REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS assessing the implementation and achievements of the 2014 – 2020 rights, equality and citizenship programme
Date: 2022-03-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, European citizenship, area of freedom, security and justice, children's rights, civil society, consumer protection, data protection, equal treatment, gender equality, human rights

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 22.3.2022  COM(2022) 118 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS assessing the implementation and achievements of the 2014 – 2020 rights, equality and citizenship programme  {SWD(2022) 58 final} - {SWD(2022) 59 final}  
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND 
THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND 
THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

assessing the implementation and achievements of the 2014 – 2020 rights, equality and 
citizenship programme 

The  rights,  equality  and  citizenship  programme  ('the  REC  programme')  aimed  to  further 
develop  a  Europe  of  rights  and  equality  in  accordance  with  the  Europe  2020  strategy.  It 
promoted  the  key  values  upon  which  the  European  Union  is  founded  and  contributed  to 
further developing an area where equality and the rights of persons, as enshrined in the Treaty 
of the European Union, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and international human rights 
conventions, are promoted, protected and effectively implemented. 

This  report  sets  out  the  results  obtained  by  the  programme,  in  line  with  the  obligation  in 
Article 13.2(c) of the programme's legal base1 (‘the Regulation’). The Regulation requires the 
European Commission  to  provide the European  Parliament and the Council with  an  ex post 
evaluation report for the programme by 31 December 2021. This report must assess the long-
term  impact  and  the  sustainability  of  the  programme's  effects,  with  a  view  to  informing  a 
decision on any subsequent programme. In 2021, however, a considerable number of projects 
(more than 40%) remained ongoing due to their multiannual life-span. This situation has been 
exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has caused the extension of the duration of 
several projects. Therefore a comprehensive evaluation of the programme's long-term results 
and impacts may only be possible at a later stage. 

For  these  reasons,  the  ex  post  evaluation  will  be  carried  out  in  two  parts.  This  report 
represents the first part of the evaluation. It is based on the data currently available, provides 
an overview of how the funding is distributed and assesses the programme’s achievements to 
date.  While  the  new  citizens,  equality,  rights  and  values  programme  for  2021-2027 
(hereinafter ‘CERV programme’) has already been adopted, based on, among other things, the 
results  of  the  interim  evaluation  of  the  2014-2020  REC  programme,  this first  part  of  the  ex 
post evaluation of the previous programme will shed light on potential areas for improvement 
as regards implementing the new CERV programme. 

The  second  part  of  the  evaluation  will  be  carried  out  at  a  later  stage  once  all  final  data  are 
available and in conjunction with the interim evaluation of the succeeding CERV programme. 
This second part will assess the long-term impacts and the sustainability of the programme’s 
effects.  It  will  provide  recommendations  for  the  new  multiannual  financial  framework  after 
2027, as appropriate.  

Although this report analyses all of the annual work programmes from 2014 to 2020, not all 
activities  had  started  at  the  time  of  this  evaluation.  Therefore,  a  cut-off  date  of  31/12/2020 
was set, so as to define the scope of this report. The second part of the ex post evaluation will 
complete the overview by analysing the remaining activities. 
This report is based on the findings of the evaluation2 prepared by the European Commission, 
supported by a contractor. 

1 Regulation (EU) No 1381/2013 of 17 December 2013 establishing a rights, equality and citizenship programme 
for the period 2014 to 2020, (OJ L 354, 28.12.2013). 
2 Commission staff working document accompanying the report on the evaluation of the implementation of the 
rights, equality and citizenship programme 2014-2020. 

1 

 
 
                                                           
1.  INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 

The  2014-2020  REC  programme  replaced  the  programmes  in  force  in  the  2007-2013 
programming  period,  namely  the  Daphne  III  programme,  the  fundamental  rights  and 
citizenship programme and two of the policy areas of the progress programme3, namely ‘anti-
discrimination’ and ‘gender equality’. 

The  REC  programme  was  set  up  by  European  Parliament  and  Council  Regulation  (EU) 
No 1381/2013. 

The Regulation sets its general objective as: 

 

contribute to the further development of an area where equality and the rights of persons 
as  enshrined  in  the  TEU,  in  the  TFEU,  in  the  Charter  and  in  the  international  human 
rights  conventions  to  which  the  Union  has  acceded,  are  promoted,  protected  and 
effectively implemented. 

Its specific objectives are to: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

promote the effective implementation of the principle of non-discrimination on grounds 
of sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation and 
to respect the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds provided for in Article 21 
of the Charter; 

prevent and combat racism, xenophobia, homophobia and other forms of intolerance; 

promote and protect the rights of persons with disabilities; 

promote equality between women and men and to advance gender mainstreaming; 

prevent  and  combat  violence  against  children,  young  people  and  women,  and  other 
groups at risk; 

promote and protect the rights of the child; 

contribute to ensuring the highest level of protection of privacy and personal data; 

promote and enhance the exercise of rights deriving from EU citizenship; 

enable individuals in their capacity as consumers or entrepreneurs in the internal market 
to  enforce  their  rights  deriving  from  Union  law,  having  regard  to  the  projects  funded 
under the consumer programme. 

The programme is implemented by the European Commission via direct management. 

In terms of geographical coverage, all EU Member States were eligible to participate in the 
programme and, for selected objectives, Liechtenstein, Iceland, and Serbia were also eligible.  

3 European Commission (2015), ex post evaluation of five programmes implemented under the 2007-2013 
financial perspective – final report. Specific programme evaluation: Daphne programme, 
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants1/files/expost_evaluations_2007_2013/daphne_programme_evaluation__final_r
eport.pdf; Specific programme evaluation: Fundamental Rights and Citizenship, 
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/grants1/files/expost_evaluations_2007_2013/frc_programme_evaluation_final_report.
pdf; ex post evaluation of the programme for employment and social solidarity – PROGRESS 2007-2013 and 
recommendations for the successor programmes to PROGRESS 2014-2020 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=12610&langId=en. 

2 

 
 
                                                           
2.  KEY ELEMENTS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAMME 

In  line  with  Article  5  of  the  Regulation,  the  programme  supported  a  wide  range  of 
activities, including analytical activities, mutual learning, cooperation, awareness-raising and 
dissemination  activities,  training  activities,  the  development  of  tools  such  as  training 
kits/material/curricula,  and  actions  to  implement  its  specific  objectives.  The  programme 
supported  organisations  active  in  the  area  of  social  and  fundamental  rights  across  Europe, 
including:  European  networks;  public  or  private  organisations  usually  non-profit-oriented; 
national, regional and local authorities in EU Member States; civil society organisations; and 
international organisations.  

The general public in participating countries is also a target group (groups that would benefit 
either  directly,  by  participating  in  the  programme's  activities,  or  indirectly,  from  the 
programme  being  implemented),  since  the  programme's  objectives  and  initiatives  aim  to 
promote, protect and implement effectively equality and people's  rights, in particular people 
who face discrimination, intolerance or violence, including migrants and minorities.  

As  provided  for  by  the  Regulation,  the  programme  used  action  grants,  operating  grants  and 
procurement actions as the main funding mechanisms.  

2.1. The programme’s specific objectives  

Specific objective 1: Promote non-discrimination  

The programme supported projects to prevent and to combat discrimination on the grounds of 
sex,  racial  or  ethnic  origin,  religion  or  belief,  disability,  age  or  sexual  orientation.  A 
particularly  key  area  within  this  objective  is  the  promotion  of  Roma  integration.  In  this 
regard, the REC programme supported the national Roma platforms and worked closely with 
EU Member States and their national Roma contact points and with civil society organisations 
working  in  the  field  of  non-discrimination  and  Roma  integration.  The  programme  also 
financed the activities of the European network of equality bodies. This network's core task is 
the  strengthening  of  cooperation  and  exchange  of  information  on  topics  relating  to  non-
discrimination between the national equality bodies designated by the Member States. 

Specific  objective  2:  Prevent  and  combat  racism,  xenophobia,  homophobia  and  other 
forms of intolerance  

Projects  financed  in  this  area  contributed  to  the  better  implementation  of  existing  EU 
legislation in the Member States and to combating hate crime and hate speech. In particular, 
the  activities  funded  supported  the  protection  of  minorities  against  a  surge  of  populism, 
extremism and intolerance. 

Specific objective 3: Promote the rights of persons with disabilities  

The aim of this specific objective was to increase awareness and improve implementation of 
the rights of people with disabilities, reducing barriers to their full participation in society and 
enjoyment of their rights. This was mostly done through operating grants supporting activities 
by European level networks advocating for the rights of people with disabilities, and through 
procurement  activities  focusing  on  data  collection,  training  and  awareness-raising  activities. 
The 2014 annual  work programme  supported the launch of  the European  Disability Card in 
order to facilitate cross-border travel for persons with disabilities. 

Specific objective 4: Promote equality between women and men  

The programme financed projects to support participating countries and relevant stakeholders 
in  improving  gender  balance  in  all  spheres  of  life,  especially  in  economic  decision-making, 

3 

 
and  promoting  the  equal  economic  independence  of  women  and  men.  Funding  under  this 
objective also focused on reducing the gender gaps in pay, earnings and pensions. 

Specific  objective  5:  Prevent  and  combat  violence  against  children,  young  people  and 
women, and other groups at risk  

The  programme  primarily  financed  projects  which  help  to  protect  and  support  victims  of 
violence, such as women and children, and activities to raise awareness and prevent violence, 
engaging  with  civil  society  organisations  working  on  the  ground.  It  also  supported  the 
treatment  of  perpetrators  of  violence.  Strengthening  child  protection  systems  is  one  of  the 
Commission's  priorities,  and  the  programme  supported  the  rights  of  migrant  children  by 
funding international organisations working directly for and with these children.  

Specific objective 6: Promote the rights of the child  

The rights of the child are promoted through projects focusing on child-friendly justice and on 
the  protection  of  vulnerable  children  (such  as  children  leaving  foster  care  systems  and 
children  in  conflict  with  the  law),  by  supporting  training  activities  for  civil  servants,  civil 
society organisations and lawyers working with them. 

Specific objective 7: Protect privacy and personal data  

The programme is the EU main funding source with regard to data protection. The activities 
carried out within this specific objective were strongly linked with the data protection reform, 
adopted  in  2016.  Under  this  objective,  the  programme  financed  activities  to  support,  in 
particular, the transposition and implementation of the new EU data protection legislation by 
the Member States and the training of data protection authorities and data protection officers. 

Specific objective 8: EU citizenship  

The  programme  financed  projects,  mostly  awareness-raising  activities,  to  support  the 
inclusion of EU citizens in the civic and political life of the EU.  These included projects to 
help  citizens  become  more  aware  of  their  rights  deriving  from  EU  citizenship.  Information 
campaigns  on  EU  citizenship  rights  were  financed  under  this  specific  objective,  with  a 
particular focus on electoral rights, in view of the 2019 European elections. 

Specific objective 9: Consumers' or entrepreneurs' rights  

The programme also financed activities to support individuals in their capacity as consumers 
or entrepreneurs in the single market, in order to enforce their rights deriving from  EU law. 
EU  funds  in  this  area  aim  to  help  increase  knowledge  and  awareness  of  consumers'  rights, 
especially in the digital market. 

4 

 
2.2. Budget 

The  table  1  below  shows  the  budget  annual  allocations,  amounting  to  EUR 426.8 m  for  the 
entire programming period. The amounts increased every  year from EUR 54.2 m in 2014 to 
EUR 67.9 m in 2020.  

Table 1. Budget amount planned by year 

Budget Year 
2014 
2015 
2016 
2017 
2018 
2019 
2020 
Total 

Amount planned (EUR) 
54 158 000 
56 323 637 
58 852 000 
62 515 000 
62 282 000 
64 771 000 
67 913 000 
426 814 637 

Annual increase (%) 
- 
4.0% 
4.5% 
6.2% 
-0.4% 
4.0% 
4.9% 

Source: annual work programmes 2014-2020 

The  biggest  proportion  of  the  programme's  budget  (25%)  was  allocated  to  the  specific 
objective  to  ‘prevent  violence  (Daphne)’.  The  specific  objective  with  the  second  largest 
budget  allocation was the  one to  promote non-discrimination (22%).  The full distribution is 
available in table 2 below. 

Table 2. Specific objectives and the amounts planned 

Specific Objective  

Budget (EUR) 

Share  

Prevent violence against children, young people, women and 
other groups at risk (Daphne)   
Promote non-discrimination  

Prevent and combat racism, xenophobia, homophobia and other 
forms of intolerance  
Promote equality between women and men and gender 
mainstreaming  
Promote rights of persons with disabilities  

Promote the rights of the child  

Promote the rights deriving from EU citizenship  

Ensure the highest level of data protection  

Enforce consumer rights  

Total  

Source: 2014-2020 annual work programmes  

2.3. Implementation 

109 835 157 

93 294 280 

56 321 000 

50 066 000 

44 034 000 

31 740 200 

19 571 000 

11 783 000 

10 170 000 

426 814 637 

25.73% 

21.86% 

13.20% 

11.73% 

10.32% 

7.44% 

4.59% 

2.76% 

2.38% 

100% 

A total of 81 calls for proposals were planned in the 2014-2020 period. The largest number 
of these calls covered the specific objective to ‘prevent violence (Daphne)’, with 18 calls. As 
the  specific  objective  on  ‘consumers'  rights’  was  funded  through  procurement  only,  there 
were no calls for proposals relating to this. Overall, 942 action grants and operating grants 
were awarded throughout the duration of the programme. 

The biggest proportion of activities funded by REC projects between 2016 and 2020 can be 
classified as ‘training activities’ (35%). 

5 

 
 
Figure 1. Types of activities funded by year (2016-2020)4 

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Others

ICT tools

Mutual learning

Analytical and monitoring activities

Awareness rising and dissemination

Training

Note: Vertical axis measures the number of activities. Projects can be assigned to more than one type of activity. Data before 
introduction of e-grants in 2016 was in a different format and could not be used for this analysis. 

Source: Project documents by DG JUST (Action grants and Operating grants). 

Non-profit organisations accounted for the majority of beneficiaries in the 2016-2020 period 
(57%)5. 

Procurement  was  an  important  funding  mechanism  for  a  number  of  specific  objectives, 
amounting  to  a  total  of  345  contracts  over  the  entire  period.  ‘Racism  and  other  forms  of 
intolerance’ was the specific objective which most heavily used this funding option, with 112 
procurement contracts over the period.  

In total, approximately EUR 81 million were allocated to procurement contracts and services. 
The most common type of procurement was for analytical and monitoring activities. 

According to the data collected, in 2014-2015 the group most targeted for support was young 
people (including children), followed by women and students. In 2016-2020, the granularity 
of  the  target  groupings  increased  and  professionals  became  the  group  most  targeted  for 
support,  followed  by  women  and  children.  Other  significant  groups  are  EU  citizens,  young 
people and communities. 

2.4. The programme's main achievements 

The introduction of a system of indicators for the REC programme was helpful for measuring 
its achievements. Article 14 of the REC Regulation lists indicators which serve as a basis for 
monitoring and evaluation.  

The data collected from project reports shows that between 2016 and 2020, at least 80 million 
people were reached by information and dissemination campaigns or took part in awareness-
raising events. This figure includes various target groups, of which the most numerous are the 
general  public  (approximately  46  million);  followed  by  EU  citizens  (approx.  19  million); 
women (approx. 4 million); and the scientific community, civil society, policymakers, media 

4 Data for 2014-2015 are not available. 
5 Data for 2014-2015 are not available. 

6 

 
 
 
                                                           
(approx.  3  million);  individuals  belonging  to  the  LGBT  community  (approx.  1  million)  and 
representing businesses/companies (approx. 1 million). 

In addition, approximately 85 000 individuals participated in exchange and mutual learning 
events, and at least 1.5 million individuals took part in training activities.  

Based on the evidence available, increased knowledge and awareness of stakeholders and 
end beneficiaries is by far the most reported result, mentioned by 78% of projects for which 
a  technical  report  was  available.  This  is  in  line  with  the  programme's  intervention  logic:  it 
intends to trigger a behavioural change in society, for which awareness-raising is crucial.   

645  cross-border  tools  and  mechanisms  continued  after  the  projects  had  ended,  including 
formal advisory groups, memorandums of cooperation/cooperation agreements, and networks. 

Over the course of its implementation period, the REC programme received a large number of 
applications (4 903). Approximately five applications were received for each grant awarded. 
Overall, the average success rate of receiving a grant in the REC programme was 17%. 
Projects were not  equally  distributed across the  Member States.  The main reason for this is 
that  some  countries  submitted  particularly  large  numbers  of  applications.  It  is  important  to 
emphasise  that  the  operating  grants,  which  mainly  fund  EU-wide  networks,  guaranteed  fair 
geographic coverage at EU level.   

Along  with  the  indicators  set  out  in  the  Regulation,  several  additional  indicators  have  been 
developed to measure the programme's achievements. 

Although data are only partially available at the time of writing, the achievement of the 2020 
targets  for  most  of  the  indicators  in  relation  to  the  programme's  general  objective6,  seems 
challenging,  given that  Europe is  exiting a long financial  recession, exacerbated in  2020 by 
the COVID-19 crisis. Only the target for the indicator on ‘the percentage of Europeans who 
consider themselves as “well” or “very well” informed of the rights they enjoy as citizens of 
the Union’ has been achieved, well before 2020. 

Several additional indicators have been used to evaluate the programme's performance at the 
level  of  individual  specific  objectives.  The  data  available  so  far  show  that  the  targets  for 
several indicators have been achieved or exceeded7. 
In relation to the baseline situation,  described in the 2011 impact assessment8 and the 2015 ex 
post  evaluation  of  the  three  predecessor  programmes  (Daphne  III,  fundamental  rights  and 
citizenship  and  progress)9,  the  evidence  shows  that  almost  all  difficulties  identified  at  that 
time  have  been  overcome  in  the  REC  programme,  except  for  the  persisting  geographical 
imbalance. 

6 To contribute to the further development of an area, where equality and the rights of persons (as enshrined in 
the  Treaty  on  European  Union,  in  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  in  the  Charter  of 
Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the international human rights conventions to which the EU 
has acceded) are promoted, protected and effectively implemented.  
7 Such as ‘Share of the population considering themselves as well or very well informed of the rights they enjoy 
as citizens of the Union’, ‘Level of consumer confidence in cross-border shopping’, ‘Percentage of people that 
consider that domestic violence against women is unacceptable’. 
8 SEC(2011) 1364 Final, ibid. 
9 European Commission (2015), ex post evaluation of five programmes implemented under the 2007-2013 
financial perspective – final report, ibid.  

7 

 
 
                                                           
3.  RESULTS OF EVALUATION 

3.1. Effectiveness  

Based  on  qualitative  evidence  collected,  the  implementation  of  the  REC  programme  was 
effective and contributed to the achievement of its overall objectives. In particular, its success 
was  due  to  the  quality  of  most  of  the  projects,  allowing  the  implementation  of  targeted 
actions such as awareness campaigns, training and training courses, publication of materials, 
research and relevant data. Both desk research and fieldwork show that  almost all finalised 
projects have achieved the expected results. 

The  activities  and  achievements  of  all  projects  sampled  were  directly  relevant  to  the 
programme's  specific  objectives.  Overall,  the  evidence  gathered  suggests  that  the  REC 
programme has contributed to increasing knowledge of EU soft and hard law.  

A complex interplay of internal and external factors supported and hindered the programme's 
delivery. Internal factors mainly relate to difficulties linked with the application process,  the 
internal  capacity  of  project  partners,  and  the  type  and  quality  of  the  project  consortium. 
Common  external  factors  relate  to  the  impact  of  external  shocks  such  as  the  COVID-19 
pandemic  and  the  challenge  of  involving  public  entities  and  stakeholders  in  the  activities 
planned.  

The  analysis  found  that  the  success  factors  in  REC  projects  include  the  quality  of 
partnerships,  bringing  together  organisations  with  complementary  expertise,  covering 
managerial  and  coordination  skills  with  experience  of  working  with  target  groups  on  the 
ground. Another element of success is the capacity of the projects to respond to the aims of 
the calls while also pursuing the longer-term strategies of the implementing organisations.  

3.2. Efficiency 

Existing  qualitative  evidence  demonstrates  that  the  benefits  of  projects’  implementation 
outweigh the costs and, in this sense, efficiency was achieved. However, the costs linked to 
the administrative burden are still considered an issue by beneficiaries, especially  in relation 
to application and reporting procedures. While most beneficiaries identified the administrative 
burden as an important cost component, they also recognised that burdensome administrative 
requirements are legitimate when transparency and fairness in the use of public funding is at 
stake.  

REC administrative costs are perceived on average to be higher in comparison with other 
non-EU  alternatives  or  with  national  programmes.  National  and  international  funding 
instruments are considered to be less demanding when it comes to application and reporting 
requirements. 

In terms of benefits, the REC programme offers the possibility of working on a transnational 
level, sharing best practice and build relationships with consortium partners and strengthening 
internal capacity and expertise. There are also intangible gains such as a better reputation and 
increased  trustworthiness  of  their  organisation  as  a  result  of  participation  in  EU-funded 
projects.  

The  evaluation  identified  underspending  in  82%  of  the  projects  sampled.  While 
underspending  is  widespread  in  the  sample  analysed,  most  projects  interviewed  reported 
underspending  of  around  10-12%,  which  was  mainly  attributed  to  the  COVID-19  outbreak 
and the consequent halt in meetings and activities requiring a physical presence, which led to 
savings in  terms  of travel  and subsistence costs for physical meetings, workshops and other 
events. 

8 

 
to 

its  predecessors, 

Compared 
the  prompt 
adoption/publication  of  calls  published  under  the  REC  programme  and  the  predictability  of 
these.  Information  collected  through  interviews  with  recurring  beneficiaries  shows  that 
merging  the  predecessor  programmes  considerably  simplified  the  management  and 
implementation procedures. 

there  has  been  an 

improvement 

in 

3.3. Relevance 

The  needs  identified  at  the  time  the  REC  programme  regulation  was  adopted  are  still 
relevant to ensuring that equality and the rights enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental 
Rights  and  other  legally  binding  instruments  continue  to  being  promoted  across  the  EU. 
Furthermore,  the  programme  has  continued  to  adapt  to  the  emergence  of  new  needs  and 
threats, such as the increase in hate speech. 

The  analysis  also  confirmed  that  the  actions  implemented  under  the  REC  programme  are 
relevant to the needs of its stakeholders, such as improving the knowledge base, sharing best 
practice  through  mutual  learning,  capacity  building  and  structural  support  for  specific 
organisational structures. Furthermore, the programme was relevant in targeting the intended 
end beneficiaries – ultimately, EU public. This has been confirmed through several strands of 
evaluation evidence, such as the text mining analysis, a sampling of projects and stakeholder 
consultations.  

In  terms  of  the  programme's  ability  to  select  the  most  relevant  beneficiaries,  two  types  of 
beneficiaries were identified as being particularly relevant but at less likely to be involved: (i) 
public  authorities,  for  whom  obstacles  to  participation  are  mainly  traceable  to  a  lack  of 
administrative capacity and dedicated human resources; (ii) small grassroots organisations, for 
whom the application process is very complex and the requirement to secure co-financing is 
challenging.  

3.4. Coherence  

In  the  REC  programme,  the  calls  for  proposals  are  guided  by  the  specific  strategic 
developments and the EU priorities. In this way, the REC programme acted as a link across 
EU priorities, in line and coherent with other EU initiatives, such as the EU justice agenda for 
2020,  the  2016-2020  strategic  engagement  for  gender  equality,  the  2010-2020  European 
disability strategy, the list of actions by the Commission to advance LGBTI equality, and the 
EU  framework  for  national  Roma  integration  strategies  up  to  2020.  The  analysis  also 
indicates a certain level of coherence with national policies and developments at project level.  

3.5. EU added value 

The  EU  added  value  of  the  REC  programme  was  assessed  according  to  the  following  four 
criteria:  

1)  supporting implementation of EU law and raising awareness about the rights deriving 

from it;  

2)  increasing mutual trust among Member States and cross-border cooperation;  
3)  developing and disseminating best practice;  
4)  creating standards, practical tools and solutions that address EU-wide challenges.  

The  programme  was  successful  in  all  these  aspects,  thanks  to  its  transnational  nature.  The 
analysis identified additional elements of the EU added value of the programme:  

 

It represents an important source of financing, allowing the beneficiaries to implement 
additional projects addressing the challenges the REC programme was set up to tackle. 

9 

 
  Receiving  EU  funding  and  implementing  activities  under  the  umbrella  of  the  REC 
programme had positive consequences for the projects in terms of improved reputation 
and increased visibility that no national input could have developed. 

  REC programme was an important driver for innovation, since little national funding 

is available for testing innovative and transnational actions.  

  REC  programme  generated  a  scope  effect10,  by  broadening  the  actions  implemented 
by  the  beneficiaries  in  a  way  that  could  hardly  be  sustained  by  the  national  level 
interventions.  

Beneficiaries note that cross-border cooperation and transnational partnerships and networks, 
and mutual  learning among  partners are  key  results of their participation  in  the programme. 
The transnational dimension is particularly evident for beneficiaries of  operating grants, due 
to  their  European  remit;  their  activities  could  not  have  been  similarly  developed  through 
national or non-EU funding.  

3.6. Equity  

The  REC  programme's  resources  and  support  were  not  distributed  equally  across 
participating countries, and the distribution of REC resources focused on a small number of 
countries – foremost Italy, Belgium, Greece and Spain, from where the applicants apply more 
often.  However,  this  picture  changes  once  the  population  of  participating  countries  is  taken 
into  account,  as  some  smaller  countries  have  a  large  number  of  beneficiaries  compared  to 
their  population  (e.g.  Malta  and  Cyprus).  Furthermore,  there  was  quite  a  high  level  of 
participation in Romania and Bulgaria.  

Overall, programmed funding reaches different target groups in an equitable way, despite 
the  concentration  of  the  REC  programme  resources  on  three  specific  objectives.  Often  the 
same target groups were targeted across different specific objectives.  

Significant  financial  resources  were  dedicated  to  promoting  the  cross-cutting  priorities  of 
gender  equality,  children's  rights  and  the  rights  of  people  with  disabilities.  In  the 
implementation phase, the calls for proposals which focused on gender, rights of persons with 
disabilities  and  children’s  rights  were  mostly  those  organised  under  the  relevant  specific 
objectives. While there is good awareness of the importance of gender mainstreaming, there is 
a general lack of knowledge of good practice among the approved REC projects on the best 
approaches  to  address  gender  mainstreaming  in  activities  funded  outside  dedicated  projects. 
Beneficiaries  have  difficulty  in  formulating  a  gender  approach  when  developing  their 
application. 

3.7. Simplification  

The  recently  introduced  system  for  submitting  applications  (the  funding  &  tenders  portal) 
simplified the application process and improved the collection and aggregation of monitoring 
data.  The  beneficiaries  generally  positively  assess  the  new  IT  tools  developed  for  the 
application  and  for  grant  management  and  find  these  effective  and  easy  to  use.  The  trend 
toward  increased  digitalisation  is  clearly  viewed  as  a  positive  development,  although  there 
could  still  be  room  for  further  simplifying  the  process,  particularly  in  relation  to  the 
administrative burden regarding documentation required from applicants. 

10 Scope effect means ‘broadening existing actions by supporting groups or policy areas that would not have 
received such support otherwise’. 

10 

 
 
                                                           
4.  CONCLUSIONS AND WAY FORWARD 

The 2014-2020 REC programme was launched when the effects of the economic and financial 
crisis had led to a general reduction in the amount of national resources and funding available 
for  social  and  rights  issues.  In  this  dire  political  and  economic  context,  the  programme  has 
proven its EU added value and its crucial role in developing a European area of equality 
and rights. 

The REC programme continues to be relevant to the changing needs of stakeholders and EU 
public.  This  was  ensured  via  its  flexible  programming  nature,  including  the  annual 
prioritisation  of  emerging  policy  needs  and  issues,  and  dialogue  with  civil  society 
organisations.  

Overall,  based  on  the  qualitative  evidence  collected,  the  implementation  of  the  REC 
programme was effective and contributed to the achievement of the overall objectives. In 
particular,  this  was  due  to  the  quality  of  most  of  the  projects  implemented  with  REC 
funding, allowing the implementation of concrete actions, directly relevant to the changing 
needs on the ground.  

Both  desk  research  and  fieldwork  show  that  the  projects  were  largely  successful  in 
implementing  the  planned  activities  and  almost  all  finalised  projects  have  achieved  the 
expected results.  

Qualitative evidence collected by  the study  suggests that  benefits  of the REC  programme 
outweigh the costs. 
In relation to the baseline situation, described in the 2011 impact assessment11 and the 2015 ex 
post  evaluation  of  the  three  predecessor  programmes  (Daphne  III,  fundamental  rights  and 
citizenship  and  progress)12,  the  evaluation  evidence  shows  that  almost  all  difficulties 
identified at that time have been overcome in the REC programme, except for the persisting 
geographical imbalance. 

The  evaluation  also  identified  a  number  of  lessons  which  are  being  addressed  for  the  REC 
programme’s  successor,  the  CERV  programme,  in  particular  the  need  to  develop  a  more 
robust monitoring framework that systematically collects  information  on outputs and results 
achieved,  to  consider  further  measures  to  improve  geographical  balance,  to  apply  a  more 
result-oriented  approach, 
the  administrative  burden  for  applicants  and 
beneficiaries and to strengthen gender mainstreaming. 

to  decrease 

11 SEC(2011) 1364 Final, ibid. 
12 European Commission (2015), ex post evaluation of five programmes implemented under the 2007-2013 
financial perspective – final report, ibid.  

11