because capacity-building and technical assistance funding is 
increasingly  rare  in  the  humanitarian  sector28  while  needs  are  increasing  (especially 
considering the World Humanitarian Summit’s localisation agenda). Strengthening local 
volunteering was mentioned by 90 % of the hosting organisations that responded to the 

27 See list of evaluation questions in Annex 5. 
28 External evaluation report p. 35. 

20 

 
                                                            
external evaluator’s survey29 as an objective of their work with the initiative. Therefore, 
capacity-building  activities  under  the  initiative  fit  well  with  the  needs  of  sending  and 
hosting organisations. The external evaluation study consulted also organisations that do 
not yet take part in the initiative. They gave the following reasons why the initiative is 
not relevant for them: 

 

‘The principle held by some organisations to only involve their ‘own’ volunteers 
and  not  volunteers  who  would  need  to  be  selected  through  a  system  external  to 
the organisation, such as the EUAV system; 

  An  assessment  that  the  overheads  permitted  by  the  initiative  would  not  be 
sufficient  to  run  a  (deployment)  project  in  a  way  that  covers  the  sending 
organisation’s costs sufficiently; 

  The  fact  that  EUAV  does  not  permit  volunteer  deployments  to  humanitarian 
(emergency) response operations which is the core business of many DG ECHO 
FPA partners (and that deploying volunteers at short notice is not possible under 
EUAV); 

  A reservation about focusing on processes centred on international volunteering 
rather  than  humanitarian  impact  —  linked  to  reservations  about  cost-
effectiveness where it relates to needs-based assistance and the impact created; 
  The  ceiling  of  funding  available  for  an  application  is  considered  by  some 
organisations to be too low to be worth applying for, especially when taking the 
requirements  for  certification  and  partnerships  (i.e.  consortium  building)  into 
account.’30  

The  initiative  is  relevant  for  European  citizens who  envisage  future  employment  in  the 
humanitarian  sector  and  welcome  the  opportunity  to  improve  their  knowledge  and 
competences  in  this  field.  Nine  out  of  eleven  EU  aid  volunteers  interviewed  for  the 
external  evaluation  study31  confirmed  that  they  would  like  to  stay  in  the  humanitarian 
sector  and  98 %  of  respondents  to  the  survey  indicated  that  they  applied  as  EU  aid 
volunteers to pursue a career in the humanitarian field. The initiative provides them with 
useful field experience which will improve their employability in the sector. In the long 
term,  it  also  supports  the  further  professionalisation  of  the  sector  and  its  capacity  to 
provide needs-based humanitarian aid.  

5.1.2  Relevance of actions under the initiative in relation to objectives 

The various actions were described in Chapter 3.1. All actions are relevant in relation to 
the initiative’s objectives. No need for additional actions has been identified at this initial 
stage. 

29 External evaluation report p. 29. 
30 External evaluation report p. 58. 
31 External evaluation report p. 28. 

21 

 
                                                            
 
 
Certification  and  volunteer  management  standards  for 
the  recruitment  and 
deployment  of  EU  aid  volunteers  are  set  out  in  the  Regulations.  These  rules  and 
procedures  must  ensure  the  safety  and  security  of  volunteers,  their  wellbeing  at  the 
workplace and at home, their fair recruitment, their continuous learning and development 
during  the  deployment,  and  their  attachment  to  the  network  after  deployment.  The 
standards  also  cover  rules  for  building  partnerships  and  ensuring  a  strong  role  of  the 
hosting  organisation  in  the  process  of  selecting  and  recruiting  volunteers.  Certification 
and standards are therefore mainly relevant in relation to Objectives 2 and 5 and are an 
important part of reaching these objectives. 

Capacity building is relevant in relation to Objectives 1, 2, 3 and 4, because it enables 
hosting organisations to participate in the initiative and to get certified. It enables hosting 
organisations  to  improve  their  knowledge  about  humanitarian  aid  and  humanitarian 
principles. It supports the improvement of volunteer management skills for both EU aid 
and local volunteers so that they can make a needs-based contribution to the work of the 
hosting organisations and develop their skills further. It is an important way of bringing 
hosting organisations into the initiative. 

Almost all sending organisations are positive about the funding provided by the initiative 
for  technical  assistance.32  It  is  relevant  in  relation  to  Objective  1,  because  it  has  been 
instrumental in introducing smaller or new organisations to the initiative and hence to the 
sector of humanitarian aid. It is also relevant in relation to Objectives 4 and 5, because 
organisations organise training and networking activities that are relevant to certification 
under  the  initiative.  The  external  evaluation  found  that,  so  far,  not  many  technical 
assistance  projects  have  resulted  in  applications  for  certification.  Although  it  is 
impossible  to  know  at  the  start  of  the  project  if  a  participating  organisation  will 
ultimately be able to successfully go through certification, this should at least be a clear 
objective.  The  wording  used  in  the  call  for  proposals  to  describe  requirements  could 
therefore be strengthened.  

The  training  of  volunteers is  relevant  in  relation  to  all  five  objectives  of  the  initiative, 
notably with regard to improving skills and competences. In the medium- to long term, 
EU aid volunteers remaining in the sector contributes to the improvement of EU capacity 
to  provide  humanitarian  aid.  Only  trained  volunteers  are  sent  out  in  the  field  and  their 
training  increases  the  likelihood  that  they  can  support  the  capacity  of  the  local  hosting 
organisation.  The  training  teaches  volunteers  about  humanitarian  principles  and  the 
Consensus and sets a standard for common training of volunteers from all over Europe. 

The  deployment  of  EU  aid  volunteers  is  one  of  the  initiative’s  main  actions  and  is 
relevant in relation to all its objectives: volunteers have the potential to increase the EU’s 
capacity  to  provide  humanitarian  aid  (Objective  1)  if  they  can  be  deployed  in  larger 
numbers,  remain  in  the  sector  and  become  future  humanitarian  aid  professionals. 
Deployment should also improve the skills, knowledge and competences of volunteers in 
the field of humanitarian aid (Objective 2). It also promotes the wide applications of EU 
aid  volunteers’  deployment  standards  and  hence  the  terms  and  conditions  of  their 

32 External evaluation report p. 35. 

22 

 
                                                            
engagement  in  the  field  (Objective  5).  Senior  EU  aid  volunteers  are  deployed  to  help 
build the capacity of hosting organisations and to foster volunteering in third countries; 
this is relevant in relation to Objective 3. EU aid volunteers receive training on the EU’s 
humanitarian aid principles and are encouraged to promote these principles during their 
deployment  with  their  hosting  organisations;  this  is  relevant  in  relation  to  Objective  4. 
The external study identified a potential gap: some hosting organisations indicated a need 
for further financial resources to ensure the realisation of the project in which an EU aid 
volunteer  worked.  This  can  indeed  be  an  issue  if  the  volunteer  does  not  work  in  a 
humanitarian  or  development  aid  project  that  is  funded  by  a  donor,  but  rather  directly 
with the local community in support of a local organisation. Whether or not this element 
could be part of the deployment action could be explored further.   

In the medium- to long-term, the database of trained and selected EU aid volunteers has 
the potential to create a corps of trained and experienced humanitarian aid professionals 
who  might  find  employment  in  the  sector  and  hence  contribute  to  the  achievement  of 
Objective 1 (increasing the EU’s capacity to provide humanitarian aid). 

The  EU  Aid  Volunteers  Network  facilitates  knowledge  sharing  and  partnership 
building.  It  supports  the  creation  of  the  corps,  and  also  potentially  Objective  2 
(improving  knowledge).  Networking  is  supposed  to  be  facilitated  by  the  EU  Aid 
Volunteers Platform, but this is currently limited, because partners are not yet aware of 
this  tool  or  use  other  platforms.  The  external  evaluation33  found  that  partners  and 
volunteers  are  very  interested  in  face-to-face  meetings  and  exchanges  to  boost 
networking and mutual learning. 

Communication and awareness raising activities attract more potential volunteers and 
organisations  to  participate  in  the  initiative.  They  are  therefore  relevant  in  relation  to 
Objective  1.  They  may  also  be  relevant  in  relation  to  Objective  4  if  they  include 
communication  on  the  EU’s  humanitarian  aid  principles  and  the  Consensus  on 
Humanitarian Aid. 

As concerns the process of selecting EU aid volunteers and matching their profiles and 
skill sets with the needs of hosting organisations, the initiative requires that volunteers be 
recruited  on  the  basis  of  vacancy  announcements.  These  are  drafted  jointly  by  the 
sending and hosting organisation and describe the required profile and skills, as well as 
the tasks to be carried out. Under the Regulation, the final selection decision to recruit an 
EU  aid  volunteer  is  taken  by  the  hosting  organisation.  The  external  evaluation34  found 
that, overall, all organisations are satisfied with the provisions that make it possible for 
them to request specific skillsets and profiles, and then match applicants with this profile. 

In general, it can be concluded that the actions listed in the Regulation are all relevant in 
relation to the objectives of the initiative. However, Objective 4 (communicating on the 
EU’s  humanitarian  aid  principles)  is  only  addressed  by  a  few  activities  (training  of 
volunteers and capacity building / technical assistance if partners choose to do so). The 
initiative  has  only  contributed  to  this  broad  objective  to  a  limited  extent.  Furthermore, 

33 External evaluation report p. 36. 
34 External evaluation report p. 39. 

23 

 
                                                            
although  the  fit  between  skills  available  and  profiles  needed  is  satisfactory,  volunteers’ 
satisfaction with their deployments could be improved. 

5.2 

Effectiveness 

5.2.1  Degree of achievement of the objectives 

The  funding  instruments  provided  by  the  initiative  contribute  to  increasing  and 
improving  the  EU’s  capacity  to  provide  humanitarian  aid  (Objective  1)  in  the  broad 
sense  defined  in  the  Regulation.  The  11  technical  assistance  projects  helped  EU-based 
organisations improve their knowledge about humanitarian aid, disaster risk management 
and  volunteer  management  and  created  networking  and  partnership-building 
opportunities.  However,  this  will  only  translate  into  a  tangible  contribution  to  the 
provision of aid when these organisations actually engage in the activities covered by the 
Regulation.  The  22  capacity-building  projects  had  the  same  objectives  as  the  technical 
assistance  projects,  and  in  addition  fostered  cooperation  between  EU-based  and  other 
organisations across the world. 275 candidate volunteers were trained and more than 200 
are currently  being  deployed in  order to  build  local capacity.  However,  the  initiative  is 
very  small,  both  when  we  compare  its  budget  to  the  EU’s  overall  humanitarian  aid 
budget (EUR 1 billion) and in terms of numbers of people involved. Its overall impact on 
the EU’s capacity to provide humanitarian aid is therefore clearly limited. In addition, it 
should be noted that the initiative is not linked to a major funding programme that would 
allow  the  funding  of  own  staff  and  project  implementation  activities  in  addition  to 
funding the volunteer. Organisations therefore need to be confident that project funding 
will be available from another source. 

It  is  too  early  to  assess  whether  training  and  deployment  have  indeed  led  to  an 
improvement  in  the  skills,  knowledge  and  competences  of  volunteers  in  the  field 
(Objective  2),  as  well  as  in  the  terms  and  conditions  of  their  engagement.  However, 
92 % of volunteers who participated in the survey35 indicated that deployment as EU aid 
volunteers has had a positive impact on their personal development.  

As  regards  building  the  capacity  of  hosting  organisations  and  fostering  volunteering  in 
third  countries  (Objective  3),  there  is  currently  no  data  that  would  make  it  possible  to 
draw  conclusions  on  the  impact  of  ongoing  capacity-building  projects  on  hosting 
organisations or on the extent to which volunteering has been fostered in third countries 
(Objective 3). This can only be assessed when the projects end, through submitted project 
reports and targeted surveys. 

As  regards  communicating  on  the  EU’s  humanitarian  aid  principles  agreed  in  the 
European  Consensus  on  Humanitarian  Aid  (Objective  4),  candidate  EU  aid  volunteers 
are  systematically  trained  on  the  meaning  of  the  principles  and  the  Consensus.  Some 
technical  assistance  projects  also  included  information  about  the  principles  and  the 
Consensus in their training and exchange activities. Although there is some awareness of 
humanitarian  principles  and  the  Consensus  among  EU  aid  volunteers,  there  is  no 
evidence at this stage that information on these topics has reached local communities in 

35 External evaluation report p. 29. 

24 

 
                                                            
third  countries  or  the  wider  public  within  the  EU.  The  external  evaluation36  examined 
also  the  extent  to  which  the  communication  strategy  helped  generate  increased  public 
awareness  of the initiative and the EU’s role in the field  of  humanitarian aid. It found 
that  the  initiative  led  to  a  significant  online  presence  created  by  the  various  projects, 
which  are  required  to  communicate  about  the  initiative  and  their  work,  alongside  the 
communication  work  done  by  the  Commission  /  Education,  Audiovisual  &  Culture 
Executive  Agency.  Interest  from  the  general  public  and  potential  volunteers  in  the 
initiative has been high with 300 000 website visits per year,37 an average of around 30 
applications  per  volunteering  vacancy  and  a  subscriber  list  of  over  1 000  people  to  be 
alerted  to  vacancies.  Communication  about  the  initiative  therefore  generated  increased 
public awareness about EU aid volunteers. It was not yet, however, possible to measure 
whether this interest in the initiative has also increased public awareness of the role of the 
EU  in  humanitarian  aid.  This  could  be  assessed  in  future  through  a  Eurobarometer 
survey. 

As  concerns  the  improvement  of  coherence  and  consistency  of  volunteering  across 
Member  States  (Objective  5),  the  initiative  provided  limited  additional  volunteering 
opportunities  in  the  humanitarian  field  for  EU  citizens.  The  certification  requirement 
means  that  organisations  that  participate  in  the  initiative  accept  the  European 
volunteering standards. However, so far there is no evidence to show that this has led or 
will  lead  to  these  standards  also  being  applied  to  volunteers  funded  by  national 
volunteering  schemes.  If  the  initiative  grows  and  involves  more  EU-based  non-
governmental  organisations,  it  would  be  expected  that  the  standards  would  be  applied 
more broadly. 

5.2.2  Other results from the initiative 

Looking at to the  extent to which the initiative reached new organisations that have 
not worked with the Commission, and promoted new partnerships between organisations, 
the external evaluation report found that many of the consortia that applied for funding 
under  the  initiative  are  composed  of  organisations  that  work  already  together  in  a 
network or are affiliates of EU-based organisations. Bringing in an increased number of 
organisations,  especially    new  organisations,  would  contribute  to  Objective  1.  In 
addition, 82 % of the respondents38 indicated that they have applied for or received EU 
funding before. Of the 109 certified hosting organisations, 78 are offices of EU sending 
organisations  (72 %)  and  31  are  local  organisations  (28 %).  Given  that  the  EU  Aid 
Volunteers initiative is a new initiative, it is understandable that organisations are keen to 
reduce  risk  and  would  rather  partner  with  established  and  trusted  partners  on  the 
deployment of volunteers. New partnerships were mostly created between humanitarian 
organisations  and  volunteering  organisations  with  no  significant  previous  experience  in 
humanitarian aid.39 

36 External evaluation report p. 55. 
37 External evaluation report p. 54. 
38 External evaluation report p. 56. 
39 External evaluation report p. 56. 

25 

 
 
                                                            
5.3 

Efficiency 

Overall,  sending  organisations  have  a  very  positive  view  of  the  efficiency  of  the 
recruitment  process,  because  it  allows  them  to  recruit  high  quality  volunteers.40 
Volunteers had a different view, though,  with 26 % rating the process as ‘poor’ or ‘very 
poor’.41 This might be linked to delayed responses to their applications due to the high 
number  of  applications  sending  organisations  had  to  deal  with,  or  with  the  long  time 
between application and actual deployment. Organisations were also faced with dropouts 
both  prior  to  and  after  training  and  had  to  use  reserve  candidates,  which  adds  to  the 
organisations’ workload.  

Safety and security provisions are an important issue for all the initiative’s objectives, 
because  without  these,  potential  volunteers  would  probably  not  participate  in  the 
initiative. They are therefore embedded in various activities, including in the certification 
of  organisations,  the  publication  of  a  list  of  countries  eligible  for  the  deployment  of 
volunteers  that  excludes  countries  with  ongoing  violent  conflict;  training  for  potential 
volunteers  and  mandatory  pre-deployment  and  in-country  induction  training.  The 
external  evaluation  study42  found  through  its  field  missions  that  safety  and  security  is 
taken seriously by all stakeholders involved in actual deployment situations.  

Stakeholders mentioned that they would like to have more flexibility with regard to the 
compilation  of  the  list  of  deployment  countries.  Currently,  countries  may  be  excluded 
from  the  list  if  parts  of  them  experience  a  current  violent  conflict.  The  Commission 
should take a more regional approach to the safety and security assessment of countries.43 

The  external  evaluation  study  observed  that  different  organisations  set  different  safety 
and security requirements for volunteers at the same location (for example regarding the 
possibility  of  moving  freely).  The  Commission  could  consider  measures  to  encourage 
consistency  in  requirements  between  the  sending  and  hosting  organisations  that  deploy 
EU aid volunteers to the same location. 

The  legal  provisions  (especially  in  the  Implementing  Regulation)  are  very  detailed  and 
prescriptive. The external evaluation study concluded that ‘despite the challenges caused 
by the established principles, standards and requirements, the evaluation clearly reveals 
that  these  are  well  justified  and  essential  for  the  responsible  and  risk-mitigating 
involvement of volunteers in humanitarian actions and therefore for the establishment of 
the  EUAV  initiative  as  a  whole’.44  The  study  also  took  account  of  action  taken  by  the 
Commission  and  the  Education,  Audiovisual  &  Culture  Executive  Agency  to  simplify 
and  improve  the  processes  while  complying  with  the  provisions  of  the  legislation.  The 
procedures  seem  complex,  especially  for  organisations  that  are  mainly  active  in  EU 
humanitarian  aid  activities,  which  allow  for  simplified  grant  management  procedures. 
New  organisations  might  first  need  to  participate  in  capacity-building  or  technical 

40 External evaluation report p. 99. 
41 External evaluation report p. 99. 
42 External evaluation report p. 61. 
43 External evaluation report p. 61. 
44 External Evaluation Report p. 66. 

26 

 
                                                            
assistance  projects  in  order  to  build  their  own  capacity  and  fulfil  the  requirements  for 
certification.  Preparatory  technical  assistance  or  capacity-building  projects  under  the 
initiative generally run for 24 months. Therefore, the move into applying for deployment 
projects  materialises  only  after  this  period.  The  time  needed  to  send  selected  potential 
volunteers  to  face-to-face  training  also  adds  several  months.  In  total,  the  average  time 
from publication of the call to deployment of volunteers is 18 months.  

The  Commission  agrees  that  there  needs  to  be  further  simplification  of  processes  and 
administrative  procedures,  in  order  to  increase  organisational  participation  in  the 
initiative  and  to  incentivise  participation  by  more  organisations.  For  example,  sending 
organisations  find  the  certification  process  challenging.  Even  established  volunteering 
organisations need up to six months to prepare for certification. It can then take a further 
six  months  to  become  certified.  According  to  the  survey  carried  out  for  the  external 
study45 35 % found the process very cumbersome, 50 % found that it was challenging but 
that they could handle it, and only 14 % found the process straightforward with no major 
challenge.  It  is  important  to  note  that  this  refers  to  the  certification  process  and  not  to 
complying with the standards themselves. The survey found that46 85 % of respondents 
from hosting organisations are positive about the process for certification. The reason for 
this  might  be  that  many  of  the  local  offices  of  EU-based  sending  organisations  go 
through  a simplified  certification  process  which  is  handled for  them  by  their  EU-based 
office and therefore not perceived as burdensome.   

These comments were also reiterated in bilateral meetings between the Commission and 
EU-based  organisations.  In  2016,  the  self-assessment  forms  were  thoroughly  revised  to 
make  them  more  user-friendly.  Further  simplification  of  the  certification  process, 
including for FPA partners, is an ongoing issue. 

The external evaluation study47 found that the monitoring framework is in line with the 
initiative’s  intervention  logic  and  generally  complies  with  the  Commission’s  Better 
Regulation Guidelines. However, data collection is challenging, because data cannot be 
collected  automatically  and  requires  a  high  level  of  manual  processing.  The  current 
monitoring  framework  gathers  exclusively  quantitative  data  twice  a  year.  Although 
useful for reporting purposes, qualitative data would help to better assess the real value of 
the  projects  in  the  humanitarian  sector,  relating  to  disaster  risk  management  or  linking 
relief,  rehabilitation  and  development.  The  process  for  monitoring  compliance  with 
certification  standards  will  need  to  be  strengthened  in  the  future,  because  field  visits 
carried  out  by  the  external  contractors48  found  that  not  all  sending  and  hosting 
organisations apply all the standards they committed to during the certification process.  

Given the short implementation period for the initiative to date, a full cost-effectiveness 
analysis has not been possible. Three issues were therefore considered to assess the cost-
effectiveness of processes:  

45 External evaluation report p. 90. 
46 External evaluation report p. 90. 
47 External evaluation report p. 69. 
48 External evaluation report p. 33. 

27 

 
                                                            
1.  The  outsourcing  of  the  contract  management  to  the  Education,  Audiovisual  & 
Culture Executive Agency was done based on a cost-benefit analysis conducted in 
2013,49  which  concluded  that  implementation  by  the  Agency  is  more  cost-
effective than an ‘in-house’ solution and could lead to savings of up to 25 %. This 
finding was confirmed by the external evaluation study.50  

2.  The  two  service  contracts  put  in  place  for  the initiative  (training  and  insurance) 
were  allocated  on  the  basis  of  competitive  tenders  and  are  based  on  a  variable 
cost structure (i.e. cost per use / volunteer).51 

3.  Organisations  are  requested  to  prove  cost-effectiveness  in  their  proposals 

submitted to the Agency, which are evaluated by external evaluators.  

In  the  external  evaluation  study,52  the  contractor  calculated  the  average  costs  per 
volunteering month based on planned deployments in 2015-2016 and the corresponding 
budgets included in the proposals. Real costs will only be available when the deployment 
projects  end  (the  first  2  projects  end  mid-2018)  and  the  real  deployment  costs  can  be 
extracted from the final project reports. A deployed EU aid volunteer costs an average of 
EUR  4 087.  The  volunteer  costs  per  month  in  the  pilot  phase  were  estimated  at  EUR 
4 414. By way of comparison, a UNV International Volunteer costs EUR 4 386, while an 
International Young Volunteer costs EUR 3 296. It seems therefore that the costs for EU 
aid  volunteers  are  comparable  with  costs  for  other 
international  volunteering 
programmes. 

The  initiative  did  not  achieve  the  planned  levels  of  deployments  and  that  demand  for 
capacity building / technical assistance and certification was below the expected levels. 
As a result, the allocated budget in the 2014-2020 MFF was not entirely used in 2014-
2017.  The  amounts  allocated  for  drawing  up  the  training  curriculum,    purchasing 
insurance  for  EU  aid  volunteers  and  setting  up  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers  Platform  were 
fully used. 

Due  to  a  relatively  low  number  of  project  proposals,  the  100 %  increase  of  the  project 
budget for deployment projects (from EUR 700 000 to EUR 1 400 000) enabled a growth 
in applications and the deployment of more volunteers compared with the low number in 
the first year of implementation. 

The  first  phase  of  the  initiative  was  marked  by  initial  spending  (establishment  of  the 
training  curriculum,  insurance  scheme  and  the  setup  of  the  EUAV  Platform)  that  will 
hopefully amortise in future years with higher volunteer numbers. 

Due to the fact that the initiative is not yet running at full capacity, it is difficult to draw 
final  conclusions on the budget  required  to  meet the high targets for deployment set in 
the MFF. As no final project reports or cost statements are available, no conclusions can 
be drawn about the costs per volunteer month (e.g. difference between the estimates and 

49 External evaluation report p. 73. 
50 External evaluation report p. 70. 
51 External evaluation report p. 76. 
52 External evaluation report p. 72. 

28 

 
                                                            
actual  costs),  and  the  results  and  achievements  in  relation  to  the  budget  invested  in 
capacity building and technical assistance. 

5.4 

Coherence 

The  evaluation  examined  the  initiative’s  coherence  with  related  EU  activities, 
particularly  under  the  humanitarian  aid,  development  and  civil  protection  instruments. 
EU  aid  volunteers  cannot  be  deployed  to  places  with  armed  conflict.53  Volunteers  are 
mainly  deployed  in  safer  environments  and  carry  out  work  related  to  disaster  risk 
management  and  linking  relief,  rehabilitation  and  development.  It  is  not  envisaged  that 
volunteers  will  be  deployed  in  Commission-funded  projects  that  target  vulnerable 
communities  in  difficult  security  conditions.  Coherence  with  the  Commission’s  core 
humanitarian aid activities will therefore clearly be limited. The Regulation, however, 
provides  for  the  possibility  of  deploying  EU  aid  volunteers  in  support  functions  in 
emergency  operations  (logistics,  communication,  project  management,  procurement). 
These  deployments  would  require  specific  procedures  and  calls  for  proposals,  which 
have not yet been developed or tested.  

The wide definition of ‘humanitarian aid’ in the Regulation allows for the deployment of 
EU  aid  volunteers  to  work  on  resilience  and  linking  relief,  rehabilitation  and 
development. Although EU aid volunteers are deployed in development projects funded 
by the European Commission54 and the survey of hosting organisations carried out during 
the  external  evaluation55  found  that  of  22  respondents  17  are  involved  in  both 
humanitarian aid and development assistance, there has been no systematic approach to 
linking  deployment  of  EU  aid  volunteers  with  European  development  projects  or  the 
Sustainable Development Goals. 

Coherence  with  civil  protection  activities  has  been  limited,  to  date.  The  Council 
Working  Group  on  Civil  Protection    has  been  informed  about  the  initiative’s  progress 
and  has  also  been  consulted  by  the  contractor  as  part  of  the  external  evaluation  study. 
Good  examples  of  collaboration  with  civil  protection  bodies  that  could  increase 
coherence with civil protection policy and be easily replicated are two capacity-building 
projects led by the Italian Civil Protection department that took place in 2015 and 2017. 
In  the  medium  term,  capacity  building  and  deployment  could  support  the  World 
Humanitarian  Summit’s  localisation  agenda,56  because  these  actions  focus  directly  on 
building  the  capacity  of  local  organisations  (or  third-country  field  offices)  and  local 
communities. 

Regarding  internal  coherence  between  EU  policies,  the  eligible  activities  under  the 
initiative  are  designed  to  enable  EU-based  and  third-country  organisations,  through 
building  capacity  and  providing  technical  assistance  funding  to  further  develop  their 
humanitarian  aid  skills  and  knowledge  so  that  they  can  participate  in  the  initiative  and 

53  Regulation  375/2014,  consideration  12:  ‘EU  aid  volunteers  should  not  be  deployed  to  operations 
conducted in the theatre of international and non-international armed conflicts. 
54 External evaluation report p. 43. 
55 External evaluation report p. 42. 
56 External evaluation report p. 44. 

29 

 
                                                            
meet  the  initiative’s  high  standards  for  volunteer  management.  The  initiative  created  a 
certification process to ensure that volunteers are properly managed, safe and secure, and 
supported  to  learn  and  develop  during  their  activities  in  the  field.  Central  training  for 
potential volunteers provides the necessary preparation for deployment in countries with 
vulnerable populations and sometimes difficult humanitarian situations. Funding for the 
deployment of EU aid volunteers enables organisations to cover their costs for volunteers 
and  other  costs  related  to  managing  the  volunteer’s  work.  The  database  and  EU  Aid 
Volunteer  Platform  provide  support  for  managing  deployed  volunteers  and  allow  for 
communication  and  networking  activities  that  go  beyond  the  deployment  period, 
supporting  the  creation  of  a  European  voluntary  humanitarian  corps.  All  these  actions 
complement  each  other.  More  time  is  required  to  see  how  many  organisations  receive 
certification after taking part in capacity-building or technical assistance programmes and 
subsequently apply for EU aid volunteers, which has been the aim of this approach. This 
work  has  been  designed  to  achieve  good  internal  coherence  between  the  EU  Aid 
Volunteers  initiative  and  other  EU  policies  in  this  area,  but  at  this  stage  not  enough 
evidence is available to support a conclusive assessment. 

5.5 

EU added value 

On  the  extent  to  which  the  initiative  has  provided  an  EU  added  value,  the  external 
evaluation57  found  that  stakeholders  appreciate  having  an  EU  volunteering  scheme, 
because it applies the same procedures for organisations in all EU countries. Stakeholders 
that  participated  in  the  open  public  consultation  (19)  have  split  views  on  whether  the 
needs  addressed  through  the  initiative  and  the  initiative’s  objectives  could  instead  be 
achieved  through  Member  States’  national  volunteering  schemes  or  volunteering 
schemes  run  by  other  actors,  e.g.  United  Nations  Volunteers  or  Red  Cross  and  Red 
Crescent volunteers. While 36.8 %58 agree fully or to a large extent with this statement, 
the same number of respondents (36.9 %) agree only to some extent or not at all. It must, 
however, be noted that this is the result of only 19 contributions and can therefore not be 
regarded as representative. Stakeholders welcome the availability of funding for capacity 
building  and  technical  assistance  activities  and  agreed  that  the  initiative  increases 
opportunities  for  neighbouring  countries  to  work  together  and  for  cooperation  between 
organisations of varying backgrounds and sizes (e.g. humanitarian actors, civil protection 
actors, development actors, volunteering organisations). 

Stakeholders  considered  that  identical,  centralised  training  for  potential  volunteers 
provided a clear added value compared to other volunteering schemes.59 

The initiative has the potential to increase its EU added value in the future, because it is 
open not only to DG ECHO’s Framework Partnership Agreement partners, but to all EU-
based  organisations  that  engage  or  intend  to  engage  in  humanitarian  aid.  While 
organisations from countries which joined the EU after 200460 make up 3 % of partners 

57 External evaluation report p. 45. 
58 External evaluation report p. 192. 
59 External evaluation report p. 46. 
60 Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, 

Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia 

30 

 
                                                            
(7 out of 204), they make up 20 % of the certified organisations in the EU Aid Volunteers 
initiative61. 

6.  CONCLUSIONS 

The  interviews  the  external  evaluator  carried  out  with  the  various  stakeholder  groups 
found that the initiative’s five objectives, as set out in the Regulation, are relevant for the 
initiative’s  beneficiaries,  sending  and  hosting  organisations  and  volunteers.  Local 
communities  find  particularly  useful  those  activities  that  encourage  local  volunteering 
and  capacity  building  to  improve  skills  locally  to  prepare  for  disasters.  In  general,  the 
different actions carried out under the initiative are relevant to the initiative’s objectives, 
while  the  objective  of  communicating  the  EU’s  humanitarian  aid  principles  is  only 
considered relevant by a small number of stakeholders (mainly volunteers). This means 
more  attention  is  required  on  this  point  in  the  initiative’s  communication  activities. 
Interest from established DG ECHO Framework Partnership Agreement partners remains 
very low, which is problematic for an initiative that is supposed to serve the humanitarian 
aid  sector.  Sending  and  hosting  organisations  that  participate  in  the  initiative  have  a 
relatively positive view about the initiative’s ability to meet their needs, and manage to 
deploy volunteers with the right profiles in line with the needs of hosting organisations. 
The  objective  to  communicate  the  Union’s  humanitarian  aid  principles  is  only  relevant 
for  few  stakeholders  (mainly  volunteers)  and  would  need  more  attention 
in 
communication activities.  

The initiative has not been effective in achieving its five objectives, also due to the fact 
that  the  initiative  did  not  meet  the  targets  set  in  the  2014-2020  multiannual  financial 
framework. The budget in the first three years was not fully used, although the figures for 
2017  saw  a  strong  uptake  in  funding  for  capacity  building  /  technical  assistance.  The 
numbers  of  volunteers,  although  increasing,  remain  well  below  the  target.  The  main 
reason for this is the barriers to participation, such as the certification of organisations or 
the  need  to  form  partnerships  with  other  organisations  to  apply  for  EU  funding.  These 
have  posed  a  particular  challenge  for  organisations  that  do  not  operate  in  established 
networks.  The  search  for  consortium  partners  and  the  administrative  procedures  to 
manage a consortium hampers effectiveness. The effectiveness of the recruitment process 
could be further improved by speeding up procedures. The initiative provided a limited 
contribution to improving the EU’s capacity to provide humanitarian aid to date, given its 
small budget and the slow uptake. There is some evidence from the evaluation surveys 
that  volunteers  feel  that  their  skills  have  improved  through  the  deployment.  The  few 
placements offered through the initiative in its early years increased the opportunities for 
people to contribute to humanitarian aid. There is no evidence so far that the volunteering 
standards set  in  the initiative have had positive  effects on the national standards of EU 
Member  States.  Some  organisations  find  the  forming  of  consortia  difficult,  especially 
when they do not work with established networks.  

61 External evaluation report p. 45/46. 

31 

 
                                                            
Procedures  and  requirements  with  a  strong  impact  on  the  initiative’s  efficiency  are 
regulated  in  detail  in  three  legislative  acts.  Although  this  creates  on  the  one  hand  a 
certain  administrative  burden  for  organisations,  it  is  on  the  other  hand  positive  for  the 
experience  of  volunteers,  because  it  establishes  a  transparent  recruitment  process  and 
supports their learning and development during the deployment. New European rules and 
procedures  for  managing  volunteers  can  be  especially  burdensome  for  organisations  if 
they  run  their  national  volunteering  scheme  in  parallel  to  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers 
initiative.  Within  this  legislative  framework,  the  Commission  constantly  seeks  to 
simplify  and  accelerate  processes,  in  order  to  increase  the  initiative’s  attractiveness  to 
stakeholders.  The  application,  selection  and  reporting  procedures  appear  particularly 
burdensome for organisations that are mainly active in EU humanitarian aid (emergency 
response)  projects,  which  follow  lighter  procedures  and  are  exempt  from  the 
Commission’s  normal  grant  management  procedures.  An  efficient  monitoring  system 
was put in place, which could be further developed to process qualitative information and 
ad hoc reports, in addition to quantitative information. Any cost-efficiency analysis can 
only  provide  a  preliminary  assessment,  given  that  no  final  project  reports  or  related 
financial  data  are  available  at  this  stage.  The  external  evaluation  noted  cost-conscious 
behaviour  on  the  part  of  the  Commission  with  regard  to  service  contracts,  which  are 
based on the number of volunteers trained and insured. The initiative will require simpler 
processes,  more  outreach  and  communication  about  the  initiative’s  potential  positive 
impacts  on  organisations  in  the  EU  and  abroad  and  the  way  the  initiative  works,  and 
stronger  links  between  the  initiative  and  EU  humanitarian  and  development  objectives 
and funding. 

There  is  room  for  improvement  in  the  initiative’s  coherence  with  humanitarian  aid, 
development  and  civil  protection  instruments,  which  could  be  strengthened.  The 
initiative was not embedded in the existing EU instruments to provide humanitarian aid, 
but was set up as a stand-alone instrument. It does not allow volunteers to be deployed to 
regions  of  armed  conflict,  but  the  broad  definition  of  humanitarian  aid  used  in  the  EU 
Aid Volunteers Regulation allows volunteers to be deployed in a wide variety of projects 
including activities which link relief, rehabilitation and development and which support 
and  develop  the  overall  resilience  of  local  communities.  The  initiative  is  not  formally 
linked  to  the  Sustainable  Development  Goals,  although  the  majority  of  participating 
hosting organisations state that they are active in both humanitarian aid and development. 
The internal consistency of the actions carried out cannot be fully assessed at this stage of 
the initiative, but their design suggests they should be consistent with each other. 

The  initiative  creates  EU  added  value  through  the  set-up  of  common  standards  for 
managing volunteers from all EU countries, common training, and  funding for capacity 
building  and  technical  assistance.  It  enables  organisations  with  different  backgrounds 
(e.g.  humanitarian,  development,  civil  protection,  volunteering  organisations)  and  of 
different sizes to work together. It is open not only to Framework Partnership Agreement 
partners but to all EU-based organisations that are active or intend to become active in 
humanitarian aid. While organisations from Member States that joined the EU after 2004 
represent  3 %  of  Framework  Partnership  Agreement  partners,  they  represent  20 %  of 

32 

 
certified organisations. In this respect the initiative was able to involve a broad range of 
organisations from different EU Member States.   

33 

 
 
 
 
ANNEX 1: PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 

1. 

LEAD DG, DECIDE PLANNING/CWP REFERENCES 

European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations (DG ECHO) 

Decide Planning reference: 2017/ECHO 

Commission Work Programme reference: EUAV WP 2017 

2. 

ORGANISATION AND TIMING 

The  interservice  steering  group  (ISG)  ensured  the  quality  of  the  external  evaluation, 
shared  all  available  information  with  the  external  evaluation  team,  commented  the 
deliverables, and participated in the meetings. It was composed of the representatives of 
DG ECHO, EACEA, DG EAC and DG SG. 

The contract was signed the 3 May 2017 for 7 months.   

Kick off meeting — the 5 May 2017 

Inception Meeting the 2 June 2017 

Interim Report Meeting- the 15 September 2017 

Draft Final Report Meeting: 27 October 2017 

3. 

EXCEPTIONS TO THE BETTER REGULATION GUIDELINES 

Not applicable 

4. 

CONSULTATION OF THE RSB (IF APPLICABLE) 

Not applicable 

5. 

EVIDENCE, SOURCES AND QUALITY 

The  ISG  members  held  multiple  meetings  during  the  evaluation  process  to  share 
information  and  documents  and  to  discuss  issues,  in  addition  to  meetings  to  discuss 
deliverables with the evaluation team. The documents that the external evaluation team 
analysed included: annual activity reports, Commission  work programmes,  annual  calls 
for  proposals,  the  evaluation  of  the  pilot  action  for  EU  aid  volunteers,  a  study  on 
approaches to assess the cost-effectiveness of DG ECHO´s humanitarian aid actions, the 
guidelines  for  deployment  call  for  proposals,  the  impact  assessment  and  proposal  for  a 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Regulation  establishing  the  European  Voluntary  Humanitarian  Aid  Corps.  Information 
collected during the research phase was complemented by and triangulated with results 
from  the  open  public  consultation  and  other  stakeholder  surveys  carried  out  by  the 
external  evaluation  team  during  the  evaluation  process.  The  field  missions  to  carefully 
selected  countries,  covering  the  most  illustrative  examples  of  implementation  of  the 
initiative,  also  provided  information.  In  total,  the  evaluation  team  conducted  120 
individual  interviews  with  representatives  from  52  organisations,  carried  out  6  targeted 
surveys and organised a number of focus groups. 

With  regard  to  quality  assurance,  the  ISG  contributed  to  the  whole  evaluation  process, 
and discussed and commented on all external evaluation deliverables in accordance with 
the relevant technical specifications. The quality of the final report was checked by the 
ISG to ensure it met the technical specifications, and the standards required for accuracy, 
completeness of data, relevance and soundness of analyses, evidence based conclusions, 
and  usefulness  of  recommendations.  Comments  provided were  fully  taken  into  account 
by the external evaluation team. 

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 2: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION 

Six targeted written surveys (questionnaires) were drafted by the external contractor and 
sent to the following stakeholder groups: 

(1) DG ECHO Framework Partnership Agreement partners (international non-

governmental organisations) which are not involved in the initiative and who also 
did not participate in pilot projects as a lead or partner organisation. 

(2) Organisations that participated in the pilot phase, but are not yet involved in the 

initiative. 

(3) EU-based organisations which are certified, have received technical assistance or 

have provided technical assistance. 

(4) Non EU-based organisations which have received capacity-building assistance or 

hosted volunteers. 

(5) EU aid volunteers (selected, about to be trained, trained, deployed, and returned). 

(6) Member State representatives (Humanitarian Aid Committee / Council Working 
Group on Humanitarian Aid and Food Aid / Council Working Group on Civil 
Protection). 

The  external  contractor  also  conducted  more  than  120  individual  interviews  with 
representatives from 52 external organisations, DG ECHO officials, officials from other 
DGs, EACEA, Member State representatives and other stakeholders: 

Stakeholder group 

Individual 
interviews 

Organisations / 
institutions 

EUAV sending organisations / EU partners / Recipients of 
technical assistance 

EUAV hosting organisations 

EUAVs (deployed and during training) 

European Commission and staff (including: DG ECHO and 
its Regional Security Officers / Country Offices, DG 
DEVCO, DG EAC, EEAS, and EACEA)  

Sector service organisations and associations / 
universities 

Member State representatives 

Others (e.g. Framework Partnership Agreement (FPA) 
partners/ Financial and Administrative Framework 
Agreement (FAFA) partners, training consortium) 

41 

26 

20 

18 

8 

4 

5 

Source: external evaluation report p. 12 

Total 

122 

15 

22 

n/a 

5 

4 

2 

4 

52 

 
 
 
Three field missions were carried out by the external contractor: 

Field mission 

Haiti and Ecuador 

Jordan and 
Lebanon 

Cambodia and 
Myanmar 

Organisations 

Remark / specific issues 

  Deployment / hosting of 

volunteers (including group 
deployment to Ecuador) 
  Recipient organisations / 
communities interviews 

 

EUAVs and projects near to 
humanitarian hotspots (e.g. 
Syria crisis) 

  Recipient organisations / 
communities interviews 

  Capacity building focus and 

deployment 

Mouvement des Paysan de Papaye (MPP) 
ACTED Haiti 
Concern Worldwide — Haiti 
Fundación Alianza por los Derechos, la Igualdad y la 
Solidaridad Internacional — Haiti 
Fundación Alianza por los Derechos, la Igualdad y la 
Solidaridad Internacional — Ecuador 
Gruppo di Volontariato Civile (GVC) — Haiti 
Caritas Ecuador 
FOCSIV Ecuador 
Ecuasol 
DG ECHO Field Offices, Haiti and Ecuador 
ACTED 
Fondación Alianza 
Institute for Family Health (IFH) Jordan 
GVC 
ACTED Lebanon 
Concern Worldwide — Lebanon 
Gruppo di Volontariato Civile (GVC) — Lebanon 

ACTED 
DanChurchAid 
ACTED — Cambodia 
DanChurchAid — Cambodia 
Finn Church Aid — Cambodia 
Gruppo di Volontariato Civile (GVC) — Cambodia 
Life With Dignity — Cambodia 
People in Need — Cambodia 
VSO 

Source: external evaluation report p. 13 

The results of the open public consultation are set out below. 

ANALYSIS OF THE OPEN PUBLIC CONSULTATION 

An  open  public  consultation  was  organised  as  part  of  the  interim  evaluation  of  the  EU 
Aid Volunteers initiative (‘the initiative’). The objective of the open public consultation 
was to give EU citizens and other stakeholders an opportunity to express their views on 
the way the initiative has performed during the first three years of its implementation. 

At  the  end  of  July  2017,  the  European  Commission  launched    a  consultation  on  the 
implementation and performance to date of the initiative. The consultation period ran for 
a  full  three  months  (until  31  October  2017)  and  was  open  to  individuals,  public  sector 
and private sector organisations. 

The  consultation  was  available  in  two  different  versions:  one  designed  for  respondents 
who  felt  they  had  limited  or  no  in-depth  knowledge,  and  a  second  for  those  with  prior 
knowledge  of  the  initiative.  The  survey  asked  specific  questions  and  provided  the 
opportunity for free-text responses. 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Participation 

In  total  the  open  public  consultation  led  to  11  answers  for  the  survey  from 
respondents without in-depth knowledge about the initiative, and 19 answers to the 
survey from respondents with some prior knowledge of the initiative. 

Respondents  were  also  given  the  opportunity  to  provide  position  papers.  One  position 
paper was received (from FOCSIV Italy, an EUAV-certified sending organisation); this 
paper was provided to DG ECHO for consideration and separate publication. 

Limitations 

Some  limitations  of  the  consultation  should  be  considered  when  interpreting  the  its 
findings. 

  There was a very limited number of respondents (30 in total for both surveys). 

  The respondents to the survey opted in (decided themselves to participate, while 
the  other  invitees  decided  not  to  participate).  As  a  result,  there  is  a  clear  opt-in 
bias and the results cannot be called representative. 

  The majority of the respondents to the survey for informed participants are either 
EUAV-certified sending organisations (9 out of 15 organisational respondents) or 
EUAV hosting organisations (2 out of 15). So the results as a whole represent the 
views  of  implementing  stakeholders  rather  than  stakeholders  that  the  evaluation 
had not reached in other ways. 

Respondents to the surveys provided a large number of comments which cannot all be set 
out in detail but which have informed the evaluation. The key results of both surveys are 
presented  below.  Information  including  the  original  data  set  with  all  responses  and 
FOCSIV’s comments were provided to DG ECHO, along with FOCSIV’s position paper, 
for information and consideration. 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
OPC  RESULTS  FROM  RESPONDENTS WITH  IN-DEPTH  KNOWLEDGE  ABOUT  EU  AID 
VOLUNTEERS 

The results set out below relate to respondents with in-depth knowledge about EUAV 
(a second survey captured the opinion of less informed respondents). 

Summary of findings 

Altogether,  19  responses  to  this  survey  were  provided  from  15  organisations  and  4 
individual respondents. Most of the institutional respondents are EUAV-certified sending 
or  hosting  organisations.  Therefore,  the  results  as  a  whole  predominantly  represent  the 
opinion of EUAV-implementing stakeholders. 

Information about the EUAV initiative 

The  large  majority  of  respondents  are  positive  about  the  quality  and  completeness  of 
information about EUAV (84 % of the respondents). Free-text comments indicate that all 
required information about EUAV is available online but they suggest presenting it using 
less  complex  language  and  a  simpler  structure,  and  in  a  single  place  /  on  one  single 
website.  The  preferred  channels  of  information  for  further  information  on  the  initiative 
are the EUAV Platform / website and meetings and events. 

Relevance of EUAV 

Addressing  needs  —  The  majority  of  the  respondents  are  not  convinced  that  EUAV 
addresses the current needs for disaster risk management and resilience in third countries. 
Only 36 % of the respondents indicate that these needs are addressed to a large extent or 
fully.  Comments  indicated  that  some  respondents  see  a  high  potential  for  engaging 
skilled  volunteers  but  at  present,  consider  that  there  is  more  focus  on  the  volunteering 
aspects  and  less  on  impact,  especially  community  impact.  Others  indicate  that  the 
description of the initiative is not focused enough (e.g. it is not clear if EUAV is about 
learning  opportunities  for  volunteers  or  local  community  capacity  improvement  in 
disaster risk management). 

Adding value to existing EU schemes — About 58 % of the respondents are convinced 
that  EUAV  adds  value  to  the  existing  national  volunteering  efforts  in  the  EU.  Some 
responses  highlight  the  fact  that  many  opportunities  to  engage  as  a  volunteer  in  third 
countries  exist,  but  mainly  in  development  assistance.  EUAV  adds  the  humanitarian 
volunteering  component  to  it,  particularly  with  its  established  standards.  Several 
respondents  comment  on  the  high  potential  for  EUAV  to  show  solidarity.  In  order  to 
further improve value it adds, one organisation strongly suggests including to include the 
possibility to provide funding for local volunteers in the approach to EUAV. 

EU  response  capacity  —  A  clear  majority  of  respondents  agree  that  volunteering  is  a 
suitable approach to improving the EU’s response capacity (63 %). The majority of these 
answers  highlight  the  importance  of  volunteering  (particularly  local  volunteering)  in 
humanitarian  response  and  the  potential  to  improve  response  capacities  by  involving 

39 

 
 
EUAV volunteers. However, respondents stress the fact that European volunteers need to 
be professionals to add value in the third countries they are active in. 

Impact on the EU’s image — Most respondents agree that there is a positive impact on 
the  EU’s  image  from  EUAV  (58 %).  In  free-text  comments,  several  respondents 
highlight that there is significant potential to improve the EU’s image in third countries, 
but  they  note  that  the  volunteers  need  to  address  particular needs  and  that  any  positive 
impact  depends  on  their  skills,  attitude  and  on  the  added  value  they  bring  to  the  host 
communities.  However  some  critical  voices  indicate  that  there  needs  to  be  more 
involvement of local volunteers in the initiative. 

Impact of EUAV volunteers 

When looking at the different areas of EUAV impact, the most impactful area identified 
by respondents is the ‘personal development of the volunteer’ (94 % of the respondents 
agree), followed by the ‘impact on local communities’ (74 % agreement) and ‘the image 
of the European Union’ (74 %). The impacts the respondents saw as least effective were 
‘availability  of  aid  workers  in  the  future’  and  ‘impact  on  national  volunteers  in  third 
countries’. However, all 7 aspects of impact received well above 50 % positive ratings. 
Several respondents indicated that it is too early in the programme to draw conclusions 
on impact.  

Coherence 

Respondents to the consultation have a mixed opinion on the coherence of EUAV with 
other  EU  activities.  Coherence  with  other  disaster  risk  management  (55 %  agreement) 
and community resilience (53 %) focused activities of the EU is seen as relatively high 
but  coherence  with EU civil  protection and other EU volunteering initiatives is seen as 
relatively  low.  The  respondents  see  the  potential  for  coherence,  as  EUAV  addresses 
humanitarian needs as well as issues more related to civil protection. However, at present 
many respondents do not see any practical alignment with either of these fields (e.g. DG 
ECHO  field  offices  are  not  involved,  and  there  are  no  obvious  links  with  disaster  risk 
reduction projects funded by DG DEVCO). 

EU added value 

The assessment of the EU added value provided by the initiative varies depending on the 
aspect analysed. Higher ratings are received in relation to ‘strengthening of capacities of 
humanitarian  organisations  at  EU  level’  (63 % agreement)  and  ‘adding  value  through  a 
set  of  standards’  (58 %).  Lower  levels  of  agreement  are  given  for  ‘needs  cannot  be 
addressed  by  other  existing  EU  volunteering  schemes’  (33 %  agreement)  or  ‘needs 
cannot  be  addressed  by  other  national  volunteering  schemes’  (37 %  agreement).  The 
majority of the comments highlight the initiative’s standards as its main achievement and 
added  value  at  European  level,  while  some  indicate  that  bringing  together  EU 
organisations  by  encouraging  collaboration  and  information-sharing  on  volunteer 

40 

 
 
 
 
management (e.g. the technical assistance component of EUAV) is  a clear added  value 
provided by the initiative. 

Effectiveness 

With respect to the effectiveness in achieving EUAV operational objectives, respondents 
are generally quite critical. The best scores are given to the effectiveness of ‘improving 
skills  and  knowledge  of  volunteers’,  where  63 %  of  respondents  agree  that  EUAV  was 
effective in achieving this objective. All other aspects receive less than 50 % agreement. 
Particularly low scores are given for the EUAV impact on ‘increased awareness’ (26 % 
agreement)  and  the  ‘enhancement  of  coherence  and  consistency  of  humanitarian 
volunteering  in  the  EU’  (32 %  agreement).  Several  respondents  highlight  that  it  is  too 
early  to  judge  the  initiative’s  effectiveness  after  only  3  years  and  with  only  a  small 
number  of  volunteers  who  have  returned  and  projects  that  have  been  completed.  For 
some respondents the certification and application process is in need of improvement to 
stimulate further engagement and to include more organisations. 

Efficiency 

The efficiency of EUAV in ‘building volunteers´ skills and competences’ is evaluated as 
high by a clear majority of respondents (79 % agree) and another 68 % of the respondents 
are  of  the  opinion  that  volunteering  abroad  has  a  significant  ‘positive  impact  on  the 
career  development  of  the  EUAV  volunteers’.  Related  to  the  objectives  ‘to  develop 
disaster risk reduction capacities in third countries’ and ‘to build resilient communities’ 
only 42 % of the respondents in each case agree that EUAV is an efficient mechanism. 
Comments provided by the respondents are varied but two statements highlight areas of 
identified inefficiency: the complex procedural framework, and the limited flexibility in 
deployment (e.g. a minimum requirement of 4 weeks for deployments). 

Capacity building 

More  than  68 %  of  the  respondents  agree  that  capacity  building  provided  by  EUAV 
projects  has  the  potential  to  contribute  to  resilience  building  in  host  communities. 
Respondents  are  convinced  that  there  is  significant  potential  to  improve  resilience 
through  EUAV  volunteers  and  some  have  experienced  positive  impacts  through  their 
work using EUAV funding. There is a clear consensus that the critical success factor is a 
proper needs assessment at local level involving local organisations and communities. 

Technical assistance 

Only 42 % of the respondents agree that EUAV technical assistance to EU organisations 
improve  the  response  capacity  of  the  EU  as  a  whole.  The  majority  of  the  comments 
confirm that the certification process improves volunteer management practices but at the 
same  time,  it  is  perceived  as  complicated  and  technical  assistance  concentrated  on 
improving volunteer management and assisting organisations to become EUAV certified 
is not seen by respondents as directly helping to improve EU response capacity. 

41 

 
 
 
 
 
Respondents to the survey 

Altogether,  19  responses  were  received  from  15  organisations  and  4  individual 
respondents.  9  out  of  the  15  organisational  responses  come  from  EUAV-certified  EU 
organisations and 2 out of 15 from EUAV-certified third-country partners. All of the 15 
organisational responses are from non-governmental organisations (NGOs). 

  All institutional responses to the consultation come from non-governmental 

organisations. 

42 

 
 
 
 
Information about EUAV 

  ‘Others’ are mostly EUAV partners and are therefore well-informed 

implementing stakeholders. 

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
OPC RESULTS FROM RESPONDENTS WITHOUT IN-DEPTH KNOWLEDGE ABOUT EU AID 
VOLUNTEERS 

The results set out below relate to respondents without in-depth knowledge of EUAV. 

Summary findings 

Altogether, 11 responses were received, from 8 individual respondents and 3 responding 
organisations. 

Information about EUAV 

The majority of the respondents first learnt about EUAV from a friend or from the EU 
websites.  Only  a  minority  of  respondents  feel  they  have  sufficient  information  on  the 
initiative (27 %). The preferred channel of information for further information on EUAV 
is  the  internet  (EUAV  website),  followed  by  the  press,  TV  and  radio,  and  other 
organisations’ websites.   

Different aspects 

Added  value  —  A  minority  of  respondents  are  convinced  that  EUAV  provides  added 
value to existing national volunteering efforts (35 %). 

Improvement of response capacity — A majority of the respondents agree that EUAV 
improves the EU’s humanitarian response capacity (60 % of the respondents). 

Image of the EU in third countries — A clear majority of the respondents agree that 
EUAV volunteers create a positive image in communities where they serve (73 %). One 
respondent expressed: ‘It [EUAV volunteers’ presence] demonstrates care, commitment 
and support contributing to the expectations these communities have about Europe and 
our willingness to help.’ 

Impact of EUAV 

In terms of impact, the majority of the respondents state that they see a strong impact on 
‘the personal development of the volunteers’ (91 %), on ‘the national volunteers in third 
countries’ (73 %) and the ‘image of the EU’ (73 %). There are lower levels of agreement 
on  the  initiative’s  impact  on  ‘disaster  preparedness  and  management’  (54 %)  and  on 
‘community disaster risk reduction’ (54 %), however a majority of the respondents still 
agree that the initiative provides benefits in these areas. 

Capacity building 

The majority of the respondents (54 %) are convinced that the capacity building of civil 
society  organisations  in  third  countries  organised  by  EUAV  helps  build  community 
resilience.  One  response  stated  with  respect  to  resilience  building:  ‘Most  civil  society 
organisations  in  the  third  world  countries  work  with  local  communities  —  grassroots 
therefore,  by  strengthening  CSOs  capacity  means  you  are  equally  contributing  to  the 
resilience of the local communities in those countries (e.g. local communities in Western 
Uganda which is characterised by flooding).’   

44 

 
Technical assistance 

The  majority  of  the  respondents  agree  (64 %)  that  ‘strengthening  civil  society 
organisations (CSOs) in the EU by providing technical assistance’ by EUAV contributes 
to  the  EU’s  humanitarian  response  capacity.  One  respondent  stated  with  respect  to 
EUAV  technical  assistance:  ‘It’s  a  combination  of  organisations  in  the  EU  and  the 
organisations in the countries the EU targets. More important is the deliverable that the 
EU-based  organisations  contribute  to  building  up  a  sustainable  environment  or 
framework  so  that  the  organisations  in  countries  are  not  continuously  depended  on 
knowledge and funding from their European peers.’ 

Respondents to the survey 

Altogether, 11 responses were received from 8 individual respondents and 3 responding 
organisations. 

  The majority of respondents are responding as individuals (73 % or 8 persons).  

45 

 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 3: FACTS & FIGURES 

1. 

Overview of funded EUAV capacity-building projects (2015-2017) 

46 

YearApplicantNumber of EU partnersNumber of third country partnersTotal partnersEU CountriesThird countriesTopics2015France Volontaires, France459France, Ireland, ItalyBangladesh, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Ecuador, PhilippinesVolunteering in Humanitarian Aid - Hosting Organisations2015Civil Protection, Italy7411Italy, Hungary, RomaniaKosovo, Albania, FYROMBalkans and Europe for development of resilience initiatives2015GVC, Italy459Italy, Germany, Hungary, SpainNicaragua, Burkina Faso, Burundi, HaitiMaximise the capacity of hosting organsiations to be involved and prepared to the EU Aid Volunteers programme2015Caritas, Austria3710Austria, Romania Czech RepublicThailand, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, MyanmarEuropean-Asian Partnership for Capacity Building in Humanitarian Action2015ICCO, Netherlands8513The Netherlands, Czech Republic, UK, Denmark, FinlandDemocratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Cambodia, Bangladesh, UgandaACT for humanitarian capacity development in the EU Aid Volunteers initiaitve2015ADICE, France31114France, Italy, EstoniaPeru, Bolivia, Ukraine, Palestinian Territory, Thailand, Ghana, India, Uganda, Nepal, KenyaPlatform on humanitarian aid for sustainable empowermentTotal 20152937662016ADICE, France3912France, Slovakia, HungaryAlbania, Morocco, Algeria, Georgia, SerbiaReinforecment and sustainability in humanitarian volunteering management2016La Guilde, France437France, Greece, IrelandMyanmar, Togo, PeruEU Aid Volunteers for you: Hosting OrganisationsTotal 2016712192017Caritas Austria3912Austria, Czech Republic, RomaniaBangladesh, India, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Myanmar, Indonesia, ThailandEuropean-Asian Partnership for Capacity Building in Humanitarian Action2017Movimiento por la Paz, Spain2810Spain, ItalyNicaragua, Guatemala, Colombia, JordanStrengthening organisational capacity for humanitarian volunteer management.2017DanChurchAid, Denmark235Denmark, GreeceKenya, Zambia, ZimbabweGender sensitive humanitarian aid volunteering2017VSO, UK2911UK, The NetherlandsEthiopia, Malawi, Sierra Leone, Nepal, Bangladesh, Philippines, Kenya, Uganda, CambodiaBuilding capacity in Asia and Africa for preparedness and better humanitarian effectiveness through local engagement and volunteering2017Engineers without Borders, Denmark369Denmark, Sweden, SlovakiaNepal, Norway, TanzaniaPlatform for technical humanitarian capacity building2017Alianza por los Derechos, Spain31720Spain, Greece, ItalyHaiti, El Salvador, Guatemala, Colombia, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Peru, CubaDevelopment of capacities for the creation of livelihoods, legal protection, health and psychological support for migrants in Central America2017Medicos Del Mundo, Spain5914Spain, Belgium, UK, The Netherlands, SwedenMorocco, Ukraine, Burkina Faso, Benin, Mauritania, Nicaragua, HondurasCapacity Building for participation in the EU Aid Volunteers initiative2017Civil Protection, Italy9514Italy, Hungary, RomaniaSerbia, MontenegroVolunteer-based international on line asset2017GVC, Italy41115Italy, SpainPalestinian Territory, Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Syria, MauritaniaCommunity-based protecion approach to build resilience and LRRD2017Accion Contra el Hambre, Spain3811Spain, ItalyGuatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, HondurasDevelopment of capacities for the creation of livelihoods, legal protection, health and psychological support for migrants in Central America2017Catholic Agency for Overseas Development21214UK, FranceTogo, Liberia, Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Sierea Leone, USA, SwitzerlandPreparing for emergencies by strengthening organisational procedures, learning and exchange2017Croix-Rouge, France246France, BelgiumBurkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Guinea, LebanonCapacity building for volunteer management and disaster management.2017Associazione Solidarieta Paesi Emergenti, Italy3710Italy, France, SpainMorocco, Peru, Bolivia, Indonesia, Ghana, IndiaEuropean Volunteers in Humanitarian Aid2017France Volontaires, France336France, ItalyTunisia, Moroco, MauritaniaCapacity building for resilience of oasisTotal 201746111157Grand Total82160242Note: not all partners receive funding; some are associated with the project 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2. 

Overview of funded EUAV technical assistance projects (2015-2017) 

47 

YearApplicantNumber of partnersfrom EU CountriesTopics2015La Guilde, France10France, Greece, Ireland, Latvia, Italy, UK, Hungary, Cyprus, SloveniaVolunteering in humanitarian aid - Sending Organisations2015Alianza por los Derechos, Spain4Spain, Hungary, Italy, UKBringing the value of volunteers and CSO to EU humanitarian response: achieving high-quality standards, outreach to EU citizens reinforcing our civil society capacities to respond to humanitarian crises.2015Concern Worldwide, Ireland3Ireland, France, Czech RepublicStrengthening Human Resource capacity for volunteer management and humanitarian response.2015Polish Humanitarian Aid, Poland5Poland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, EstoniaTechnical Assistance for humanitarian aid organisations from Central Eastern Europe to enable efficient deployment of volunteersTotal 2015222016La Guilde, France6France, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, MaltaEU Aid Volunteers for you: Sending Organisatins2016Medicos del Mundo, Spain6Spain, Greece, UK, The Netherlands, Sweden, BelgiumDeveloping technical structures for aid volunteerism - MDM2016GVC, Italy10Italy, Estonia, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, Latvia, Hungary, Slovenia, LithuaniaMore and better EU Aid Volunteers: enhancing technical capacity of European organisations and improving opportunities for EU Citizens to participate in humanitarian aid actionsTotal 2016222017Danish Refugee Council, Denmark4Denmark, UK, The NetherlandsEuropean Diaspora Volunteers - Technical Assistance for diaspora humanitarian organisations2017Alianza por los Derechos, Spain7Spain, Greece, Italy, Romania, UKMore to care: encouraging certification and strengthening EUAV management capacities of European Sending Organisations2017Federation International des Sociétés de la Croix-Rouge et du Croissant Rouge, Switzerland5Switzerland, Italia, Bulgaria, The Netherlands, AustriaEnhancing Aid Capacities2017Caritas, Austria6Austria, Belgium, UK, Czech Republic, Romania, IrelandEUAV TEACH - Assistance for Caritas Organisations in Humanitarian AidTotal 201722Grand Total66 
 
 
 
 
 
3. 

Overview of certified sending organisations active / not active in deployment (2015-

2017) 

48 

OrganisationCountryFPA2015201620171Acción Contra El HambreESFPAnot activenot activeactive2ACTEDFRFPAactiveactivenot active3Action Contre la FaimFRFPAnot activenot activenot active4Actionaid HellasEL--not activeactiveactive5ADICEFR-not activenot activeactive6Alianza por los DerechosESFPAactiveactiveactive7ASPEM (Associazione Solidarieta Paesi Emergenti)IT--not activenot activeactive8Caritas AustriaATFPAnot activenot activeactive9Concern WorldwideIEFPAactiveactivenot active10DanChurchAidDKFPAnot activeactivenot active11Debreceni Egyetem Kulonleges OrvosHU--not activenot activenot active12Diakonia CCECZ--not activeactivenot active13Doctors of the WorldUK--not activenot activeactive14Esi LabsLV--not activenot activenot active15Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW)DEFPAnot activenot activenot active16Finn Church AidFIFPAnot activeactivenot active17Finnish Red CrossFIFPAnot activenot activenot active18FOCSIVIT--not activenot activenot active19France VolontairesFR--not activenot activenot active20German Red CrossDEFPAnot activenot activenot active21GondwanaIT--not activenot activenot active22Gruppo di Voluntariato CivileITFPAactiveactiveactive23ICCONLFPAnot activeactivenot active24Magyar Önkénetesküldö AlapitvanyHU--not activenot activeactive25Medecins du MondeBEFPAnot activenot activeactive26Medicos Del MundoESFPAnot activenot activeactive27MondoEE--not activenot activeactive28Movimento por la Paz - MPDLESFPAnot activenot activenot active29Pan Cyprian Volunteerism Coordination CouncilCY--not activenot activenot active30People in Need (Clovek V Tisni Ops)CZFPAactiveactivenot active31The European GuildFR--activeactivenot active32The Organisation for Poverty Alleviation and DevelopmentSE--not activenot activenot active33TrócaireIEFPAnot activenot activeactive34Voluntary Service OverseasUK--not activenot activenot active35Voluntary Service OverseasNL--not activenot activenot active36Zavod VoluntariatSI--not activenot activenot activeactive in deployment 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
4. 

Figure 4: Overview of training modules for candidate volunteers 

49 

Training: Modules -Candidates shallattend all mandatory modules and one or more optional modules                                                     (the Sending Organisations identifies the training needs during the selection process) MandatoryModules forall CandidatesOptional Modules basedon specificlearningneedsIntroduction to the EU, its external relations and crisis response system.0.5 daysIntroduction to humanitarian action, the EU humanitarian aid policy and the EU Aid Volunteers initiative. –1.5 daysManaging personal safety, security and health.1.5 daysProject management (level 1 & 2).1.5 daysInter-cultural awareness (and transversal issues).1 dayA scenario-based simulation exercise requiring candidate volunteers to demonstrate acquired competences–3 daysAdvocacy and communication.1 dayPsychological first aid.1 dayTraining of multipliers.2 daysVolunteer management.1 dayTailor-made modules, where necessary, in particular related to adapting the technical competences of candidate volunteers to a humanitarian aid context. Organisational development.2 days 
 
 
ANNEX 4: INTERVENTION LOGIC EU AID VOLUNTEERS 

50 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 5: LIST OF EVALUATION QUESTIONS 

The evaluation is based on the following evaluation questions: 

1.  To what extent was the Initiative relevant? 

Issues to consider are, e.g.: 

a.  Fit  between  the  objectives  of  the  Initiative  and  the  needs  of  end-
beneficiaries (targeted, local communities), DG ECHO’s partners (sending 
and hosting organisations), and volunteers. 

b.  Fit  between  the  objectives  and  the  types  of  action  funded  under  the 
Initiative. Does the implementation during the evaluation period leave any 
particular gaps to be addressed in the coming period? 

c.  Fit between the profiles and skill sets of selected volunteers and the needs 

of hosting organisations. 

2.  To what extent was the Initiative coherent with related EU activities, particularly 
under the Humanitarian Aid, Development, and Civil Protection instruments? 

3.  To what extent did the Initiative provide an EU Added Value? 

Issues  to  consider  are  e.g.  how  the  Commission  has  drawn  on  its  specific  role  and 
mandate to create a specific added value, which could/would not be achieved by Member 
States  and  other  actors.  This  includes  examining  the  added  value  of  the  Initiative 
compared to other, existing volunteering initiatives. 

4.  To what extent was the Initiative effective? 

a.  To  what  extent  have 

the 
implementation  of  the  actions  (covering  both  pre-deployment  and 
deployment)? 

the  objectives  been  achieved 

through 

b.  To  what  extent  has  the  communication  strategy  contributed  to  generate 
increased public awareness of the Initiative and the EU’s role in the field 
of humanitarian aid? 

c.  To what extent has the Initiative reached new organisations that have not 
previously worked with the Commission, and promoted new partnerships 
between organisations? 

d.  To what extent have efforts to increase awareness of funding opportunities 
under  this  new  Initiative  translated  into  more  organisations  becoming 
ready to respond to calls for deployment of volunteers? 

e.  To  what  extent  has  the  EU  Aid  Volunteers  Platform  been  useful  for  the 
organisation  of  the  recruitment  process  and  the  subsequent  project 
management? 

f.  To  what  extent  were  the  safety  procedures  and  security  of  volunteers  a 
priority issue for the overall Initiative and in each project? What lessons 

51 

 
can  be  learnt  for  security  standards  and  duty  of  care  for  EU  Aid 
Volunteers? 

g.  To what extent have trans-European partnerships, as required by the Calls 
for  Proposals,  contributed  to  the  effectiveness  and  efficiency  of  the 
Initiative? 

5.  To what extent was the Initiative efficient? 

a.  To  what  extent  has  the  contents  and  structure  of  the  set  of  reference 
documents put in place for the Initiative been appropriate for ensuring and 
facilitating a smooth implementation? 

b.  To  what  extent  was  the  monitoring  framework  (including  the  relevant 
provisions  of  the  Regulation)  applied  by  the  Commission  and  the 
Executive Agency efficient, and satisfying the monitoring needs? 

c.  To  what  extent  did  the  processes  put  in  place  by  the  Commission  and 
EACEA  ensure  cost-effectiveness  and  a  smooth  implementation  of  the 
Initiative,  whilst  conforming  to  the  requirements  of  the  reference 
documents for the operation of Initiative? 

d.  To  what  extent  was  the  allocated  budget  so  far  appropriate  to  what  the 
Initiative  was  set  out  to  achieve  given  the  need  to  establish  the 
implementation  framework,  including  a  pipeline  of  eligible  certified 
organisations to manage deployment of volunteers?    

52