Makinguseof
EuropeanStructuralandInvestmentFunds
forRomaInclusion
AGuideforLocalAuthorities
EURomaNetwork
FinalversionMay2014
EURoma (EuropeanNetworkonSocialInclusionandRomaundertheStructuralFunds www.euromanet.eu) is an
initiativelaunchedin2007thatgathers12EUMemberStateswiththeaimofpromotingtheuseoftheStructural
FundsforthesocialinclusionoftheRomapopulation.NetworkpartnersarerepresentedbyManagingAuthorities
andpublicbodiesresponsibleforRomapolicies.TheprimaryobjectivesofEURomaarethesharingofstrategies,
initiatives and approaches, mutual learning based on experience, knowledge generation and the dissemination
andstandardisationofsuchknowledge.
TableofContents
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1Whythisguide?
1.2Thepurposeoftheguide
1.3Targetaudiencesandhowtousethisguide
1.4Anewpositivepoliticalframework
1.5ThelocallevelaskeyfactorintheintegrationofRoma
1.6ContentofthisGuide
3
3
3
4
5
5
6
2. THE MAIN MESSAGES AND KEYS TO SUCCESS 2.1MainMessages
2.2.KeystoSuccessandPracticalRecommendations
3.FOSTERING LOCAL ROMA POLICIES WITH THE SUPPORT OF EUROPEAN STRUCTURAL AND INVESTMENT FUNDS 7
3.1IncreasingrelevancyoftheRomainclusionintheEUAgenda
11
3.1.1.TheneedtoimprovetheRoma’ssocialsituation
11
3.1.2.ApositiveframeworkofEURomapolicies
13
3.1.3.HowEuropeanStructuralandInvestmentFundswork
17
3.1.4.EuropeanStructuralandInvestmentFundsatthelocallevel
19
3.1.5.HowaretheEuropeanStructuralandInvestmentFundsrelatedtotheRoma?
20
3.1.6.WhataretheaddedvaluesofapplyingEuropeanStructuralandInvestmentFundsforRomainclusion?22
3.2.WhichtypesofOperationalProgrammespromoteRomainclusion?
23
4. WHAT ARE THE EXISTING BARRIERS AND HOW CAN THEY BE OVERCOME? 25
4.1ExistingbarriersformunicipalitiesaccessingEUFundsforRomainclusion
25
4.2Fivestepstoovercomethesebarriers
25
5. POTENTIAL OPTIONS FOR LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO ACCESS EUROPEAN STRUCTURAL AND INVESTMENT FUNDS AS A TOOL TO PROMOTE ROMA INCLUSION 38
5.1.FourmodelstoaccessStructuralandInvestmentFundsatlocallevel
38
5.1.1.Community‐ledlocaldevelopment(CLLD)initiatives
38
5.1.2.Sustainableurbandevelopment
39
5.1.3.IntegratedRehousingOperation
40
5.1.4.GlobalGrants
42
5.2.ExamplesoflocalandregionalauthoritiesusingStructuralandInvestmentFundsforRomainclusion
43
RELEVANT WEBSITES ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 45
46
2
FinalversionMay2014
1. Introduction
1.1 Why this guide? Thepublicationofthisguidearrivesatacriticalmoment:theplanningphasefortheEuropean
Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) of the next programming period 2014‐2020 is
currently on‐going, future Regulations have already been approved and Member States are
eitherinthefinalstepsofsigningorhavejustsignedtheirPartnershipAgreements(PAs)and
OperationalProgrammes(OPs).Nowitistimetoimplement!
The local level plays a crucial role in the implementation of ESI Funds and hence, local
administrations are vital in ensuring that the funds get to the local level, that is, to their
beneficiaries,includingtheRomapopulation.
The ESI Funds, in particular the European Social Fund (ESF) and the European Regional
DevelopmentFund(ERDF),aretheEU’smainfinancialandpolicyinstrumentsatthedisposal
of Member States to design and implement policies aimed at enhancing social cohesion and
reducinginequalitieswithintheEU.Asaconsequence,inmanycountriestheESIFundsarea
majoropportunityforinvestinginRomacommunities.
In fact, they offer a pool for designing more effective long‐term policies, fostering the
cooperation between the national, regional and local administrations and involving different
actors including Roma organisations. They are therefore a particularly relevant means of
facilitating the inclusion of the Roma in terms of combating discrimination, promoting equal
opportunitiesandimprovingtheirsituationintheareasofemployment,education,healthcare
and housing conditions. Furthermore, they allow for undertaking long‐term integrated
operationsinalltheseareas.
Roma issues have become more and more relevant at the European level and promoting the
social inclusion of the Roma form part of an ESF key investment priority “integration of
marginalisedcommunitiessuchastheRoma”.Furthermore,bothESFandERDFRegulations
explicitlyrefertotheRomapopulationastargetbeneficiaries: 20% of the ESF has been
earmarked for fighting social exclusion and poverty, which includes the Roma population as
target beneficiaries; housing interventions are eligible as part of an integrated intervention
undertheERDF–theymayalsobecoveredbytheESFonacomplementarybasis.
However,oneofthemostimportantreasonsforpublishingthisguideisthatthereisaneedfor
amoreefficientimpactoftheESIFundswithregardstoRomaintegrationatthelocallevel;in
fact, many municipalities are interested in accessing the ESI Funds in order to improve the
situationoftheirRomapopulationatlocallevel.
1.2 The purpose of the guide The central aim of the present guide is to provide guidelinesandpracticalsuggestionson
the use of the SF for Roma inclusion at the local level. The guide should be seen in the
contextoftheemergingEuropeanUnion(EU)policyframeworkembodiedintheEurope2020
Strategy, the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (NRIS), the current
3
FinalversionMay2014
(2007‐2013)andfuture(2014‐2020)programmingperiodforESIFunds.Itcomplementsthe
EURoma guide Tackling Roma needs in the 2014‐2020 Structural Funds Programming Period.
Guide to improve the planning process by shifting the focus from the national and regional
planningprocessesofPartnershipAgreementsandOperationalProgrammestolocalplanning
foreffectiveinterventionswithRomabyusingESIFunds.

EURomaGuide“TacklingRomaneedsinthe2014‐2020StructuralFundsProgrammingPeriod.
Guidetoimprovetheplanningprocess”:
http://www.euromanet.eu/newsroom/archive/euroma_launches_publication_to_support_the_e
ffective_inclusion_of_roma_in_the_next_programming_period.html
AIM OF THIS GUIDE
 Give practical information on how Structural Funds Regulations work
 Explain the priorities of the funds
 Explain how local authorities can access funds as a tool to promote social inclusion
and improve living conditions of Roma in situations of exclusion
 Propose practical models
 Refer to existing experiences
Enhance the effectiveness of local interventions with Roma and
make a real difference on the ground
1.3 Target audiences and how to use this guide The primary target audience of this guide are local administrations, in particular staff in
charge of Roma policies and staff in charge of policies affecting the Roma (i.e. education,
employment, housing, social services etc.), as it provides practical guidelines and
recommendationsofhowtoaccessESIFundsinordertoimplementRomainclusionactivities
atlocallevel.
In addition, this guide can be useful to institutionsatthenationalandregionallevel that
areresponsibleforthedesignoftheESIFunds,especiallytheOperationalProgrammes,asit
providesconcretemodelsandrecommendationsonhowthefundscanbeimplementedatlocal
4
FinalversionMay2014
level. Indeed, regional and national authorities have the responsibility of allowing, and
ensuring,theappropriateinvolvementoflocalauthoritiesinaccessingEUfunding.
Furthermore,NationalRomaContactPointscanalsomakeuseofthisguideanddisseminate
theinformationtothelocallevelintheirrespectivecountries;Romaorganisationscanuseit
as well for activating their dialogue with local authorities and contributing to the planning
process.
1.4 A new positive political framework RecentdevelopmentsoftheEUpolicyframeworkfacilitatethepromotionofRomainclusionat
thelocallevel:
1
In2010,theEUadoptedtheEurope2020Strategyasitsoverarchingframeworkfor
smart, sustainable and inclusive growth for the coming decade. The strategy
includesspecifictargetsrelatedtoemployment,education,povertyreductionandsocial
inclusion, which directly concern special groups, such as the Roma. These targets are
currentlyguidingthenational,regionalandlocalpolicyprocessestowardsachievingthe
set objectives in 2020. More specifically, these targets form an important part of the
Europeansemesterprocessandarethereforereflectedannuallyinitskeydocuments,suchas
the Annual Growth Survey (AGS), the National Reform Programmes (NRP) and the Country
Specific Recommendations (CSR) that, in several cases, explicitly recommend strengthening
effortstoimprovethesituationoftheRomapopulationatthelocallevel.
2
3
The EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies was adopted in 2011
and calls on Member States to draft NRIS. These national strategies should specify
concretetargetsinthefourmainpillars:education,employment,healthcareand
housing.TheseobjectiveshavetobeconsistentwiththeEurope2020Strategyandeach
MemberStatesNRP.
ContinuousmonitoringandevaluationoftheimplantationofNRIShavedemonstrated
that,inmanycases,thenationalstrategiesarelackingimplementationatthelocal
level; in fact, more and more EU institutions have expressed their opinion that “NRIS
shouldworkatlocallevel.”Therefore,theaccesstoESIFundsatlocallevelhastobe
strengthenedsignificantlyinthenextprogrammingperiod2014‐2020.Asaresponse
toit,thisguideprovidespracticalinformationonhowtoachievetherespectivenational
RomaintegrationtargetsatlocallevelbyapplyingESIFunds.
1.5 The local level as key factor in the integration of Roma As mentioned above, local institutions play a crucial role in the implementation of Roma
integration strategies, as they are the ones dealing directly with Roma issues. An effective
implementationofanationalpolicyatlocallevelimpliesspecificandconcretemeasuresand
activeparticipationofthelocalinstitutionsandstakeholders.
5
FinalversionMay2014
DependingontheadministrativestructureintheMemberStates,thelocalleveltendstohave
betweenrelativelymanyandalotofcompetencies,whichmeansthatmanyofthechallenges
forRomainclusionaretheresponsibilityoflocaladministrations.Inmanycountries,they
are key decision makers and providers of services, such as housing, urban planning,
education, health care, social and environmental services – all these are key determinants of
theintegrationofRomacommunities.
LocalinterventionspromotingtheintegrationoftheRomaareinthebenefitofallcitizensand
arethereforevitalto:
 Breaktheinter‐generationaltransmissionofpovertyandexclusionamongRoma;
 Unleash the energies of Roma youth to generate new sources of growth and fiscal
revenue;
 Foster constructive relationships in villages and neighbourhoods and contribute to
socialcohesioninalocal,nationalandEuropeancontext;
 ContributetotheEU’sdemocraticviabilitybyensuringtheinvolvementofRomainthe
localpoliticalarenaasaspringboardfortheirinvolvementinnationalandEUpolitics;
1.6 Content of this Guide Whatarethemain
messagesandkeysto
success
 It gives concrete recommendations on successful
approaches, good practices and lessons learnt from other
experiencesatlocallevel.
Howtodesignlocal
Romapolicieswiththe
supportoftheESI
Funds
 ItoutlinestheincreasingrelevancyofRomainclusioninthe
EU Agenda and explains the existing framework and
instrumentsthatcanbeappliedatlocallevel.
 IthighlightstheproblemsandchallengesofRomainclusion
policies at local level and explains how ESI Funds can be
used to implement initiatives that promote Roma inclusion
atlocallevel.
 It gives an overview of the advantages and added value of
Roma integration policies and provides examples and good
practicesatlocallevel.
Howtoaddresskey
issues
 It analyses existing barriers for municipalities to accessing
StructuralFundsandgivespracticaltipsonhowtoovercome
them.
 Itprovidesusefulsuggestionsonhowtogetinformed,form
partnerships and participate in and influence the planning
processofESIFunds.
Howtotakethe
initiative
Exploringpotential
options
 It presents a concrete example of ways to accessing
StructuralFundsfromthelocallevel–thedosanddon’tsas
wellashowtheyworkinpractice.
6
FinalversionMay2014
2. TheMainMessagesandKeystoSuccess
Thischapteroutlinesthekeyideasofthisguide,summarisingmainmessagesandpractical
recommendationsforimplementingsuccessfulRomaInclusionpoliciesatlocallevel.
2.1. Main Messages Based on recommendations and practical suggestions presented in this guide, the main messages can
be summarised as follows:
Message 1: Roma inclusion is a duty of local authorities. Above all,
it is to the benefit of the entire community, not only to the Roma.
Factstoremember:
• AtEuropeanlevel,thereisaframeworkfortheNationalRomaIntegrationStrategies
(NRIS)whichinsistsonactionatthelocallevel.
• YourcountryisduetoimplementaNRISwhichidentifiesactionsandpotential
territorialareasoffocus.
• PromotingRomainclusionnotonlysavesmoneyandavoidsfutureproblemsand
conflicts,butalsobringseconomicandsocialreturnsfortheentirecommunity.
Practicalsuggestions:
• MakeRomainclusionapoliticalpriorityonthelocalagenda
• DefineapolicystrategyfortheinclusionoftheRomabasedona(local)diagnosisof
thesituation
• Identifyclearprioritiesandtargets
• InvolveandempowerRomaatallstagesofRomaintegrationinitiatives
• Learnfromexperiencesandconnectwithothervillages/municipalities/cities
Message 2: Municipalities can benefit from the ESI Funds for
Roma inclusion by developing projects particularly aimed at the
integration of Roma or by developing projects that focus on areas
with a high Roma concentration
7
FinalversionMay2014
Factstoremember:
• Rightnow,yourcountryisplanningitsactionsforthefinancingperioduntil2020.
• TheESIincludeobjectivesrelatedtoeducation,employment,andsocialinclusion.
• ThereisoneESFinvestingpriorityspecificallyfocusingonRomaandother
marginalisedcommunities.
• WiththesupportoftheESI,localauthoritiescanundertakeintegratedoperations
aimingatthedesegregationofexcludedandisolatedsetlementswereRomaareliving
Practicalsuggestions:
• FindouthowtheESIarebeingimplementedinyourcountry
• IdentifythebodiesresponsiblefortheimplementationoftheESIOperational
Programmes
• Benefitfromabroadrangeoforganisationsthatcanprovideyouinformationand
adviceonimplementingESI‐fundedlocalRomaintegrationactivities
Message 3: There are different ways of addressing Roma needs through
EU funds and different needs can be addressed through different funds.
Factstoremember:
• YoucanaccessfundsforprojectsthatspecificallyfocusonRomainclusionintheareas
ofeducation,employment,socialinclusionandfightingdiscrimination.
• YoucanaccessfundsforactivitiesinterritorialareaswhereRomaareliving.
• Youcandevelopcommunity‐ledlocalinitiativesinvolvingthelocalactors.
• Youcanaccessfundsforcapacitybuildingandtechnicalassistance.
Practicalsuggestions:
• Exploreandconsiderpotentialoptionsandselectthemostadequateoneforthe
circumstancesofyourvillage/municipality/city
• LearnhowothercitiesdealwithRomainclusion
• Learnfromlessonsidentifiedinotherreportsandgoodpractices
2.2 Keys to success and practical recommendations Basedonrecommendationsandpracticalsuggestionspresentedinthisguide,thefollowing
factorshavebeenidentifiedashavingapositiveeffectonthesuccessoflocalRomainclusion
programmes:
8
FinalversionMay2014
1
Takesufficienttimeforplanningandplanforthemediumandlong‐term(e.g.projects
for 3‐4 years up to 7 years and more) and with the objective of achieving sustainable
results by performing a proper diagnostic analysis of the situation and setting
measureableindicatorsinthekeyareasofRomainclusion(i.e.education,employment,
health,housing).
2
Combine actions that address the multiple dimensions of problems faced by Roma. In
doing so, an integrated approach should be applied (e.g. specific and adapted
education, employment, health and housing programmes in good coordination with
socialservicesandotherservices;individualitineraries).
3
Buildonexistingexperiencesthatguaranteecontinuityandsustainabilityoftheactions
inthemediumtolongterm.
4
Definemandatesandresponsibilities(withroomforsharedresponsibilities)forthe
programme.Theleadershipfunctionhastobedefinedclearly.
5
Accesstoemploymentandhousingarethecentraldriversinurbanareas(including
forRomamigrants):employmentcombinedwithsocialhousingcanactasaspringboard
complemented with training activities and individual education itineraries (including
systematicsupporttoRomachildrentopreventearlyschoolleaving).
6
Actively involve and empower Roma from the planning phase onwards (incl.
implementation, monitoring and evaluation), including through Roma mediators.
Partnerships should be formed with civil society organisations, especially Roma
organisations.Plansshouldinvolvecapacity‐buildingactionsforallinvolvedactors.
7
Consider the particular situation of Roma women, in particular multiple forms of
discriminationandgenderinequalities.
8
Improve knowhow and specialisation of local staff and raise political and public
awarenessaboutprejudiceanddiscrimination.
9
AimforthemainstreamingofRomaissuesintogeneralpolicies(avoidingsegregated
orparallelprogrammes).MainstreamservicesshouldbeadaptedtoRomaneeds.
10
Initiatives must achieve “explicit but not exclusive targeting”, meaning that they
should be adapted and open to Roma, but they should also include other potential
beneficiaries,particularlythevulnerableandmarginalised.
9
FinalversionMay2014
11
Mobiliseallexistingresources(human,institutional,economic)fortheprojects.
3. FosteringlocalRomapolicieswiththe
supportofEuropeanStructuraland
InvestmentFunds
KeyIdeas
Local and regional authorities play a fundamental role in governing the Roma
inclusionprocessesinallEUMemberStates,makingthemnaturalcandidatesforan
involvementinESI‐fundedoperations.
1
2
ThenewESIFundsforeseeactiveengagementofthelocallevelintheplanningand
implementationoftheFundsaswellasspecificformsofactionsadaptedtolocallevel
needs:
 Local authorities are the institutions closest to the citizens and many of the most
important decisions affecting Roma people are taken at the local level,
especially in relation to the day‐to‐day practical issues such as health, education,
housingandwelfare,whatmaybetermeda‘proximity’role;
 They are important providers, if not the key providers, of services of crucial
importance for the Roma community: social services, housing, health services,
education,utilities(e.g.water,wastedisposal,streetpaving,streetlighting);
 They bring together the broad range of stakeholders necessary for the
successfulimplementationoflocally‐basedprojectsandservicesforRomapeople;
 They are normally the authority responsible for physical and spatial planning
wheresettlementissuescanbemostdifficult;
 TheyarethestartingpointfortheinvolvementofRomacommunitiesinlocal
politics,democraticsocietyandactivecitizenship,essentialforsocialinclusion;
 They often implement existing national plans and strategies for Roma
integrationaccordingtotheirlevelofcompetenceandwilldosotoagreaterextent
withintheNRIS.Nationalandregionalauthoritiesshouldsupportthelocallevelin
theimplementationoftheseplans.
10
FinalversionMay2014
3.1 Increasing relevancy of the Roma inclusion in the EU Agenda 3.1.1. The need to improve the Roma’s social situation ImprovingthesocialsituationoftheRomaisnotonlyamatterofhumanrightsandsolidarity–
itisalsoaneconomicmatter.TheRomaarethelargestminoritygroupintheEU,totalling
between 10 and 12 million people. This group is spread throughout the European continent
and with a high concentration in Central and Eastern Europe. The Roma population is
characterisedbyasignificantdegreeofheterogeneitybetweenandwithincountries,between
urban and rural areas, between and within cities/towns. Despite this diversity and with the
exception of specific Roma groups and individual cases, a very high proportion of Roma
personsareaffectedbysevereformsofpovertyandsocialexclusion, especially in some
countries.
It is estimated that 90 per cent of Roma in those Member States with the largest Roma
populations are living in or at risk of poverty, while almost 80 per cent of Roma experience
severematerialdeprivation.
TheRomafacedeepsocialproblemsmanifestin:
•
•
•
•
•
loweducationallevels,
highunemploymentandprecariousemployment,
inadequatehousing,orlackofhousing
poorhealth,
anegativesocialimageanddiscriminationonthegroundofethnicity.
The gap between Roma communities and the majority population has been growing
significantlyinmanycountriesinthepasttwodecades.Thissituationisfurtherworsening
due to the current economic crisis and the growth of racist discourses and movements and
intensifies difficulties encountered by municipalities in managing diversity and achieving
socialandterritorialcohesion.
11
FinalversionMay2014
TheViciousCircleofRomaExclusion
Increasing
discrimination
andracism
againstRoma
Poorhousing
conditionsand
spatial
segregation
Limitedaccess
tohealthcare&
education
services
Limitedjob
opportunities
Poorhealthand
education
levels
Inadditiontotheabove,itisalsoimportanttohighlighttheeconomiccostofRomaexclusion.
As the vast majority of working‐age Roma lack sufficient education their successful
participation in the labour market is limited. As a result, European countries are losing
hundreds of millions of Euros annually in productivity and in fiscal contributions to the
government. Furthermore, in several countries Europe 2020 targets related to employment,
education and social inclusion will not be reached if there is no substantial progress in the
integrationofRoma.
12
FinalversionMay2014
EconomiccostsofRomaexclusion
Estimatesofannual
productivitylossesrange
from231millioneuroin
Serbia,367millioneuro
intheCzechRepublic,526
millioneuroinBulgaria,
to887millioneuroin
Romania.
Theeconomiclosses
forthefourcountries
combined(incl.add.
data)areasmuchas
5.7billioneuro
annually,andthefiscal
losses2billioneuro
annually.
Annualfiscallossesrange
from58millioneuroin
Serbia,202millioneuro
inRomania,233million
eurointheCzech
Republic,and370million
euroinBulgaria.
Source:WorldBank“EconomicCostsofRomaExclusion”:
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/ECAEXT/EXTROMA/0,,contentMDK:22526807~pa
gePK:64168445~piPK:64168309~theSitePK:615987,00.html
3.1.2. A positive framework of EU Roma policies Without doubt, Roma issues have gained considerable significance in the EU agenda within
recentyears.Thefollowingdevelopmentshavecontributedtoformingapositiveframeworkof
RomapoliciesintheEU:
13
FinalversionMay2014
Year
2009
Policyandlegalmeasures
10CommonBasic
PrinciplesonRoma
Inclusion
2010
2011
2013
Characteristics
1. Constructive, pragmatic and non‐discriminatory
policies
2. Explicitbutnotexclusivetargeting
3. Inter‐culturalapproach
4. Aimingforthemainstream
5. Awarenessofthegenderdimension
6. Transferofevidence‐basedpolicies
7. UseofEuropeanUnioninstruments
8. Involvementofregionalandlocalauthorities
9. Involvementofcivilsociety
10. ActiveparticipationoftheRoma
Theamendmentof
Article7.2ofRegulation
1080/2006/EConthe
EuropeanRegional
DevelopmentFundfor
MemberStatesas
regardstheeligibilityof
housinginterventionsin
favourofmarginalised
communities

ECCommunication“The
socialandeconomic
integrationoftheRoma
inEurope”

ECCommunication“An
EUFrameworkfor
NationalRoma
IntegrationStrategiesup
to2020”
Council
recommendationon
effectiveRoma
integrationmeasuresin
theMemberStates






Significantly raises the availability of EU financial
resourcesforRomainclusion
Insists on the importance of involving municipalities
as beneficiaries in the implementation of Structural
Funds.
Establishes the integrated approach and
desegregationasaconditiontoaccessingERDFfunds
forhousinginterventions.
QualitativeshiftintheEU’sapproachtowardsthe
socio‐economicintegration,theimprovementof
socialconditionsandtheaccesstosocialrightsof
RomabycontributingtoraisingtheRomaissueon
thepoliticalagendaandtoadoptingashared
approachtoRomainclusionamongstakeholders
ExplicitlyadvocatesthedeploymentofSFforRoma
inclusionintheNationalRomaIntegrationStrategies.
Insistsonthecrucialimportanceoflocalauthorities
inimplementingprogrammestoachieveadifference
ontheground.
StrongindicationofthecommitmentoftheEUbothto
ensureSFreachRomaandtoinvolvelocalauthorities
intheuseofSFforRomainclusion
Makes a strong call on Member States to fulfil their
obligationstowardstheRomaEUcitizenry.
14
FinalversionMay2014
3.2.Romaatthelocallevel:mainproblemsandchallenges
MostofthechallengesrelatedtoRomainclusionhavetobeaddressedatlocallevelasthis
iswheretheRomalive.TheproblemsfacedbytheRomapopulationatlocallevelareoften
directlyrelatedtotheirlivingcircumstances.Thebelowcategorisationdoesnotcoverthe
full variety nor does it generalise the situations experienced by Roma living in Europe;
however,thedifferentsituationsrefertothemostfrequentlivingconditionsoftheRoma
population observable throughout the EU and therefore provide an insight into the
problemsandchallengesfacedatlocallevel:
MostfrequentsituationsofRomainEuropeatthelocallevel1
Situation1:Romacommunitieslivinginintegratedurbanandsuburbanneighbourhoods
Characteristics
Dynamics&Trends
Commonin
• High‐densityareasofthecities,
usuallyinlower‐middleorworking‐
classneighbourhoods.
• Romalivingtogetherwithrestof
population,oftenwithother
minorities/migrants.
• Engagedinaprocessofsocio‐
economicintegrationbutwithhigher
riskofexclusionthantheir
neighbours.
• Publicservicesoftenquality.
• HighphysicalconcentrationofRoma
tendstohamperintegration,
distributionfacilitiesit.
• Concentrationcanoftenbecausedby
“whiteflight”.
• Concentrationinhousinghas
multipliereffectinpublicservices,
esp.schools(higherbirthrates).
• Publicinvestmentininfrastructure
(e.g.qualityofsocialhousing)is
crucialforpositivechange.
• Participatorypractices(involvement
ofRomaassociations)accelerate
inclusion.
• Accesstopublicservicesiscrucialfor
integration.
• MostcommoninSpain.
• AlsofrequentlyincentralEurope
(Hungary,theCzechRepublic,
Slovakia)aswellasPoland,Romania
andBulgaria
Situation2:Romacommunitieslivinginsegregatedurbanandsuburbanneighbourhoods
Characteristics
Dynamics&Trends
• Deterioratedurbanandsuburban
neighbourhoods,spatiallyisolated,
slums,settlementsorsemi‐rural
housingareas
• Ethnicconcentration(exclusively
Roma),highlevelsofpovertyand
deprivation
• Sometimeslivingthereforalong
time,sometimesresultofmigration
fromcountrysidetocities,sometimes
occupiedafterthefalloftheSoviet
bloc(consequenceofrehousing)
• Lackofmeasuresaimedatimproving
physicalorsocialaccessibility,lackof
infrastructure(deterioratingover
time),lowqualityhousing
• Symbolicandphysicalboundaries
• Stigmatisation:littleattractiveness
forprivateinvestment,unattractive
toprofessionalsofpublicservices
(esp.mostskilled&mostimportant
forimprovementofsocio‐economic
conditions),self‐stigmatisation
(reducesexpectationof
improvements)
• Publicabandonment:notapriority
forlocalpoliticians,common
discourse“theydon’twanttobe
integrated”,influencesdecreasing
interestandcompromiseofRomain
takingcareofbothpublicandprivate
goods
• Ethnicconcentration,“whiteflight”.
Commonin
• SlovakRepublic
• CzechRepublic
• Hungary
• Romania
• Bulgaria
• Greece
• Spain
• Portugal
• Italy
• France
• ButexamplesinallEUcountries
1Reproducedfrom“WhatworksforRomainclusionintheEU.Policiesandmodelapproaches.”ECDGJustice,
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/whatworksfor_romainclusion_en.pdf
15
FinalversionMay2014
Situation3:Romacommunitieslivinginsegregatedruralsettlements
Characteristics
Dynamics&Trends
• Segregatedruralsettlements,isolated
fromcitiesandvillagesorsituatedin
thevicinityofvillages,extreme
deprivation
• Insomecountries(Slovakia,
Romania,Hungary)“segregated
villages”:ghettoised,highriskof
socio‐economicexclusion.
• Manyestablishedatthebeginningof
the1950s,butalsomanyother
recently.
• Lackofbasicinfrastructure&access
toservices.
• Lackofaccesstoproductive
resources(land,workingcapital)
neededforsubsistenceagriculture:
absenceoffoodandheatingmeans.
• Highbirthrates,earlymarriagesetc.:
expansionofslums,increasing
imbalancebetweenRoma&non‐
Roma.
• Worseninglackofbasicconsumer
goodsandeconomicopportunities.
• Extremepovertyandhighlevelsof
dependencyonsocialwelfare,debt
trap,subjecttovariousformsof
exploitation.
• Legalinsecurity:nopropertyrights
(refusaltoprovidepublicservices)
• Increasingmigration:tocities,to
othercountries(EU‐15).
Commonin
• Slovakia:25%ofRoma
• Romania:40.5%‐65%
• Hungary:44%‐60%
• Bulgaria:43‐48%
• Frontierareas:Hungary‐Slovakia,
Romania‐Serbia,Romania‐Hungary.
• Greece:25%
• Portugal:Algarve
Situation4:RomamigrantsandRomaEUnationalsmovingwithintheEU‐15MemberStates
Characteristics
Dynamics&Trends
• Short‐ andmedium‐termmigrants
(formerYugoslavia,Romania,
Bulgaria,theSlovakandCzech
Republics)tomainlyEU‐15.
• Pushfactors:povertyandthe
experienceofracism,discrimination,
violence
• Pullfactors:circularpatterns,search
formorestableemployment/higher
qualityofpublicservices,friends&
familyindestinationcountries,lower
anti‐Romadiscrimination
• Status:lackoffullcitizenship(ethnic
minority),refugeesorasylum‐
seekers,noresidencepermit
• Increasingprominenceonthe
politicalagenda:worsenedpublic
perceptionsofRoma,diplomatic
tensionsonRomaissue,fuelledracist
politicaldiscourses
• Generalisedconfusionand
inadequacyofordinarymechanisms
• Risinghostilityandpublicorder
approach
• Increasingtheviciouscircleof
exclusionanddiscrimination
Commonin
• Inthe1990s:migrationtoItaly,
France,theUK,GermanyBelgium
• MostrecentlyallEU‐15,incl.
peripheralcountries:Ireland,Spain,
Portugal;toalesserextentNordic
countries
Situation5:RomaTravellersand(Semi‐)MobileLifestyles
Characteristics
Dynamics&Trends
• Tendtoliveinseparateplaces(sites,
camps,etc.),locatedatadistance
frommajoritypopulations,usually
builtbylocalauthorities,sometimes
rentapieceoflandwhereextended
familiesinstalltheirmobilehomes
• Mobilityisscarceinwintertimeand
increasesinthesummer
• Enmassenotverycommonanymore
(mid‐twentiethcentury)
• Historicaldifficultiesbystatesto
acceptthislifestyles,
misunderstandingsofreasonsforby
population.
• Mobilewaysoflifeposeseveral
administrativeproblemsforpublic
institutions(accesstoservices):
increasingconfrontationwith
authorities,discrimination.
• Caravanrecognisedasformof
housing(insomecountries),limited
spacemadeavailable,local
authoritiesoftenignorethemto
reducepressurefromcitizens
Commonin
• Frequentinthepast
• Continuesinwesternandnorthern
Europe:Belgium,Germany,France,
Italy,theUKandIreland,tosome
extentinNordiccountries&the
Netherlands
16
FinalversionMay2014
3.3ConnectingEuropeanStructuralandInvestmentFundswiththeRoma
3.3.1. How European Structural and Investment Funds work The European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI) are a crucial financial tool in the
implementationoftheNationalRomaIntegrationStrategies.
The11thematicobjectivesofESIFunds
1.Strengthening
research,technological
development,and
innovation
4.Supportingtheshift
towardsalow‐carbon
economyinallsectors
2.Enhancingaccessto
anduseofinformation
andcommunication
technologies
5. Promotingclimate
changeadaptationand
riskprevention
3.Enhancingthe
competitivenessof
smallandmedium‐
sizedenterprises
(SMEs)
6.Protectingthe
environmentand
promotingresource
efficiency
7.Promoting
sustainabletransport
andremoving
bottlenecksinkey
network
infrastructures
8.Promoting
employmentand
supportinglabour
mobility
9.Promotingsocial
inclusionand
combatingpoverty
10.Investingin
education,skills,and
lifelonglearning
11.Enhancing
ESF institutionalcapacity
andanefficient
OBJECTIVES
public
administration
SeveralFundsworkcomplementarily
The Regulations of two particular ESI Funds specifically address the integration of the
Romapopulation:
 The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) aims to strengthen economic,
socialandterritorialcohesionintheEUbycorrectingimbalancesbetweenregions.The
ERDFsupportsregionalandlocaldevelopmenttocontributetoallthematicobjectives.
Itisfrequentlyusedfor‘hard’projectsandinfrastructure,likeroads,bridges,railways
etc. and, in the coming period, for supporting innovation as well as for fostering low
carbon economy. However, it can and should be used for social infrastructure (social
and community facilities, neighbourhood services, community development and
housinginthecaseofmarginalisedcommunities).
 TheEuropeanSocialFund(ESF)istheEU’smainfinancialinstrumentforinvestingin
people. It increases the employment opportunities of European citizens, promotes
better education, and improves the situation of the most vulnerable people at risk of
17
FinalversionMay2014
poverty. It focuses on the last 4 thematic objectives (8‐11). There is a specific
investmentpriorityfocusonRoma.
Furthermore,theEuropeanAgriculturalFundforRuralDevelopment(EAFRD)aimsto
support rural areas by improving the competitiveness of the agricultural and forestry
sector,improvingtheenvironmentandthecountrysideandimprovingthequalityoflifein
ruralareasandencouragingdiversificationoftheruraleconomy.Asdescribedintheabove
chapter, many Roma, especially in some countries, live in rural areas and have a poor
quality of life. This fund could therefore tackle disadvantaged micro‐regions where many
Romaruralsettlementsarelocated.
DeliveryofESIFunds
ESIFundsareallocatedtotheMemberStatesfollowingbilateralnegotiationswiththeECat
the beginning of each seven‐year programming period, or ‘Multiannual Financial
Framework – the current one being 2014‐2020. Despite being EU money, ESI Funds are
under the responsibility of Member States and their regional authorities, which have to
manage these budgets under their respective Partnership Agreements, which include a
seriesofOperationalProgrammes.
It is the responsibility of the Member State to deliver the ESI Funds through so‐called
ManagingAuthorities,whicharedefinedas:“Anational,regionalorlocalpublicauthorityor
a public or private body designated by the Member State to manage the OP”. The same
ManagingAuthoritymaymanagemorethanoneOP.
Fundinglevelsandgeographicalcoverage
Under the Cohesion Policy a total of 325 billion euro will be available (through the ESI
Funds) for the coming programming period 2014‐2020. Levels of investment from ESIs
dependonthelevelofdevelopmentofdifferentregions:
Source:EuropeanCommission
18
FinalversionMay2014
Co‐funding
Thelevelofco‐foundingvariesanddependsontheregions:forinstance,themoredeveloped
regions usually have to co‐fund 50%, transitional regions usually up to 40% and the less
developedregions20%.
3.3.2. European Structural and Investment Funds at the local level The new programming period 2014‐2020 of ESI Funds strengthens the local dimension in a
varietyofareas:
DistributionofESIFundsbyterritories:
•Theabove‐describedgeographicaldistributionofESIfundinglevelsrepresentsthe
territorialprioritisationofinvestmentobjectivesinthedifferentregions.Italsoclearly
highlightstheimportanceofthelocallevelinguaranteeingthatthefundsachievetheir
objectives.
Strengtheningthelocallevelinamulti‐levelgovernance
context:
•IntheplanningprocessoftheStructuralFundsbytheMemberStatesthelocallevelplays
akeyroleforthePartnershipAgreementsandtheOperationalProgrammes.
ThelocalperspectiveofOperationalProgrammes:
•OperationalProgrammesneedtoincludeconcreteinvestmentobjectivesthatshouldbe
achievedinspecificareaswhichconsequentlyimpliesaclosecooperationbetweenthe
locallevel,bothintheplanningandimplementationprocess.
Impulsetoanintegratedterritorialdevelopmentapproach:
•ThenewESIregulationsstatethatthecontentofthePartnershipAgreementshould
includemeasurestoensureanintegratedapproachtotheuseoffundsforterritorial
developmentwithaspecialfocusongeographicalareasmostaffectedbypovertyorwith
targetgroupsathighestriskofdiscriminationorexclusion.
Reinforcementoflocalparticipativedevelopment:
•TheLocallevelgainsparticularstrengthinthecaseoftheEAFRDanditsfocusonthe
developmentofruralareasthatrequiresactiveengagementofthelocallevel.
Newimplementationmechanismforlocalintegratedapproach:
•Inordertopromoteanintegratedapproachfromaterritorialperspective,thenew
regulationsprovidetwomechanismstofacilitatelocalownership:community‐led
initiativesandintegratedterritorialinvestments;bothmechanismsinvolvepursuing
localstakeholdersandcommunitiesintheimplementationofprograms.
Exanteconditionalitieswithaterritorialperspective:
•Exanteconditionalitiesarerequirementstobemetinordertoaccessfundsanddevelop
programs.Eachoftheconditionalitiesspecifiescompliancecriteria– manyofthemrefer
tothelocallevel.
19
FinalversionMay2014
3.3.3. How are the European Structural and Investment Funds related to the Roma? The above‐described ESI Funds objective 9 specifically aims to promote social inclusion
and combat poverty, which is reflected in the 6 ESF investment prioritiesaddressing this
objective9.AlltheseinvestmentprioritiescanrelatetoinclusionfortheRomapopulation;
thesecondoneexplicitlyfocusesonRoma.
ESIFundsObjective9:Promotingsocialinclusionandcombatingpoverty
ESFInvestmentpriorities
(ESIFundsObjective9)
1.Activeinclusion
2.IntegrationofmarginalisedcommunitiessuchastheRoma
3.Combatingdiscriminationbasedonsex,racialorethnicorigin,religionorbelief,
disability,ageorsexualorientation
4.Enhancingaccesstoaffordable,sustainable&high‐qualityservices,including
healthcare&socialservicesofgeneralinterest.
5.Promotingthesocialeconomy&socialenterprises
6.Community‐ledlocaldevelopmentstrategies
As described above, the ESF includes an investment priority which specifically refers to
Roma: “Integration of marginalised communities such as the Roma”. The ESF is
thereforetheidealESIFundtofinanceactionsrelatedtoRomainclusion.
Furthermore, this ESF investment priority may be complemented by the following ERDF
investmentpriorities:
 Investinginhealthandsocialinfrastructuretoimproveaccesstohealthandsocial
services
 Support for physical and economic regeneration of deprived urban and rural
communities
20
FinalversionMay2014
SpecificESFandERDFinvestmentprioritiestargetingRoma
ESFInvestment
priority
2.Integrationof
marginalisedcommunities
suchastheRoma
ERDFinvestment
priorities
Maybe
complemented
with
Investinginhealthandsocial
infrastructuretoimproveaccess
tohealthandsocialservices
Supportforphysical&economic
regenerationofdeprivedurban&
ruralcommunities
PotentialactionsunderthisESFinvestmentpriority(whichmaybecomplementedby
ERDF):





Integratedpathwaystothelabourmarket,includingindividualisedsupport,
counselling,guidanceandaccesstogeneralandvocationaleducationandtraining.
Accesstoservices,inparticularsocialcare,socialservicesandhealthcare
Eliminationofsegregationineducation,promotingearly‐childhoodeducation,fighting
earlyschool‐leavingandensuringsuccessfultransitionsfromschooltoemployment.
Measurestoovercomeprejudicesanddiscrimination.
Support for the physical and economic regeneration of deprived urban and rural
communities including the Roma, including the promotion of integrated plans where
social housing is accompanied notably by interventions in education, health including
sportfacilitiesforlocalresidentsandemployment(ERDF).
However,itisimportanttorememberthat,eventhoughthereisonespecificESF
investment priority (under the ESI Funds thematic objective 9) focusing on the
Roma community, there are many possibilities of including Roma as
beneficiaries of any of the other ESI Funds thematic objectives, especially
theESFobjectivesandtheirrespectiveinvestmentprioritiesasthefollowing
chartdemonstrates:
!
21
FinalversionMay2014
ThemostrelevantESFInvestmentPriorities
underESIFundsThematicObjectives8,10and11
ESIObjective8:Promoting
employmentand
supportinglabourmobility
Accessto employmentforjob‐
seekers&inactivepeople,
includinglocalemployment
initiatives&supportforlabour
mobility
Sustainableintegrationofyoung
peoplenotinemployment,
educationortrainingintothe
labourmarket
Self‐employment,
entrepreneurship&business
creation
Equalitybetweenmen&women
&reconciliationbetweenwork&
privatelife
Adaptationofworkers,
enterprises&entrepreneursto
change
ESIObjective10:Investing
ineducation,skillsand
lifelonglearning
Reducingearlyschool‐
leaving&promotingequal
accesstogoodqualityearly‐
childhood,primary&
secondaryeducation
ESIObjective11:Enhancing
institutionalcapacityand
anefficientpublic
administration
Investmentininstitutional
capacity&intheefficiency
ofpublicadministrations&
publicserviceswithaview
toreforms,betterregulation
&goodgovernance<onlyin
lessdevelopedcountries>
Improvingthequality,
efficiency&opennessof
tertiary&equivalent
educationwithaviewto
increasingparticipation&
attainmentlevels
Enhancingaccesstolifelong
learning,upgradingtheskills
&competencesofthe
workforce&increasingthe
labourmarketrelevanceof
education&trainingsystems
Capacitybuildingfor
stakeholdersdelivering
employment,education&
socialpolicies&sectoral&
territorialpactstomobilise
forreformatnational,
regional&locallevel.
3.3.4. What are the added values of applying European Structural and Investment Funds for Roma inclusion? The application of ESI Funds for Roma offers a powerful financial tool for the effective
implementationofNRIS:
Long‐termsustainable
Roma inclusion project must have a long‐term and
projects
sustainablevision.ESI‐fundedRomainclusionprojectscan
thereforebedevelopedwithdurationofupto7years.
Extensivefinancialsupport
The ESI Funds co‐financing requirement stimulates the
activeinvolvementofallstakeholders.
Opportunityforcombining
actionlevelsfromaholistic
perspective
Actionsimplementedconcurrentlyatthenational(policies)
andlocallevels(grassroots)haveasignificantimpact:
 Top down – bottom up: ESI Funds allow for localised
implementation that feed back into EU’s holistic
22
FinalversionMay2014


approachtoeconomicdevelopmentandsocialcohesion.
Local–national:integrationofvariouslevelsofpolicy
designandimplementation.
Grassroots – policy strategies: it is possible to work
notonlywiththeRomacommunitybutalsowithsociety
atlargesothatprojectandactionsareatthebenefitof
theentirecommunity.
Opportunityforstrong
partnerships
A strong partnership between public and private
organisations(publicauthorities,businesses,themediaand
the non‐profit sector) is possible and desirable for policy
design,implementation,monitoringandevaluation.
Opportunitytotargetthe
mostexcludedgroupswhile
mainstreamingRomaissues
Byplacingthemonthepolicyagendaandbyachievingthe
implementation of targeted yet non‐segregated services.
Action adapted to target groups guarantees and increases
impact, which emphasises the close linkages between
education,employmentandinclusion.
Opportunityforcapacity
building:
By fostering administrative capacity, training of Roma
professionals and managers and creating local social
capital.
Newmodelsofpolicydesign
andimplementation
Partnershipapproacheswithahighengagementofprivate
organisations, including non‐profit organisations, in the
planningandimplementationoftheFunds.
3.4. Which types of Operational Programmes promote Roma inclusion? TherearedifferentapproachesthatMemberStatescouldusetodevelopOPsthatpromotethe
inclusion of Roma. Depending on the type and objectives of OPs developed for your country,
the following 3 approaches are the ones most commonly used to address Roma inclusion in
OPs:
 Explicit targeting means focusing on Roma and implementing measures specifically
tailored to their needs, or focusing explicitly on excluded groups including Roma.
Explicit but not exclusive Roma targeting, while including other groups in similar
socio‐economiccircumstances,hasproventobeoneofthebestwaysoftacklingRoma
socio‐economicintegration.Severalcountriesareincludingspecificmeasurestargeting
RomaintheirOPs.Explicittargetingimpliesclearobjectives,specificthemes,adequate
formsofimplementationaswellasspecificformsofreporting.
 MainstreamingmeanstakingintoaccounttheneedsoftheRomaindifferentOPsand
is one option that Member States may follow in order to develop policies inclusive of
Romapeople.Infact,promotingtheinclusionoftheRomainmainstreamsocietyshould
betheultimateaimofallpolicies.
23
FinalversionMay2014
 Micro‐territorial actions focus on specific needs of the geographical areas at the
greatestriskofpoverty,aswellastheofgroupsatriskofexclusionanddiscrimination,
asisthecaseoftheRoma.Thisintegratedapproachusuallycombinestheuseofseveral
fundswiththeirrespectiveobjectives,e.g.ERDFshouldprovideinvestmentsinhealth,
education and social infrastructures, as well as to recover physical and economic
excludedareas;ESFshouldconcentrateoneducation,employment,socialinclusion,the
fightagainstpovertyandtheimprovementofadministrativecapacity.
Based on the above‐described common approaches to address Roma inclusion in OPs, the
following table gives an overview of potential situations and potential OPs you may find in
yourcountry.ItalsoexplainsthatinsomecountriesyoumayfinddifferentOPswhichcould
allow local authorities to access ESI Funds in order to finance actions that promote Roma
inclusion.
Mostlikelyapproach
Potentialsituations
Main‐
Micro‐
Targeting
streaming
territorial
ESFOPorESF
Mayfocuson
1. AfullNationalOPfocusedonRoma,
OPwiththe
urbanorrural
e.g.agovernmentdecidestohavea
supportofERDF
areaswith
specificOPforRomaintegration.
and/orEARDF
higherRoma
concentration.
ESFOPorESF
Mayfocuson
2. OPsusuallyfocusedonsocial
OPwiththe
urbanorrural
inclusion,includingspecific
supportofERDF
areasincluding
objectivesandactionswithRoma,e.g.
and/orEARDF
areaswith
anOPtopromotesocialinclusionofthe
higherRoma
mostvulnerablegroups
concentration
Oneorseveral Mayfocuson
3. InclusiveRomaapproachwithoneof
ESFOPsorone urbanorrural
severalESFthematicobjectivesESF
orseveralESF areasincluding
(education,employment,social
OPswiththe
areaswith
inclusion,administrativecapacity),
supportof
higherRoma
e.g.OPonhumanresourcedevelopment
ERDFand/or
concentration
EARDF
OneESFOPsor Mayfocuson
4. InclusiveRomaapproachinthe
oneESFOPs
urbanorrural
implementationoftheYouth
withthe
areasincluding
EmploymentInitiativeandtheYouth
supportof
areaswith
Guarantee,e.g.OPforyouth
ERDFand/or
higherRoma
employment
EARDF
concentration
Oneorseveral
Mayfocuson
5. InclusiveRomaapproachwith
ERDFand/or
urbanorrural
thematicobjectivescorrespondingto
EARDF
areasincluding
ERDFandEARDF,e.g.OPonrural
programs.
areaswith
development
higherRoma
concentration
24
FinalversionMay2014
4. Whataretheexistingbarriersandhowcan
theybeovercome?
4.1 Existing barriers for municipalities accessing EU Funds for Roma inclusion In many countries, ESI Funds are currently underused, especially at local and regional
administrationlevel.CommonbarrierstoaccessingESIFundsatlocallevelare:
 Politicalreluctance,inpartduetosocialresistance
 Lowmotivationduetopreviousfailures
 LackofinformationonESIfundingopportunities
Common
barriers
 Lackofactiveinvolvementofthelocallevelintheplanning
processofESIFunds
 Limitedtechnicalcapacityinlocaladministrations,sometimes
duetotheirsmallsize
 Requirementofco‐financing,coupledwithlackofresources
andcash‐flowproblems
 ComplexadministrativerulesmanagingESIFunds
 Lackofclearguidelinesforintervention
 Difficultiesinestablishingadequatepartnerships
4.2 Five steps to overcome these barriers ThefollowingstepsareessentialformunicipalitiestoovercomethebarriersofaccessingEU
fundsforRomainclusion.Thebelowtablegivesabriefoverviewofthedifferentstepswhich
willbeexplainedindetailinthischapter.
Step1:MakeRoma
integrationapolicy
priority
Step2:Getinformed
Step3:Exploreallco‐
Addresses lack of political motivation and reluctance and
explainswhyitisimportantforlocalpoliticianstoaddress
Romaissues.
Addresses the lack of information on ESI funding
opportunities (and to a certain extent complex
administrative rules managing ESI Funds) and explains
wheretofindthenecessaryinformation.
Addressesthebarrierofco‐fundingrequirementsandlack
25
FinalversionMay2014
financingpossibilities
Step4:Getconnected
&learnfromothers
Step5:Establish
partnershipsand
fostercooperation
Step1
of resources and gives tips on where to look for possible
co‐funding.
Addresses the lack of information on ESI funding
opportunities and limited technical capacity. It gives
examples of different platforms, forums, programmes etc.
that may be helpful for learning, sharing experiences and
gettingsupport.
Addresses difficulties in establishing adequate
partnershipsandproposeswaystofostercooperationwith
thedifferentstakeholders.
 MakeRomaintegrationapolicypriority
As explained above, a lack of political motivation is one of the main barriers to promoting
Romaintegration.ThefirststeptosolvingtheproblemofRomaexclusionispoliticalwilland
thecommitmentofpoliticalinstitutionsatalllevels:Romainclusionhastoformanintegral
partofthepoliticalagenda–atnational,regionalandlocallevel.
1.
WhyshouldelectedlocalrepresentativestackleRomaproblems?
BecausefightingRomaexclusionistherightthingtodo:promotingRomainclusion
policiesnotonlycomplieswithinternationalstandardsbutalsofosterstheprotectionof
humanrights.
2.
Because the social image and perception of the city/municipality/village will
improveifallpersonsofthecommunityarefullyintegrated(e.g.citiesthatdonothave
settlement problems are perceived as safer and more stable by the population;
populations in cities with high levels of segregation usually experience extreme
stigmatisation).
3.
Becausemaintainingsegregationandexclusionismoreexpensive:thereisalarge
body of evidence that cities that invest in the promotion of inclusion of marginalised
communities not only save expenditures in the long‐run but also receive economic
returnsbymeansofincreasedsocialandhumancapital(e.g.notsolvingtheproblemof
segregated Roma settlements implies large expenditures solving social problems
affecting the entire community while the problems remain unsolved; transition
settlementsusuallyimplymoreexpenditureanddelayingthesolutionoftheproblems)
4.
Because the reduction of segregation improves social relations of the entire
community:whilesegregationcanonlyleadtodiscriminationandconflict,integration
isthekeytoaharmonioussociety.
26
FinalversionMay2014
5.
Becauseitistothebenefitofallcitizens:everyonewantstoliveinasafe,stableand
harmonious society that provides opportunities for everyone. By improving the Roma
situation,allneighbourswillbenefit.AddressingRomaneedsshouldbedoneinaway
thateveryonebenefits.
6.
BecauseitisawaytoattractESIfunding:well‐designedRomainclusionprojectsare
mostlikelytoreceiveESIfunding.TheStructuralandInvestmentsFundsareoneofthe
bestopportunitiestoinvestinRomaprojectsatthelocallevel.
Step2
 Getinformed
Thetwomostimportantquestionsbeforegettingstartedare:
 WhodecidesabouttheimplementationoftheESI‐fundedprogrammesinmy
country?
DecisionsabouttheallocationofESIFundsineachcountryaretakenbynationalandregional
authorities:
 Atthepolicylevel:Bythecentralgovernment(commonlytheMinistryofPresidency
andtheMinistryofFinancetogetherwithotherministriesand/ordepartmentse.g.the
MinistryofEmployment,EducationandSocialAffairsfortheESF,theMinistryofUrban
and Local Planning/Development for the ERDF, the Ministry of Agriculture for the
EARDF).
 At the technical and administrative level by ESF, ERDF and EAFRD Managing
Authorities,usuallylocatedingovernmentministries.TheManagingAuthoritiesarethe
intermediarybodiesresponsibleformanagingthesefundsandtheirrespectiveOPs.
 It is important to take into account that some countries have a high degree of
administrative decentralisation into Regions; therefore, the Regional Administrations
playanimportantroleinthedecisionmakingprocess.Forinstance,almostallregions
haveRegionalOPs.

ESFManagingAuthorityinyourcountry:http://ec.europa.eu/esf/main.jsp?catId=524&langId=en

ERDFManagingAuthorityinyourcountry:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/manage/authority/authority_en.cfm
 Towhatextentdolocalauthoritieshavetobeinvolvedintheimplementationof
ESI‐fundedprogrammes?
27
FinalversionMay2014
TherecentlyapprovedEuropeanCodeofConductonpartnershipintheframeworkofESI
Funds2obligesMemberStatestoinvolverelevantpartnersinthepreparationandensuretheir
participation in the implementation of OPs. The regulation gives particular importance to
competent regional, local, urban and other public authorities, including regional
authorities,nationalrepresentativesoflocalauthoritiesandlocalauthoritiesrepresentingthe
largest cities and urban areas. The Code of Conduct states that Member States shall involve
relevantpartnersinthepreparationofprogrammes,includingforthefollowingtasks:





theanalysisandidentificationofneeds;
thedefinitionorselectionofprioritiesandrelatedspecificobjectives;
theallocationoffunding;
thedefinitionofprogrammes’specificindicators;
thecompositionofthemonitoringcommittee
WhatdoIneedtoknow?
The above‐mentioned Managing Authorities (in particular the ESF Managing Authority in
yourcountry)shouldprovideyouwithinformationonthefollowingimportantquestionsyou
needknowwhenplanningESI‐fundedRomaintegrationactivitiesatlocallevel:
1.
ArethereOPsinmycountryfocusingonlocaldevelopmentandurbandevelopment?
Insomecases,therearespecificOPsfocusedonurbanandlocaldevelopment,inothersthere
arepartsofanOPfocusingonlocalandurbandevelopment.
2.
Ifthisisthecase,whoaretheintermediarybodiesatregionalorlocallevelresponsible
forthemanagementoftheseOPs?
Usually, intermediary bodies may be regional authorities, departments of the central
Governmentand,insomecases,specialisedagencies.
3.
Can cities/municipalities/villages be final recipients of these funds? If so, under which
OPs?
Usuallycitiesmaybefinalrecipientsofthefundsthroughintermediarybodies;thesefunds
are to be used for the development of specific investment priorities and actions. Under
certainconditions,localauthoritiesmayalsoactasintermediarybodies,directlymanaging
ESIFunds(see4.2.4.GlobalGrants)
4.
Ifthisisthecase,howwillthefundsbeallocatedtothelocallevel?
Usually funds can be allocated through different forms, such as calls for tender, direct
decisionsbasedonstatistics,jointagreementsetc.
5.
WhataretheinvestmentprioritiesoftheseOPs?IsanyESFOPinmycountryfocusingon
theESFinvestmentpriority“integratingmarginalisedcommunitiessuchastheRoma”?
Remember that actions related to the inclusion of Roma can be undertaken actions under
the ESF investment priority “integrating marginalised communities such as the Roma” but
2
http://eucis-lll.us5.list-manage.com/track/click?u=e0ba59dcb487a8983ceda27d9&id=6bd3fdf87a&e=c9da669d35
28
FinalversionMay2014
alsotroughotherESF,ERDFandEARDFinvestmentpriorities.
6.
Ifso,whoisimplementingthisinvestmentpriorityandhow?
Asyouknow,oneinvestmentprioritycanbeimplementedinoneorseveralOPsandcanbe
supportedbyoneorseveralfunds.
8.
Who else is implementing ESI co‐funded integration programmes in my country? (e.g.
othermunicipalitiesorregions;)WhatcanIlearnfromtheirexperience?
In your country, you will most likely find cities and villages that benefited from the
StructuralFundsintheperiod2007‐2013.
9.
To what extend could Technical Assistance support local authorities in accessing
StructuralandInvestmentFunds?
Funds for Technical Assistance are usually allocated to the administrative management of
ESIFunds;however,itcanalsobealsoallocatedtomakingdiagnostics,providingcapacity
buildingforstaff,assistanceinthepreparationofprojectsetc.
10. How will the money available for fostering administrative capacity be invested in my
country?
Remember that under the ESF, there is one investment priority (Enhancing administrative
capacity and supporting public administration) which can provide support to your local
administrationandtothestakeholdersoperatingatthelocallevel.Thissupportcanbeused
forimprovingcapacitiesinworkwithRoma.
Additionally,thefollowingcontactsatEClevelcanprovideyouwiththefurtherinformationon
thedifferentOPsbeingimplementedinyourcountry:
ECDeskOfficersresponsibleforyourcountryat:

TheDirectorate‐GeneralforRegionalPolicy(DGREGIO):
http://ec.europa.eu/staffdir/plsql/gsys_www.branch?pLang=EN&pId=1819&pDisplayAll=1

TheDirectorate‐GeneralforEmployment,SocialAffairs&Inclusion(DGEMPL)
http://ec.europa.eu/staffdir/plsql/gsys_www.branch?pLang=EN&pId=473&pDisplayAll=1
Step3
 Exploreallco‐financingpossibilities
29
FinalversionMay2014
Findingthenecessaryco‐fundingremainsoneofthebiggestchallengesforaccessingESIFunds
– especially for local administrations. However, the often strict co‐funding requirements
shouldnotkeeplocaladministrationsfromexploringalltheirco‐financingpossibilities:
 Incaseofintegratedactions(e.g.rehousingactivities),alwaysconsiderthepossibilityof
combiningERDFandESFfundingforboth‘hard’and‘soft’investments.
 Municipalities should always explore the possibility of applying for co‐funding from
their central and regional government sources. These may include national funds
that could finance both targeted projects (e.g. funds available for the NRIS or the
NationalRomaPlans)aswellasmainstreamservices(e.g.fundsavailableforthefields
ofeducation,employment,housing,etc.).
 ESI funding provides the opportunity of an enormous financial “boost” for local
administrations.Itisthereforehighlyrecommendableforeachmunicipalitytoallocate
some of its own resources to co‐fund interventions aimed at fostering social
inclusion and reducing inequalities. Depending on the region (less developed,
transitional, more developed), some municipalities are eligible to multiply their own
resourcesthroughESIFundsbyupto5timestheamountoftheirinitialinvestment(e.g.
lessdevelopedregions:co‐fundinglevel20%).
 Forsomeoperations,theremaybeanactiveparticipationofprivateprofitandnon‐
profit institutions; in this case these donors could provide part of the necessary co‐
funding(e.g.NGOsmanagingEUFundswiththeeconomicsupportofprivatedonors).
 Itisrecommendedformunicipalitiestoexplorethebroaddiversityofotherpublicand
private sources – especially in the project design phase. Some examples of
internationaldonororganisationsknownto(co‐)financeRomainclusioninitiativesare
WorldBank,HabitatforHumanity,OpenSocietyFoundationetc.
Step4
 Getconnected&learnfromothers
Sharing experiences on Roma integration projects is not only recommendable at national or
regionallevel,butevenmoresoinaEuropeancontext.Thereareavastvarietyofplatforms
andnetworks,whoseaimistopromotemutuallearningonRomainclusion(amongother
issues) between European cities and regions. The following networks can provide you with
practicalhands‐onexperiencefromothercities,municipalitiesandregionsacrossEurope:
30
FinalversionMay2014
Overviewofplatformsandnetworksforlocalauthorities
engagedinRomainclusionpolicies
•Mutuallearning:good
practicesfromdifferent
countries
•Adviceonusing
StructuralFundsfor
RomaInclusion
•Capacitybuildingfor
municipalitiesand
regions.
•Lobbyingtoolfor
municipalitiesatEU
level.
•Exchangeofknow‐how
andgoodpracticeson
Romainclusionamong
Europeancities.
•Supportinproject
development,financial
andhumancapacity
building,andadvocacy.
•Assitanceforaccessing
EUFundsforRoma
Inclusion.
EURoma
Committeof
theRegions
European
Alliance
Makingthe
Most
•ConnectsMayorsof
Europeancitiestoshare
experiences.
•Supportslocal
authoritiestoattracht
EUFundstolocallevel.
•TaskforceonRoma
Inclusion
•TaskforceonESF
•Strengthentheroleof
municipalitiesinthe
implementationofthe
NationalRoma
Strategiesatlocallevel
MERI
Eurocities
ROMACT
EURoma
EURoma is a European Network made up of representatives of twelve Member States
(Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Finland, Greece, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Spain, Slovakia and Sweden), determined to promote the use of Structural Funds to enhance
theeffectivenessofpoliciestargetingRomapeopleandtopromotetheirsocialinclusion.
TheprimaryaimsofEURomaarethesharingofstrategies,initiativesandapproaches,learning
based on experience and best practices, and the dissemination and standardisation of such
knowledge.
Inlinewiththeseobjectives,twoworkinglinesareundertaken:


Transmission and exchange of information, through internal and external
communicationchannels.
Mutual learning: sharing of approaches and strategies, identification and transfer of
experiences, creation of a forum for the organisation and management of projects,
developmentofcommonandtransversalproducts.
31
FinalversionMay2014
Therearetworepresentativesineachofthepartnercountries:


TherespectiveESFManagingAuthority
ThebodyoftheMemberStateresponsibleforpoliciestargetingtheRomacommunity
orthebodytowhichitdelegatesitsauthority.
Besides these official representatives from each country, EURoma is seeing more and more
participation from a variety of other stakeholders, such as ERDF Managing Authorities, local
and regional authorities, NGOs as well as international organisations and other countries
interestedinitsactivities.
On its website the network offers general information on projects, good practice, legal texts
andotherresourcesregardingtheRomaandStructuralFunds.
ESFLearningNetwork:ReinforcingpolicylearningforRomainclusion(EURomaplus)
The ESF Learning Network “Reinforcing policy learning for Roma inclusion”, also known as
EURomaplusNetwork,waslaunchedinMay2013withtheaimofreinforcingtheworkdone
byEURoma.ThenewnetworkaimstoincreasetheimpactandeffectivenessoftheStructural
Funds for Roma inclusion through transnational cooperation by achieving a higher political
commitmentfortheplanningprocessofthe2014‐2020programmingperiodandensuringthat
thelessonslearntfromthepreviousprogrammingperiodareincorporatedaspolicydecisions
inthecurrentone.ThenetworkisledbytheSpanishESFManagingAuthorityandgathersESF
Managing Authorities and National Roma Contact Points from 8 Member States (Bulgaria,
Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Romania, Slovak Republic and Spain) together with
EuropeanCommissionrepresentatives.
UnderEURomaplusthefollowingactivitiesarebeingconducted:




Basedontheinformationfromeightcountries,ananalysishasbeenproducedonhow
StructuralFundswereimplementedwiththeaimofpromotingRomainclusionduring
the programing period 2007‐2013; furthermore, this document provides an overview
abouttheMemberStates’planstouseStructuralFundsforpromotingRomaincluding
inthenextperiod2014‐2020.
Twothematicseminarsfocusingonspecificissueswillbeheld.
Twomeetingswithparticipantsfromthepolicylevelinordertoexchangeandcompare
the situations in each country, foster commitment and compare the progress that has
beenmadeforthefutureprogramingperiod.
EURoma:http://www.euromanet.eu/about/index.html
TheCommitteeoftheRegionsandtheEurope2020MonitoringPlatform
The Committee of the Regions (CoR) is the main European body bringing together EU
regionsandmunicipalities;itcurrentlyhas353members.ItisaformalEUinstitutionandhas
animportantconsultativerole,regularlypresentingitsviewsoncohesionpolicy.Itisthemain
interlocutoroftheECregardingcohesionpolicyissuesandisindirect(adhoc)contactwith
regional and local representatives, including through the Representations in the Member
States. The CoR provides important mutual support and lobbying mechanisms for
municipalities.
32
FinalversionMay2014
Furthermore, the CoR runs the Europe 2020 Monitoring Platform – a group of over 160
cities and regions from the 28 EU Member States, which monitors how Europe 2020 is
implemented on the ground, promoting the exchange of good practices. The platform also
providesapowerfultoolforcapacitybuildingofmunicipalitiesandregionsasitoffersspecific
support on thematic issues, such as working groups and the promotion of exchanges on
specifictopics,includingRomainclusion.


CommitteeoftheRegions:http://cor.europa.eu/en/
Europe2020MonitoringPlatform:https://portal.cor.europa.eu/europe2020/
TheEuropeanAllianceofCitiesandRegionsforRomaInclusion
TheEuropeanAllianceofCitiesandRegionsforRomaInclusionwassetupinMarch2013by
theCouncilofEurope'sCongressofLocalandRegionalAuthoritieswiththesupportofSpecial
Representative of the Secretary General for Roma Issues. More than 120 cities and regions
fromover27countriesareparticipatingintheAlliance.
The Alliance aims to promote the exchange of know‐how and good practices on Roma
inclusion among participating cities and regions, and to enable participating cities and
regionstospeakwithonevoicebyprovidingaplatformforadvocatingonissuesconcerning
Romainclusionatlocalandregionallevel.

TheEuropeanAllianceofCitiesandRegionsforRomaInclusion:
http://www.roma‐alliance.org/
ROMACT
In September 2013, the Council of Europe and the EC launched a new programme called
ROMACT.Currently,itincludescitiesandmunicipalitiesfrom5countries(Bulgaria,Hungary,
Romania,Slovakia,Italy).Thenewprogrammeaimstostrengthentheroleofmunicipalitiesin
the implementation of the National Roma Strategies at local level by promoting local Roma
inclusionprojectsandprovidingsupportforaccessingESIFunds.

ROMACT
http://coe‐romact.org/
MakingtheMostofEUFundsforRoma
MakingtheMostofEUFundsforRoma(MtM)isaprogrammeoftheOpenSocietyFoundations
(OSF)whichsupportsnational,andlocalgovernmentsinrealisingthetargetsoftheDecadeof
Roma Inclusion 2005‐2015 – a network of European governments (Central, South‐eastern,
EasternEuropeandSpain),intergovernmentalandnongovernmentalorganizations,aswellas
Roma civil society that aims to eliminate discrimination against Roma and close the
unacceptablegapsbetweenRomaandtherestofsociety;twelvecountriesarecurrentlytaking
partinthedecade.
33
FinalversionMay2014
MtM offers project development assistance, financial and humancapacitybuilding, and
advocacyandseekstocreateacriticalmassofconcernedgovernmentalactorsatalllevelsto
keepRomainclusionhighonthepolicyagenda.MtMisconcernedwithproblemssuchasthe
weak visibility of Roma issues in the implementation of EU cohesion policies at the national
and local levels; resource and expertise disadvantages; and overly bureaucratic funding
procedures,whichblockaccessofthemostdeprivedtorightsandopportunities.
Tools of the MtM programme include the Project Generating Facility (project development
assistance, training, and advocacy at the local level), the Mentoring Intervention (promoting
participation of Roma in local partnerships), the Non‐Eligible Costs/Supplementary funds
(supplementary funding), the Capacity Building Programme. Furthermore, MtM provides
policy analysis and advocacy services aimed at drawing policy level conclusions and
recommendationsfromfieldlevelexperiencesgatheredthroughprojectgenerationservices.

MakingtheMostofEUFundsforRoma:
http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/about/programs/making‐most‐eu‐funds‐roma

DecadeofRomaInclusion2005‐2015:http://www.romadecade.org/
TheEuropeannetworkMayorsMakingtheMost(MERI)
In 2012, the Making the Most ofEU Funds for Roma programme (see above), in cooperation
withtheEuropeanCommission,launchedanewinitiativetoestablishaEuropeannetworkof
local authorities which have implemented – or plan to implement – programmes supporting
integrationofvulnerablegroupswithafocusonRoma.ThenetworkcalledMayorsMakingthe
Most of EU Funds for Roma Inclusion Network (MERI) promotes the inclusion and
integration of Roma at local levels through best practice‐sharing and learning across
European countries, and brings to the forefront local level results and achievements. In
addition,throughbuildingcapacitiesatlocallevel,theMERInetworkplanstoattractmoreEU
funds to the local level. The network aims at creating a space for local authorities to
exchange on their Roma inclusion programmes, to promote a learning venue and a
visibilityplatformformunicipalitieswhichultimatelyimplementnationalstrategiesforRoma
integration.
TheMERInetworkisopentoallEuropeanmunicipalitieswhichpursueRomainclusion.
Its purpose is to create a Europe‐wide platform where possibilities for cooperation, joint
programmes,twinningsandexchangesforsolvingchallengingissueswillbeoffered.Currently,
municipalitiesfrom15countriesstretchingfromtheBalticregion,South‐eastern,Easternand
CentralEuropetotheSouthCaucasusareparticipatinginMERI.

MERI:http://www.logincee.org/
Eurocities
Eurocities is the European Association of Metropolitan Cities (populations over 250,000)
andhasmorethan135membersin35countries.Eurocitiesplaysanimportantroleinbringing
34
FinalversionMay2014
togetherregionalandmetropolitanauthoritiesandpromotingtheirinvolvementintheworkof
theEU,includingcohesion,regionalandsocialpolicy.
Eurocities established two working groups for participating cities which are of particular
relevanceformakingthebestuseofEUfundingforRomainclusion:

The Roma inclusion task force is committed to fighting discrimination and
exploitation and to foster Roma inclusion through exchanging good practice on Roma
inclusion;raisingawarenessofthecityperspectiveonEUmobilityandRomainclusion
withinEUinstitutionsandtheNationalRomaContactPoints;influencingEUpolicyon
non‐discrimination and management of intra‐EU migration; building East‐West
cooperationonRomainclusionincooperationwithOpenSocietyFoundations;securing
funding for cities to improve their policies on Roma inclusion; and addressing the
exploitativedimensionofRomaexclusion.

The ESF task force focuses on making sure that the role of cities in European Social
Fundisbothsustainedandenhancedintheproposedprogrammefor2014‐2020.The
taskforceconcentratesonfollowingthenegotiationsonthefinalshapeoftheESIFunds
Regulations,especiallytheESF;collectingdatafromcitiesontheinvolvementofcities
intheprogrammingofOPs;exchangingexperiencesonthelobbyingstrategiesofcities
atnationallevel;andcoordinatingactivitieswithoncohesionpolicy,especiallyrelating
tothecohesionpolicypackageandtheprogramminganddevelopmentofPAs.


Eurocities:http://www.eurocities.eu/

ESFtaskforce:
http://www.eurocities.eu/eurocities/activities/working_groups/ESF‐task‐force‐&tpl=home
Romainclusiontaskforce:
http://www.eurocities.eu/eurocities/activities/working_groups/Roma‐inclusion‐task‐
force&tpl=home
Step5
 Establishpartnershipsandfostercooperation
Successful Roma inclusion projects at local level require partnerships and cooperation at 4
levels:
35
FinalversionMay2014
The4dimensionsofpartnership

Vertical
cooperation
Horizontal
cooperation
Cooperation
withcivil
society
Cooperation
withother
actors
Verticalcooperationbetweenthecentrallevel(Government)andthelocallevel:Inorder
toputNRISintopractice,itisveryimportanttoalignlocalpolicieswithnationalstrategies.
Thisrequirescooperationfrombothsides.
 How to foster vertical cooperation: The central government and its respective
ministries and departments responsible for the implementation of the NRIS should
provide local authorities with the necessary advice and support to take action. Local
authoritiesshouldstrengthentheirrelationshipwiththerespectivecentralgovernment
authorities by actively demonstrating their plans and activities to promote Roma
inclusion–ESFandERDFManagementAuthoritiesarethekeycontactpointsatcentral
level.

Horizontal cooperation between different departments at local level: Roma needs and
problems always concern the responsibilities of a variety of departments (e.g. housing,
employment, education, health etc.) and it is therefore important that these departments
worktogetherandaddresstheseproblemsthroughintegratedapproaches.
 How to develop horizontal cooperation: It is important for each department to
rememberthatRomaneedsandproblemshavemultipledimensionsandthereforehave
tobeaddressedinsuchmanner:ahousingproblemcannotbesolvedbye.g.rehousing
activitiesalone,difficultiesinaccessingthelabourmarketcannotbeaddressedbye.g.
employment activities alone etc. Achieving Roma inclusion requires a set of common
objectives to which all departments are committed. These common objectives could
then be specified for each area of responsibility. It is recommendable that one or two
departments lead Roma inclusion activities and therefore, having the consensus and
commitment from all departments is essential. Drawing up a local Roma Inclusion
ActionPlancould,forexample,strengthenthiscommitment.

Cooperation with civil society: when planning projects aiming at Roma inclusion, it is
essentialtoinvolvecivilsociety,especiallyRomaorganisations,intheentireprojectphase.
36
FinalversionMay2014
 Howtoengagecivilsocietyandpromoteparticipation:Civil society organisations,
especially Roma organisations, are the key to a successful implementation of Roma
inclusion policies. When planning interventions related to Roma inclusion, local
authoritiesshouldmakesuretoconsultallrelevantcivilsocietyorganisationsfromthe
planning phase onwards (e.g. ask for their experience on the ground, invite them to
planningsessionsetc.).Civilsocietyorganisationscanalsoserveaskeyimplementing
partnersofactivitiesrelatedtoRomainclusion,astheyaretheoneswhoareindirect
contactnotonlywithRomabutalsowithallinhabitantsofavillage/municipality/city.
CivilsocietyorganisationscanalsoplayanimportantroleinmonitoringRomainclusion
plans – it is therefore recommended to also invite them to participate in Monitoring
Committees. Furthermore, it is of crucial importance to identify and involve Roma
leaders or organisations that best represent the voices of the local Roma population
fromtheconsultationprocessonwards;thesecouldinclude(elected)representativesof
thelocalRomapopulationwhocouldhavethecapacitytoengagewiththeRoma.

Cooperationwithotheractors:itishighlyrecommendabletoformfurtherpartnerships
with research institutions (e.g. impact assessment) or private companies (especially for
employmentprojects)thatsupportthepromotionofRomainclusion.
 How to involve other actors: An impact assessment of either previous or planned
interventions provides the possibility of readjusting and fine‐tuning any future plans
related to Roma inclusion and therefore guarantees the achievement of its objectives.
Independent(local)researchinstitutionscanserveasexcellentpartnersforproviding
suchanobjectiveevaluationofmulti‐dimensionalimpacts.Itisthereforerecommended
for local authorities to commission such studies of previous/planned Roma inclusion
projects. University departments in the fields of sociology, urban & regional planning,
economics, social work/social services, medicine and others can offer valuable
knowledge and experience to conduct this type of research. With regards to
employment and labour insertion projects, the cooperation with (local) private
companiesisthekeytosuccess.Localauthoritiesshouldconvincecompaniesaboutthe
importance of Roma inclusion and the role of employment in this process. Local
authoritiescouldreachagreementswithcompaniesthatprovideincentivestopromote
trainingandemploymentofRoma.LocalauthoritiesmayalsointroduceSocialClauses
in the public procurements; for example, they could include award criteria in their
evaluation systems which favours companies that provide public services and at the
sametimefacilitateemploymenttoexcludedgroups,suchastheRoma.
37
FinalversionMay2014
5. Potentialoptionsforlocalauthoritiesto
accessEuropeanStructuralandInvestment
FundsasatooltopromoteRomainclusion
5.1. Four models to access Structural and Investment Funds at local level Asdescribedinchapter3.4,therearedifferentpotentialsituationsforapplyingESIFundsas
financialtoolforpromotingRomainclusion.Thefollowingfourmodelsrepresentexamplesof
how local authorities could access ESI funding for their Roma inclusion programmes. Some
mechanismsareappliedinallcountries,othersdonot.Nevertheless,itshouldbementioned
thatthemainaccesstoESIFundsremainsstandardcalls.
5.1.1. Community‐led local development (CLLD) initiatives Whatisit?
Community‐ledlocaldevelopment(CLLD)isamethodforinvolvinglocalstakeholders,especiallycivil
society and local economic actors, in a local project. It focuses on the design and implementation of
integratedlocalstrategiestohelpruralareastotransitiontoamoresustainablefuture.Thismaybea
particularlyappropriatetoolintimesofcrisis,whichallowslocalcommunitiestodemonstratethatthey
can take concrete steps towards forms of economic development that are smarter, more sustainable
andmoreinclusive,inlinewiththeEurope2020strategy.
Operational Programmes of the new programming period 2014‐2020may provide for the use of this
mechanism in certain cases: especially city neighbourhoods for the ESF and rural for the EAFRD. For
moredetailsontheaimsandrequirementsforCLLDinitiatives,pleaseseetheESIFundsRegulations.
Whentouseit?
This model is ideal for implementing local actions that promote Roma inclusion under national and
regional ESF programmes. ESF funds can be supplemented by other funds (e.g. ERDF, EAFRD). The
populationsizeoflocal/regionalauthoritiesforthesetypesofinitiativesshouldnotbelessthan10,000
andnotmorethan150,000.
Whichactionscanbesupported?
Inlinewith theESFinvestmentprioritiesandwithinthecontextofthisguide,CLLD activitiesshould
promotetheintegrationofmarginalisedcommunities,suchastheRoma.Furthermore,activitiesrelated
tothefollowingESFpriorityareascanandshouldcomplementthisintegrationprocess:
Accessto
employment
Sustainable
integrationofyouth
(esp.NEET)
Socio‐labour
integrationof
peoplefurthestfrom
thelabourmarket
Reducingearly‐
schoolleaving
Fighting
discrimination
Promotionof
equalitybetween
womenandmen
Promotingthesocial
economyandsocial
entrepreneurship
38
FinalversionMay2014
CLLDprojectsalsosupportedbyERDFfundingcanincludeactivitiesrelatedto:
 Investinginhealthandsocialinfrastructuretoimproveaccesstohealthandsocialservices
 Supportforphysical&economicregenerationofdeprivedurban&ruralcommunities
CLLDalsosupportedbyEAFRDfundingcouldtackledisadvantagedmicro‐regionswheremanyRoma
ruralsettlementsarelocated.




EuropeanCommissionbrochureforthistypeofinitiative:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/2014/community_en.pdf
GuidanceonCommunity‐LedLocalDevelopmentforLocalActors:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/2014/guidance_clld_local_act
ors.pdf
GuidanceonCommunity‐ledLocalDevelopmentinESIFunds
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/informat/2014/guidance_community_l
ocal_development.pdf
ESIFundsRegulations(CLLD:ChapterII,Article32and33):
http://new.eur‐lex.europa.eu/legal‐content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R1303&from=EN
5.1.2. Sustainable urban development Whatisit?
Under the ERDF, there are specific provisions for sustainable urban development. The ERDF
Regulations state that the fund supports, within operational programmes, sustainable urban
developmentthroughstrategiesthatsetoutintegratedactionstotackletheeconomic,environmental,
climate,demographicandsocialchallengesaffectingurbanareas.Theseprojectsshouldbeundertaken
throughIntegratedterritorialinvestment(seeESIFundsRegulationslinkbelow)orthroughaspecific
operational programme, or through a specific priority axis. In its PA, each Member State should
establishtheprinciplesfortheselectionofurbanareaswhereintegratedactionsforsustainableurban
developmentaretobeimplementedandanindicativeallocationforthoseactions.YourERDFManaging
Authorityshouldinformyouabouttheselectioncriteriaandallocationoffundsforyourcountry(see
chapter4.2,Step2“GetInformed”).
In each country, at least 5% of the ERDF resources allocated to the “Investment for growth and jobs
goal” should be allocated to integrated actions for sustainable urban development where cities, sub‐
regionalorlocalbodiesresponsibleforimplementingsustainableurbanstrategiesareresponsiblefor
themanagingand/orimplementing(e.g.throughglobalgrants,seechapter5.2.4.)theseprojects.
Whentouseit?
Sustainable urban development strategies are ideal for addressing the problems of Roma living in
urban areas; these projects are therefore highly recommendable in situations with Roma population
livinginurbanneighbourhoods(e.g.seeSituation1&2,chapter3.2.).Sustainableurbandevelopment
strategies are based on a territorial approach and they can cover specific areas including
neighbourhoodsorareaswereRomaareliving.Theymustbeinclusiveandaddresstheproblemsand
needsofallinhabitantsoftheareabytakingintoaccounttheneedsofmarginalisedcommunities,such
astheRoma.
Previous experiences from ERDF‐funded projects (e.g. URBAN, URBACT) demonstrate the positive
effects of sustainable urban development projects. Respective websites also provide substantive
information,toolsandlessonslearntfromdifferentexperiencesaddressingRomaintegrationinurban
39
FinalversionMay2014
areas(seelinksbelow).
Whichactionscanbesupported?
Withinthecontextofthisguide,sustainableurbandevelopmentstrategiesshouldtheaddresstheERDF
investment priority “promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination”. These
strategiescouldbecomplementedwithanyofthefollowingERDFinvestmentpriorities:
Promotingsustainable
transportandremoving
bottlenecksinkeynetwork
infrastructures
Investingineducation,
trainingandvocational
trainingforskillsand
lifelonglearningby
developingeducationand
traininginfrastructure
Promotingsustainableand
qualityemploymentand
supportinglabourmobility
Enhancinginstitutional
capacityofpublic
authoritiesand
stakeholdersandefficient
publicadministration




URBANII:
http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/employment_and_social_policy/social_inclusion_fight_
against_poverty/g24209_en.htm
ROMA‐Net(URBACTproject2009‐2013):
http://urbact.eu/en/projects/active‐inclusion/roma‐net/homepage/
UrbanDevelopmentintheEU:50projectssupportedbytheERDFduringthe2007‐2013
period:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/50_projects/urban_dev_er
df50.pdf
ESIFundsRegulations(Integratedterritorialinvestment:ChapterIII,Article36):
http://new.eur‐lex.europa.eu/legal‐content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R1303&from=EN
5.1.3. Integrated Rehousing Operations Whatisit?
Integrated rehousing operations are interventions that combine rehousing activities with further
actions (e.g. in the fields of education, health, employment) that facilitate the inclusion of socially
excludedcommunities.Thistypeofoperationishighlyrecommendableforrehousinginterventionsof
marginalised communities as its integrated approach is the key to reducing or limiting the risk of
segregation.UndertheThematicObjective9,theERDFregulationincludesaninvestmentprioritythat
focuses on promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination; this includes the
provisionofsupportforphysical,economicandsocialregenerationofdeprivedcommunitiesinurban
andruralareas.
Whentouseit?
When planning rehousing activities for marginalised Roma and/or non‐Roma communities, an
integratedapproachistheidealwaytoreducesegregationofthesecommunitiesandpavesthewayto
fullinclusionintosociety.ThismodelishighlyrecommendableforsituationswithRomacommunities
livinginsegregatedurbanandsuburbanneighbourhoods(seeSituation2,chapter3.2.)
Whichactionscanbesupported?
ApplyinganintegratedapproachisarequirementforreceivingERDFfundingforrehousingactivities
targeting marginalised communities. When developing this type of operation any kind of segregation
40
FinalversionMay2014
should be avoided. It is recommended to combine rehousing interventions with actions that further
promotetheinclusionofmarginalisedcommunitiesinthefollowingfields:
Education
Health
Socialaffairs
Employment
&security
Desegregation
measures
Remember that ERDF funding can be complemented with ESF funding for the “integration of
marginalised communities” (see chapter 3.3.3.). These two funds are therefore the ideal combination
forIntegratedRehousingOperations.
2examplesfromSpain:


Thematicreportondispersalprogram.RehousingandsocialintegrationprograminMadrid:
http://urbact.eu/fileadmin/Projects/Roma_Net/outputs_media/Thematic_report_rehousing__L
C2_Almeria.pdf
IntegrationhelpsRomabecomefullmembersofEuropeansociety(Avilés):
http://europa.eu/ey2012/BlobServlet?docId=737&langId=en
41
FinalversionMay2014
5.1.4. Global Grants Whatisit?
Global Grants are mechanism in which a Member State or Managing Authority may entrust the
managementandimplementationofapartofanOPtooneormoreintermediatebodies,includinglocal
authorities, regional development bodies or non‐governmental organisations. This passing on of
managementresponsibilitiesallowstobetterreachtargetgroups,whichcouldbeRomapopulation.
Whenapplyingthismechanism,theintermediarybodytakingoverresponsibilityofthemanagementof
the funds has to bear in mind the technical and reporting capacities needed to manage these funds.
Havingsaidthis,GlobalGrantsbringcertainadvantages:



Funding is passed directly to the intermediary body for management, allocation and
distribution;
Theintermediarybodyisfreetodesignitsownrulesforoperationandadministration;
Flexibleeasy‐to‐useapplicationsystems,100%up‐frontfunding.
Whentouseit?
This mechanism is usually used for the implementation of small programmes at local level. Local
authorities considering applying this option for Roma inclusion activities should have a full
understandingoftheOPsbeingimplementedintheircountry(seechapter4.2,Step2“GetInformed”)
in order to guarantee that their plans are in accordance with the respective OP’s objectives.
Furthermore, according to the regulations, the intermediate body shall provide guarantees of its
solvencyandcompetenceinthedomainconcernedtoundertaketheplannedactivities.
GlobalGrantschemesprovidethepossibilityforconsortiums(e.g.agroupoflocalauthorities)toactas
one intermediary body. This option is especially recommended for small local authorities with little
technicalcapacity.
Whichactionscanbesupported?
Actions supported under Global Grants have to be in line with the objectives of the OP being
implementedineachcountry.Globalgrantscaninclude,amongothers:
Smallgrantsforthe
capacitybuildingofcivil
societyandRoma
organisations
Dedicatedamountsof
moneyforthespecific
actionsintheareasof
education,employment,
socialinterventions,
healthcare,etc.
Grantsallocatedto
severalpartners(e.g.a
localadministration
togetherwithaNGOfor
theimplementationof
specificprojects).


GlobalGrants:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/vm20002006/chap4_en.htm
GlobalGrantforBetterImplementationofEuropeanProgrammes(EuropeanTrainingCentre
Paris):http://www.etcp.fr/component/content/article/90
42
FinalversionMay2014
5.2. Examples of local and regional authorities using Structural and Investment Funds for Roma inclusion ExamplesoflocalandregionalauthoritiesusingtheESFforRomainclusion
Jyväskylä, Finland, where the city authorities employs social mediators to work with the Roma
community for employment support, home‐school liaison and to accompany individuals in their
dealingswithwelfareandlabourmarketoffices;
CountyLouthVocationalEducationCommittee,Ireland,whichobtainedESFfundingforaneducation
programme for Irish Travellers: numeracyandliteraryinstruction,trainingallowances,educational
materialsforslowlearners,childcareprovisionfortrainees,classesoff‐siteandinterculturaltraining
foreducationstaff;
Letanovce local authority, Slovakia, received support under the ESF for social and community
workers for classic social work support, interventions and counselling to help families at risk or in
crisissituations;thepromotionofleisuretimeactivitiesforyoungpeople;developmentofaclothing
bank and food bank; promotion of school attendance; preventative medical examinations and
vaccination; improved cooperation and relationships with the police and assistance with work
placements;
The ESF can be used to develop the Roma economy. The commune authority of Francesti, Valcea,
Romania is using the operational programme Human resource development, priority axis 6,
Promotingsocialinclusion, intervention 6.1Developmentofthesocialeconomy to create 23 jobs in a
socialeconomyenterprise,developadaycarecentrefor30childrenandprovideprofessionaltraining
forincomegeneration;
InItaly,the ESFhasprovided€936,000tothelocalauthoritiesfortrainingcoursestoimprovethe
skillsofsocialworkersinhealthandsocialcare.€220,000havebeenallocatedtoBolzanoandEmilia
Romagnaforsocialcooperatives,vocationalguidance,certificationandpersonalpathways.Laziowas
providedwith€360,000forplacementsinhealthcareandretailsales;
Most,intheCzechRepublic,hadbeenusingtheESFsince2005whenthelocalauthorityappointeda
coordinatorandclubfornationalminorities.UndertheoperationalprogrammeHumanresourcesand
employment the project PreventionofsocialexclusionintheRomanylocalities was granted €185,000
toprovideeducation(school attendance,helpwithhomework,motorskillsdevelopment,Computer
ABC, joint activities with parents), social counselling (e.g. anti‐debt, family difficulties, conflict at
work), labour market training (CVs, forms and work placement), accompanied by a system of
indicatorsandmonitoring(e.g.numberofparticipants).
ExamplesoflocalandregionalauthoritiesusingtheERDFforRomainclusion
North Great Plain, Hungary, where Nyiregyhaza local authority obtained €1.57m ERDF funding
dividedbetweeninfrastructureandcommunitydevelopmentfordesegregationandintegratedurban
development(housingimprovements,kindergarten,roads,playgrounds);
InLimassol,Cyprus,thecapital,ERDFfundsareusedatmunicipallevelinthoseareaswhereRoma
people live for the improvement of roads, water, street lighting, pedestrian crossing, tree planting,
bicycle lanes, playgrounds, the prevention of early school leaving, Greek language training (Roma
peoplegenerallyspeakTurkish);
Education in Hrabusice, Oslany, Slovakia, for school‐building, renovation, modernisation,
accompaniedbyafter‐schoolactivities;
43
FinalversionMay2014
Re‐development of municipal cultural centre, Galanta, Slovakia as a focus for cultural and social
events(Romafest,art,theatre,lectures,debates,exhibitions,youthclubandconcerts);
Southern Finland over 2009‐2012 where a €34,000 project of the City of Helsinki Social Services
Departments and a local college provide help for Roma people to complete primary school, reach
vocationalandhighschools,getinternships,findjobsaswellashelpyoungRomafamiliestocombine
familylifeandcontinuetostudy.
ThelocalauthorityofOstrava,CzechRepublic,used€238,000toreconstructtechnicallydevastated
but occupied apartment house in socially excluded area. The investment included a complete
technicalrenovationofinterior areas,constructionof newhousingunits,oldwindowsreplacement
andrevitalizationofanouterplasterwithrespecttoenergysavingsandotherenvironmentalaspects.
ExamplesoflocalandregionalauthoritiescombiningESFandERDFfunding
SouthGreatplain,Hungary,wherethelocalauthorityofHodmezovaraselycombinedESFandERDF
fundingtodevelopanintegratedkindergartenandschoolforRomaandotherchildren;
Emilia Romagna, Italy, where the €1.9m ERDF and ESF Pathways for Sinti and Roma programme
starts with outreach workers visiting camps and leads on to job‐centre guidance, aptitude test, CV
development,job‐seekingskillsandaprogrammeforinter‐personalskills.
Local charity organization in Cheb, Czech Republic, used ERDF (€650,000) and ESF (€755,000)
fundingtoreconstructandequiptheSocialServicesCentre.Itprovidescomplexofservicessuchas
shelter, social rehabilitation, social councelling and educational activities to prevent and combat
socialexclusion.
Local authority of Orlová, Czech Republic, used ERDF (€280,000) and ESF (€330,000) funding to
developCommunityCentre.Itprovidessocialservicesforchildren,youthandtheirparentssuchas
socialcouncelling,socialactivationservicesforfamilieswithchildrenandleisuretimeactivities.
44
FinalversionMay2014
Relevantwebsites
EU,DGJustice:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/
EU,DGJusticeandRoma:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/roma/index_en.htm
ECInteractivemapoflocalauthoritiesstrivingtoincludetheirRomapopulations:
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1860&furtherNews=yes
EUFRA:
http://fra.europa.eu/en/theme/roma
EURomanetwork:
http://www.euromanet.eu/about/index.html
Europe2020website:
http://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/index_en.htm
EuropeDirect:
http://europa.eu/europedirect/index_en.htm
EuropeanSocialFundandtheRoma:
http://ec.europa.eu/esf/main.jsp?catId=63&langId=en
EUCohesionPolicy2014‐2020:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/what/future/index_en.cfm
NationalRomaIntegrationStrategies:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/roma/national‐strategies/index_en.htm
ESIFundsRegulations(17December2013):
http://new.eur‐lex.europa.eu/legal‐
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32013R1303&from=EN
Contactsforyourcountry:
ESFManagingAuthorityinyourcountry:
http://ec.europa.eu/esf/main.jsp?catId=524&langId=en
ERDFManagingAuthorityinyourcountry:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/manage/authority/authority_en.cfm
45
FinalversionMay2014
ECDeskOfficersresponsibleforyourcountryat:
DGREGIO:
http://ec.europa.eu/staffdir/plsql/gsys_www.branch?pLang=EN&pId=1819&pDisplayAll=1
DGEMPL:
http://ec.europa.eu/staffdir/plsql/gsys_www.branch?pLang=EN&pId=473&pDisplayAll=1
Abbreviationsandacronyms
AGS
AnnualGrowthSurvey
CLLD
Community‐ledlocaldevelopment
CoR
CommitteeoftheRegions
CSR
CountrySpecificRecommendations
DGEMPL
Directorate‐GeneralforEmployment,SocialAffairs&Inclusion
DGREGIO
Directorate‐GeneralforRegionalPolicy(EuropeanCommission)
EAFRD
EuropeanAgriculturalFundforRuralDevelopment
EC
EuropeanCommission
EMFF
EuropeanMaritimeandFisheriesFund
ERDF
EuropeanRegionalDevelopmentFund
ESF
EuropeanSocialFund
ESIF
EuropeanStructuralandInvestmentFunds
EU
EuropeanUnion
LEADER
LiaisonEntreActionsdeDéveloppementdel'ÉconomieRurale
MERI
EuropeanNetworkMayorsMakingtheMost
MtM
MakingtheMostofEUFundsforRoma
NRIS
NationalRomaIntegrationStrategies
NRP
NationalReformProgrammes
OP
OperationalProgramme
PA
PartnershipAgreement
46
FinalversionMay2014
Download

Making use of European Structural and Investment