REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on the interim evaluation of the 2021-2027 European Solidarity Corps and final evaluation of the 2018-2020 European Solidarity Corps
Date: 2025-04-01
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: EU aid, EU programme, education policy, humanitarian aid, monitoring report, voluntary organisation, voluntary work, young person, youth employment, youth policy

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 1.4.2025  COM(2025) 144 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on the interim evaluation of the 2021-2027 European Solidarity Corps and final evaluation of the 2018-2020 European Solidarity Corps  {SWD(2025) 75 final}  
 
 
Contents 
1. 

2. 

3. 

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS ............................................................. 2 

PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION REPORT ............................................................................... 2 

IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................................................. 3 

The 2018-2020 European Solidarity Corps programme ............................................................... 3 

The 2021-2027 European Solidarity Corps programme ............................................................... 3 

4. 

MAIN EVALUATION RESULTS ................................................................................................. 4 

4.1  Relevance, coherence, effectiveness and efficiency – to what extent has the European 

Solidarity Corps been successful? ......................................................................................... 4 

4.2  EU added value – how has the European Solidarity Corps made a difference so far and to 

whom? .................................................................................................................................. 9 

5. 

6. 

RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................... 11 

WAY AHEAD ......................................................................................................................... 14 

1 

 
 
 
 
1.  INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF KEY FINDINGS 

The European Solidarity Corps is an EU programme that gives young people the opportunity 
to  help  build  a  more  inclusive  society,  support  vulnerable  people  and  respond  to  societal 
challenges. 

Launched  in  December  2016,  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  has  existed  as  its  own  EU-
funded  programme  since  October  20181.  Since  2022,  the  programme  has  also  funded 
volunteering projects supporting humanitarian aid operations worldwide. 

The evaluations at hand have found that the European Solidarity Corps addresses European 
society’s crucial needs, especially in fostering participation in democratic life and promoting 
inclusion  and  diversity.  The  programme  fosters  a  sense  of  community,  revitalising  local 
initiatives and promoting a broader global perspective. Participation contributes to improved 
personal,  professional  and  study  skills  and  social  and  civic  awareness.  The  programme 
includes young people facing a wide range of challenges and creates pan-European networks 
leading  to  long-term  partnerships  and  relationships.  The  programme  has  high  satisfaction 
rates  among  individual  participants,  and  participating  organisations  can  enrich  their 
professional skills and improve their organisational effectiveness. 

The main findings of the evaluation can be summarised as follows: 
•  The European Solidarity Corps responds  effectively  to  the evolving needs of European 

society, promoting social cohesion, individual development and inclusion. 

•  The  programme  benefits  individuals,  organisations  and  communities. Participants  grow 
personally  and  professionally,  leading  to  increased  civic  engagement.  Organisations 
benefit  from  better  project  management  and  inclusion  practices,  while    communities 
experience stronger social cohesion and intercultural understanding. 

•  The  programme  is  well  aligned  with  the  Commission’s  priorities  of  democratic 

participation, inclusion, diversity and environmental sustainability. 

•  Despite  its  remarkable  efficiency,  the  programme  faces  funding  constraints  due  to 
inflation and support for participants with fewer opportunities, which highlights the need 
for better budget alignment with the programme’s ambitions. 

2. 

 PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION REPORT   

In  line  with  Article  21(2)  of  Regulation  (EU)  2021/888  (the  ‘Regulation’),  the  European 
Commission  carried  out  a  mid-term  evaluation  of  the  current  European  Solidarity  Corps 
programme and the final evaluation of the 2018-2020 European Solidarity Corps programme. 
This evaluation was supported by an external study, consultations and findings from reports 
submitted by Member States and third countries associated to the programme (these reports 
describe  the  programme’s  implementation  and  impact).  The  evaluations  assessed  the 
programme’s effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, coherence and added value. 

1 Regulation (EU) 2018/1475 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 October 2018 laying down the legal 
framework of the European Solidarity Corps 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The  evaluation  has  confirmed  the  continued  relevance  of  the  programme  offering 
volunteering  opportunities  in  line  with  the  Commission’s  political  priorities  for  the  period 
2019-2024, including  democratic participation,  diversity, inclusion and sustainability. It  has 
also  identified  some  areas  for  improvement,  including:  (i)  improving  the  identification  of 
people  with  fewer  opportunities  to  facilitate  their  inclusion  in  the  programme;  (ii)  better 
aligning programme funding with its objectives; (iii) improving IT and monitoring tools; and 
(iv)  clarifying  in  more  detail  the  communication  on  the  purpose  of  the  humanitarian  aid 
strand. This report presents the main evaluation findings and proposed recommendations. The 
accompanying  staff  working  document  gives  details  on  the  findings,  consultations  and 
methodology. 

In line with the Regulation, the Commission will send the interim and final evaluation to the 
European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the 
Committee of the Regions. 

3.  IMPLEMENTATION 

The 2018-2020 European Solidarity Corps programme 

The 2018-2020 European Solidarity  Corps  programme had a budget  of  EUR 375.6 million, 
dedicated to volunteering, solidarity projects, traineeships and jobs for young people. By the 
end of 2020, the programme had created opportunities for more than 35 000 young people. 
The  programme  addressed  horizontal  priorities,  such  as  inclusion  and  climate  change,  and 
supported projects involving young people. 

European Solidarity Corps outputs in 2018-2020 

DESCRIPTION 

Total no. of participants 

Volunteering projects, 
participants 
Solidarity projects, 
participants 

Traineeships and jobs 
projects, participants 

Volunteering teams in high-
priority areas, participants 

Participants with fewer 
opportunities (%) 

2018 

2019 

2020 

Planned 
17 000 

Realised 
4 412 

Planned 
34 700 

Realised 
16 709 

Planned 
40 300 

Realised 
22 346 

8 400 

5 400 

3 200 

- 

2 694 

1 057 

139 

522 

24 600 

11 735 

28 900 

14 009 

6 200 

3 900 

- 

4 447 

208 

319 

7 300 

4 100 

- 

7 196 

503 

638 

25% 

35% 

25% 

42% 

25% 

42% 

The 2021-2027 European Solidarity Corps programme 

In the 2021-2027 period related to the current Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), the 
European Solidarity Corps focuses even more on volunteering and proposes humanitarian aid 
volunteering  in  non-EU  countries.  With  a  budget  of  EUR 1 009  million,  the  programme’s 
implementation  was  delayed  between  2021  and  2022  due  to  the  late  adoption  of  the 
Regulation in May 2021 and the post-COVID-19 effects. As a result, the performance targets 

3 

 
 
 
 
set  in  the  Programme  Performance  Statement2  were  adjusted  in  2023  from  270 000  to 
185 000 participants. The programme has built on the achievements of its predecessor in its 
first years and on the EU Aid Volunteers initiative. 

The first year of the latest MFF was challenging and complex. Along with the late adoption 
of  the  programme’s  regulation  and  work  programme  as  well  as  the  COVID-19  pandemic, 
there were unexpected and exceptional challenges in 2022 due to Russia’s war of aggression 
against Ukraine and the impact of rising inflation. The programme quickly adopted flexibility 
measures to allow projects to refocus, on a voluntary basis, parts of their activities to provide 
short-term  support  to  Ukraine  and  its  population.  Inflation  was  also  addressed  through  an 
adjustment of unit rates. 

European Solidarity Corps outputs in 2021-2023 

DESCRIPTION 

Total no. of participants 

Solidarity projects, participants 
Volunteering projects, participants 
Volunteering teams in high-priority 
areas, participants 
Humanitarian aid volunteering, 
participants 

Participants with fewer opportunities 
(%) 

Organisations that have received a 
quality label for volunteering in 
solidarity activities 
Organisations that have received a 
quality label for humanitarian aid 
volunteering 

2021 

2022 

2023 

Planned 
25 000 

9 000 
15 000 

1 000 

Realised 
18 112 

5 164 
11 648 

1 300 

0 

0 

34% 

35% 

Planned 
27 223 

9 700 
16 200 

1 000 

323 

30% 

Realised 
25 147 

7 418 
16 016 

1 384 

329 

35% 

2 000 

2 178 

2 100 

504 

- 

100 

100 

40 

Planned 
25 606 

9 100 
15 200 

1 000 

Realised 
20 403 

3 813 
14 404 

1 837 

306 

30% 

390 

40 

349 

40% 

258 

30 

4.  MAIN EVALUATION RESULTS 

Based  on  the  Commission’s  Better  Regulation  Guidelines3,  the  evaluation  draws  on  the 
evidence provided by an external study. The period covered was 2018-2020 for the previous 
programme  and  2021-2023  for  the  current  one.  The  evaluation  shows  an  overall  positive 
assessment  across  all  evaluation  criteria  and  supports  the  continued  implementation  of  the 
European Solidarity Corps. 

4.1 Relevance, coherence, effectiveness and efficiency – to what extent has the 

European Solidarity Corps been successful? 

Relevance 

The European Solidarity Corps is highly relevant to the evolving needs of European society. 
The  programme  fosters  a  diverse  range  of  volunteering  opportunities  aligned  with  the 

2 EU (2024), European Solidarity Corps Performance, https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/eu-
budget/performance-and-reporting/programme-performance-statements/european-solidarity-corps-performance_en#mff-
2014-2020--european-solidarity-corps  
3 https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/planning-and-proposing-law/better-regulation-why-and-how/better-
regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox_en 

4 

 
 
 
 
Commission’s political priorities for the period 2019-2024, such as democratic participation, 
inclusion, diversity and sustainability. 

The programme also demonstrates a firm commitment to adapting its priorities to meet urgent 
societal  needs,  as  seen  by  its  swift  response  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  other  crises. 
However,  there  is  room  for  improvement  in  ensuring  a  balanced  geographical  spread  of 
participants and expanding the involvement of young people with fewer opportunities. 

Relevance of European Solidarity Corps horizontal priorities according to participants 

Integration and diversity, including asylum seekers and
migrants (N=8 257)

8%

Participation in democratic life (N=8 258)

9%

Responding to environmental and climate challenges,
including disaster prevention, preparedness and recovery
(N=8 261)

9%

46%

46%

46%

47%

45%

44%

Digital transformation (N=8 221)

14%

53%

33%

To little or no extent

To some extent

To a very large or large extent

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Source: Survey of individual participants. Question 102 ‘The European Solidarity Corps has several priorities. In your view, to what extent 
do they meet the needs and expectations of society?’ 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
Relevance 

General findings  

•  The  objectives  and  priorities  of  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  are  relevant  for 

promoting social cohesion and individual development among young people. 

•  The  programme  is  highly  relevant  in  addressing  local  societal  needs  due  to  its 

diverse formats and topics, enabling tailored projects. 

Findings on the 2021-2027 programme 

•  The  European  Solidarity  Corps  has  proved  it  can  adapt  to  meet  emerging  societal 
needs  such  as  the  impact  of  more  frequent  and  severe  climate-related  hazards  and 
other disasters. 

• 

• 

Its relevance is underlined by high satisfaction rates among individual participants. 

It addresses European society’s crucial needs, especially in fostering participation in 
democratic life and promoting inclusion and diversity. 

•  The  programme  could  better  meet  the  needs  of  participants  from  diverse 
backgrounds  or  in  particular  situations  (such  as  living  with  a  disability)  by 
improving  the  identification  of  young  people  with  fewer  opportunities  and  the 
targeted support to them. 

Coherence 

The European Solidarity Corps has demonstrated strong internal and external coherence  (or 
consistency)  with  the  EU’s  strategic  priorities,  particularly  in  relation  to  youth  engagement 
and the integration of other EU policy initiatives. 

The  programme  complements  EU  programmes  like  Erasmus+,  but  actual  synergies  are 
somewhat limited, suggesting a need for more structured efforts. A possible integration of the 
European  Solidarity  Corps  into  Erasmus+  could  present  both  opportunities  and  challenges. 
While integration could increase administrative efficiency and resource flexibility, there are 
concerns that it could dilute the European Solidarity Corps’ unique focus on volunteering and 
solidarity, potentially weakening its foundational values and impact. 

Externally,  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  is  well-aligned  with  other  EU  policy  initiatives, 
especially  those  aiming  to  improve  youth  participation  and  democratic  engagement.  The 
benefits  of  this  alignment  could  be  further  improved  by  setting  up  a  structured  cooperation 
from  the  outset  of  the  next  programme.  Moreover,  given  the  occupational  benefits  for 
vulnerable young people, the programme could be better linked with EU youth employment 
initiatives. 

Coherence 

Findings on the 2018-2020 programme 

•  The  programme  complemented  EU  policies  and  served  as  a  single-entry  point  for 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
solidarity activities. 

•  Overall, it was complementary to other EU programmes, particularly Erasmus+. 

•  The occupational strand did not stand out as an alternative to other activities, which 

limited how it could complement the rest of the programme. 

•  The programme stood out from other programmes by offering in-country activities 

and group projects. 

Findings on the 2021-2027 programme 

•  No specific inconsistencies were perceived among action types managed directly by 

the Commission and indirectly by National Agencies.  

•  Streamlining  volunteering  activities  under  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  has 

improved the programme’s coherence. 

•  While integrating the programme into Erasmus+ may seem  cost-effective, it could 
raise  participation  barriers  and  weaken  the  programme’s  distinct  focus,  targeted 
reach and impact. 

•  The programme  highly  complements the Youth  Action  Plan in  EU external  action 
for 2022-2027 and the Commission’s broader strategic priorities for 2019-2024. 

•  Overall, the programme complements other EU programmes, particularly Erasmus+ 

and Horizon Europe, but further synergies could be developed. 

Effectiveness 

The  European  Solidarity  Corps  strengthens  social  cohesion  and  intercultural  understanding 
and  addresses  local  challenges,  especially  in  areas  with  declining  local  volunteering.  The 
programme  successfully  fosters  community  engagement,  leadership  development  and 
collaborative organisational networks. The involvement of international volunteers has been 
vital  in  remote  or  socio-economically  disadvantaged  areas,  but  the  programme  faced  some 
organisational challenges in adapting to these areas’ specific needs. Key community impacts 
include: 
o 

addressing local challenges by filling volunteer gaps and improving the quality of life, 
particularly  in  rural  and  socio-economically  disadvantaged  areas;  the  involvement  of 
international volunteers has been vital in these regions, fostering community spirit and 
addressing specific local needs; 

o 

improving  community  development  by  strengthening  social  cohesion  and  intercultural 
understanding within communities; however, the programme faced challenges in remote 
areas. 

The  programme  has  consistently  met  its  targets  on  participants  with  fewer  opportunities4 
(34% in 2021, and 30%  each year since 2022). However, the current method of identifying 
them makes it difficult to assess the programme’s outputs in this area. 

4 See complete definition of young people with fewer opportunities in Article 2(4) of Regulation (EU) No 
2021/888 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2021 establishing the European Solidarity 
Corps Programme 

7 

 
 
 
The humanitarian aid strand has seen a substantial increase in interest compared with the EU 
Aid  Volunteers  initiative.  More  than  42 000  expressions  of  interest  were  received  by  May 
2023, indicating a successful launch with high visibility. In total, nearly 104 000 expressions 
of  interest  were  made  by  the  end  of  2023,  far  exceeding  the  initial  target  of  1 955 
deployments  for  the  entire  2021-2027  programming  period.  This  suggests  that  the  strand’s 
current budget is insufficient for meeting this high level of demand. 

Effectiveness 

General findings  

•  Organisations  recognise  improvements  in  their  project  planning,  implementation 
and reporting skills and noted the impact of the European Solidarity Corps Quality 
Label on their future fundraising and project delivery. 

•  The  programme  fosters  a  sense  of  community,  revitalising  local  initiatives  and 

promoting a broader global perspective. 

•  Participation  contributes  to  strong  individual-level  results,  such  as  improved 

personal, professional and study skills and social and civic awareness. 

Findings on the 2018-2020 programme 

•  The European Solidarity Corps navigated through regulatory and pandemic-related 
challenges, gradually increasing the number of participants engaged in mobility but 
falling short of the targets. 

Findings on the 2021-2027 programme 

•  The programme creates a cycle of benefits through its target groups – individuals, 

organisations and communities. 

•  Organisations face challenges in working with volunteers with fewer opportunities, 
underscoring the need for continuous capacity building and programme support. 

Efficiency 

The programme has benefited from improved cost-effectiveness compared with the previous 
period.  However, 
the 
programme’s  actions,  suggesting  that  efficiency  in  some  areas  may  benefit  from  targeted 
financial strategies.  

there  are  noticeable  differences 

in  cost-effectiveness  across 

Funding has proven very limited given the programme’s ambitions and objectives. Despite a 
higher  annual  budget  compared  with  2018-2020  (22%),  inflation  has  affected  the 
programme’s  ability  to  achieve  its  goals.  Therefore,  budget  allocations  need  to  be  aligned 
with the actual needs of young people and the ambition of promoting solidarity. The situation 
is  compounded  by  the  high  demand  for  the  programme.  Compared  with  the  2018-2020 
programme period, the current programme has managed to be roughly twice as cost-effective 
in  terms  of  participant  costs,  with  a  cost  of  EUR 4 054  per  participant  when  adjusting  for 
inflation. 

8 

 
 
 
 
Moreover, some countries do not use all their planned budget, which affects the programme’s 
overall performance. In contrast, countries facing higher demand cannot use more than 100% 
of their allocated budget. 

Significant  improvements  have  been  made  to  measurement  and  monitoring.  Nevertheless, 
challenges  remain,  particularly  with  the  new  IT  tools  that  have  not  fully  met  users’  needs. 
Moreover,  the  practical  application  of  performance  indicators  needs  refinement  to  fully 
capture  the  programme’s  impact.  Monitoring  the  geographical  balance  of  participation  and 
the spread of benefits across participating countries is also essential. 

Efficiency 

Findings on the 2018-2020 programme 

•  Funding  was  deemed  appropriate  given  the  absorption  rate  of  79.4%.  The  low 
uptake in payments is not an indicator of excessive funding but of inflexible budget 
allocations and distortions due to the COVID-19 crisis. 

•  The administrative burden was reasonable according to most stakeholders. 

•  Programme management was seen as moderately efficient, with some criticism of 

the IT tools. 

Findings on the 2021-2027 programme 

•  While many participants and organisations found the level of administrative burden 

manageable, processes can be further simplified. 

•  Programme management and implementation have been efficient overall. Flexible 
programme management mitigated the impact of external shocks like the COVID-
19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. 

•  Programme  funding  was  overall  too  low  compared  with  the  programme’s  needs 

and objectives, compounded by factors such as inflationary pressures. 

•  The IT tools’ user-friendliness  and functionalities  require further attention despite 

their continuous improvement. 

4.2 EU added value – how has the European Solidarity Corps made a difference so 

far and to whom? 

For more than half of the organisations and participants, the European Solidarity Corps is the 
only available opportunity for volunteering and solidarity activities (see chart below). 

9 

 
 
Question: If the European Solidarity Corps programme did not 
exist, would you be able to find and participate in alternative 
programmes with similar objectives on the national, European 
or international level?

Participating organisations

24%

24%

Individual participants

21%

29%

52%

50%

0

20

40

60

80

100

Don't know / No opinion Yes No

Source: Public consultation 

Participating organisations and individuals are expanding their focus beyond local issues and 
becoming  aware  of  how  their  efforts  contribute  to  the  broader  European  landscape. 
Additionally, the positive attitude towards the EU clearly spills over to the communities and 
societal groups involved. 

Strengthening democracy and active citizenship 

The programme plays a key role in mitigating anti-EU and anti-democratic sentiments thanks 
to  its  strong  international  network  that  extends  from  national  authorities  to  societal 
organisations, down to the community and individuals. 

The  link  between  volunteering  activities  and  broader  societal,  political  and  citizenship 
engagement is very well-recognised. The programme drives broader societal participation as 
young people  engaged  in solidarity  activities  tend to  develop  a keen interest  in  society and 
politics. 

Empowering youth 

Resulting  from  the  programme’s  contributions  to  objectives  such  as  strengthening 
democracy,  active  citizenship,  solidarity,  and  personal  and  professional  development,  the 
European  Solidarity  Corps  contributes  to  youth  empowerment  by  providing  many  benefits 
beyond national  borders. The programme strengthens European identity and fosters support 
for European values, such as democracy and human rights.  

The  programme  creates  extensive  pan-European  networks,  fostering  long-term  partnerships 
that facilitate knowledge-sharing and collaborative initiatives across Europe and beyond. 

Facilitating the transition from education to employment 

The  European  Solidarity  Corps  goes  beyond  its  expected  impact  by  helping  young  people 
facing  obstacles  to  employment  despite  their  educational  achievements.  The  programme  is 
appealing to those starting their careers who aim to bridge academic study and professional 

10 

 
 
practice, boosting their skills and gaining valuable experience. Although not a direct goal, the 
European Solidarity Corps tackles the disconnect between youth education and employment. 

EU added value 

General findings  

•  The European Solidarity Corps cultivates a sense of European identity and support for 

European values among its participants. 

Findings on the 2018-2020 programme 

•  The  programme  promoted  active  citizenship  and  facilitated  participants’  personal 

development on a scale unlikely to be achieved through national efforts. 

•  The  move  from  the  European  Voluntary  Service  to  the  European  Solidarity  Corps 
boosted EU added value by creating a single-entry point for solidarity activities. 

•  By  broadening  its  scope,  improving  flexibility  and  strengthening  objectives  on 
inclusion,  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  was  better  positioned  than  the  European 
Voluntary Service to meet young people’s needs. 

•  The  programme  provided  better  international  networking  and  collaboration,  which 

was difficult to achieve through national volunteering initiatives. 

Findings on the 2021-2027 programme 

•  The European Solidarity Corps is a powerful initiative for youth empowerment with 

a unique blend of engagement opportunities. 

•  The programme includes young people facing a wide range of challenges. 

•  Participating  organisations  can  enrich  their  professional  skills  and  improve  their 

organisational effectiveness. 

•  The  programme’s  quality  standards,  including  the  European  Solidarity  Corps 
Quality Label, distinguish it from other schemes that may not offer the same level of 
consistency or scope in quality assurance. 

•  The programme is unique in creating pan-European networks, leading to long-term 

partnerships and relationships. 

5.  RECOMMENDATIONS 

Including people with fewer opportunities 

The  current  method  of  monitoring  individuals  with  fewer  opportunities  relies  on  either 
reporting by organisations and National Agencies in the volunteering actions or self-reporting 
in the solidarity projects, which generates inconsistencies. 

Recommendations:  

11 

 
 
 
• 

further  clarify  how  the  definition  of  young  people  with  fewer  opportunities  should  be 
interpreted; 

•  make  the  implementation  guidelines  –  the  Erasmus+  and  European  Solidarity  Corps 

inclusion and diversity strategy5 – more widely known; 

• 

implement strategies to improve identifying people with fewer opportunities before they 
participate in projects; 

•  create more opportunities for capacity building in organisations, incorporating situational 
examples  and  exercises,  to  better  identify  and  integrate  participants  with  fewer 
opportunities; 

• 

involve  inclusion  and  diversity  officers  from  the  National  Agencies  in  organising  these 
exercises to ensure they align with the inclusion and diversity strategy’s goals. 

Addressing differences in the geographical distribution of results and impacts 

Better monitoring the  programme’s geographical  spread is  needed to  accurately assess  how 
its benefits are spread and to implement the programme’s solidarity objective. 

Recommendations: 

•  continue to improve monitoring mechanisms to track where volunteer activities are taking 

place; 

• 

if geographical imbalances are identified, encourage organisations from underrepresented 
regions to participate. 

Improving visa arrangements for non-EU nationals 

Volunteers  and  organisations  have  highlighted  persisting  issues  with  visa  arrangements  for 
non-EU nationals. 

Recommendations: 

•  strengthen collaboration with the relevant national bodies to streamline the visa delivery 

process for non-EU participants; 

•  cooperate  closely  with  the  Member  States  in  the  implementation  of  Directive  (EU) 
2016/8016  on  the  conditions  of  entry  and  residence  of  third-country  nationals  for  the 
purpose  of  research,  studies  training,  voluntary  service,  pupil  exchange  schemes  or 
educational projects and au pairing, in line with the Council’s recommendation on young 
volunteer’s  mobility  (2022/C157/01)7  on  the  mobility  of  young  volunteers  across  the 
European Union. 

Aligning funding to the goals 

5   https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/document/implementation-guidelines-erasmus-and-european-solidarity-corps-

inclusion-and-diversity-strategy 

6   OJ L 132, 2016/801, 21.5.2016, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ%3AJOL_2016_132_R_0002. 
7   OJ C, 2022/C157/01, 11.4.2022, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32022H0411(01). 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Funding  for  the  European  Solidarity  Corps  resembles  that  of  a  pilot  programme  and  is  too 
low to achieve what it sets out to do. 

Recommendations: 

• 

for  the  future,  without  prejudice  to  negotiations  on  the  next  Multiannual  Financial 
Framework, consider better aligning the overall budget with the goals of the programme; 

•  consider  planning  for  annual  budget  increases  rather  than  a  flat  budget  to  make  the 

programme more resilient to economic shocks; 

•  bring in an annual reassessment of the suitability of unit costs so that the programme can 
respond  to  organisations  and  participants’  needs  without  compromising  the  quality  of 
projects; 

• 

in  the  definition  of  the  future  programme,  explore  with  participating  countries  the 
possibility to recalibrate the criteria for funding allocation; 

•  better integrate the programme into other policy initiatives; for example, volunteers could 
benefit more from initiatives aiming to support occupational transitions and the needs of 
young  people  not  in  education,  employment  or  training  (NEETs)  and  other  vulnerable 
young people; 

•  maximise  and  further  develop  synergies  with  other  programmes  to  make  the  most  of 

existing funding and address common objectives. 

Strengthening IT tools  

IT  tools  that  cannot  be  used  easily  by  users  or  experience  downtime  pose  challenges  to 
efficiently  implementing  the  programme  and  carry  risks,  such  as  data  loss  and  delayed 
reporting. 

Recommendations:  

•  conduct comprehensive user testing with a diverse group of end users to identify usability 

and accessibility issues, and ensure that IT tools meet all stakeholders’ needs;  

• 

further simplify the IT tools and forms used by organisations when applying for funding; 

•  ensure  that  contingency  measures  are  in  place  to  maintain  data  integrity  and  continuity 

when reporting tools are unavailable.   

Aligning the humanitarian aid strand  

There is room for further clarifying and communicating the purpose of the humanitarian aid 
strand to stakeholders to better manage their expectations. In addition, the strand’s higher age 
limit  of  35  years,  against  30  years  for  the  programme’s  other  volunteering  and  solidarity 
activities, makes the programme less coherent and confuses stakeholders. 

Recommendations: 

•  clearly communicate to participating organisations that the strand’s purpose is to provide 
individual  mobility  and  learning  to  volunteers  who  should  not  be  expected  to  have 
professional skills and experience; 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
•  consider aligning the humanitarian aid strand’s age limit with the rest of the programme 
as the demand from people between 30 and 35 is not high (only 3% of the strand’s total 
registrants). 

6.  WAY AHEAD 

The evaluation’s outcomes confirm that the European Solidarity Corps plays an essential role 
and, in some countries, is the only alternative for volunteering and solidarity. While a number 
of areas for improvement have been identified, the overall evaluation across the five criteria 
(relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, coherence, EU added value) is positive  and forms the 
basis to further develop the programme’s implementation under the 2021-2027 MFF and start 
reflections for the future programme under the 2028-2034 MFF. 

14