EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 5.9.2019

COM(2019) 406 final

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL EMPTY

Report on the implementation of national Roma integration strategies - 2019

{SWD(2019) 320 final}

INTRODUCTION

The European Commission published an evaluation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (NRIS) up to 2020 1 on 4 December 2018. The evaluation assessed the EU framework and how it mobilised other European policy, legal and funding instruments for Roma inclusion 2 . To complete the picture, this report of 2019 focuses on national implementation of Roma inclusion measures.

The main sources of the assessment are:

·reports from National Roma Contact Points (NRCPs) 3 ;

·civil society reports from the Roma Civil Monitor EP Pilot project 4 ;

·data on the situation of Roma from the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) 5 ;

·a meta-evaluation on Roma inclusion interventions 6 .

This report summarises the most important trends focusing on the four policy areas of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies (education, employment, health, housing), as well as fighting discrimination and antigypsyism. In each area the report highlights: the situation of Roma; summarises the main types of inclusion measures, achievements and challenges of their implementation (as reported by NRCPs); and formulates policy learning highlighting promising approaches and priorities to be addressed (based on existing evaluations, 7 feedback from civil society and NRCPs).

I. Substantive policy areas

This report contains the measures taken under the Council Recommendation on effective Roma integration measures 8 . The number of measures reported does not necessarily reflect the ambition or the effectiveness of efforts. In education and the fight against discrimination and antigypsyism most measures are targeted for Roma. In housing there is an even balance between targeted measures for Roma and general policy measures, i.e. mainstream measures. In employment, and to a lesser extent in health, Member States predominantly rely on mainstream measures to also promote Roma inclusion.

1. Education

1.1. Focus of measures

Most Member States (MS) invest in measures to reduce early school-leaving (18 MS). The next most frequently used measures include: considering the needs of individual pupils in cooperation with their families (14MS); increasing the access to, and quality of, early childhood education and care (13 MS); and encouraging Roma participation in – and completion of – secondary and tertiary education (11MS). Efforts are also made to fight school segregation; use inclusive teaching methods; and develop skills adapted to labour market needs (12 MS each).

What about the substantive focus of the measures beyond the above goals? Here we find that Member States most often opt for measures to improve educational attainment: fighting drop-out; encouraging transition to – and completion of – secondary and tertiary education; or providing support to compensate for educational gaps, or material disadvantage. Taken together these types of measures account for 36% of all education measures. Other significant groups of measures focus on: the transition from education to employment by supporting vocational education; career development and lifelong learning; and capacity development of professionals (9-11%). Less widespread measures focus on integrated inclusion interventions and introducing Roma history and culture in the curricula (6-6%).

1.2. Achievements and challenges

The most widespread achievement mentioned by NRCPs in the area of education is mediation 9 . Other achievements include: development of kindergarten capacities 10 ; improved support to fighting and monitoring early school-leaving 11 ; and including Roma inclusion and non-discrimination related topics in teacher training or national curricula 12 .

The most significant challenges highlighted by NRCPs include: school participation, absenteeism, early school-leaving, the transition from primary to secondary and the completion of secondary education. 13 Other challenges include: fighting segregation 14 ; ensuring and developing human capacities 15 ; cooperation among stakeholders 16 ; promoting early childhood education and care; 17 adult learning and second chance education 18 ; and data availability 19 .

1.3. Policy learning

Education is the area with the highest number of interventions and evaluations. It is therefore also the area with a relatively greater number of promising approaches and policy lessons common to several countries. Some of the important policy lessons in this area include: the importance of early intervention and prevention; the need to ensure participation and empowerment of Roma parents (as a key element of supporting children in each stage of education); the role of extracurricular activities for strengthening identity and social networks of Roma children; the relevance of continuous complex support measures (tutoring combined with scholarship and removal of other cost barriers) in promoting the transition between educational levels and to employment. Although affirmative action has helped to improve Roma participation in education, it is important to avoid dedicating specific places for Roma who would have qualified for regular admittance.

Especially in Member States with a high share of Roma pupils, a systematic, complex and long-term approach is needed to fight school and class segregation, which remains a pressing problem that undermines the success of other inclusion measures. Key parts of this approach include: providing early and free access to quality inclusive early-childhood education and care in integrated settings (both to prepare Roma children, and to overcome prejudice between Roma and non-Roma children and parents in order to prevent later segregation); supporting Roma parents in school choice; gradual closing of segregated schools by educational authorities; and distributing Roma children across several schools (through the reorganisation of school catchment areas). These active desegregation measures should be accompanied by additional financial and professional support to promote the social and academic integration of Roma children in mainstream schools such as: covering costs of transportation, school materials, meals, extracurricular activities, supplementary classes; training pre-school staff and teachers in new methods of teaching in integrated school settings (including overcoming stereotypes); facilitating communication between parents and schools; informing parents of the benefits of integrated education; student mentoring, after-school support for Roma children, employment of teacher assistants; measures to sensitise the general public on the importance of educational inclusion and intercultural education for community relations via campaigns and media 20 .

2. Employment

2.1. Focus of measures

The two largest groups of measures implemented by most Member States aim at removing barriers to the labour market (15MS) and individualised support for job-seekers (13 MS). Fewer, but still significant number of countries invest in vocational training (9MS), lifelong learning and skill development (10MS) and self-employment and entrepreneurship (8MS). The growing rates of Roma youth not in education, employment or training would certainly require even more efforts in supporting a first work experience (10MS). Two other areas that should be prioritised are: safeguards and personalised services to ensure that mainstream public employment services effectively reach out to disadvantaged Roma job-seekers; and positive action to promote Roma employment in the civil service.

What about the substantive focus of the measures? Here we find that Member States most often opt for individually oriented forms of support, such as employment subsidisation, other forms of cost sharing, career-development support (mentoring, coaching) and vocational training (altogether 35% of all measures). More general measures to promote social inclusion, community development, adult qualification and catch-up education make up 8-9% of the measures. Only one fifth of the measures target young people, which is clearly insufficient, given the challenges of Roma youth in employment.

2.2. Achievements and challenges

In their reporting on 2017, several NRCPs referred to the positive impact of economic growth on the prospects for Roma employment 21 . But even more NRCPs referred to targeted measures, such as regional employment programmes (career-counselling, vocational or on-the-job training and job matching tailored to Roma or vulnerable job-seekers) 22 . Such measures are even more effective when Roma are involved as mediators, social workers, or other service providers.

NRCPs emphasise three main types of challenges: capacity of implementing structures 23 ; discrimination against Roma 24 ; and attitudes and trust of Roma themselves 25 .

2.3. Policy learning

Ensuring effective transition from education to the open labour market, tackling discrimination by employers, and ensuring meeting of demand for labour with supply (especially among Roma youth not in education, employment and training) appear to be the most critical points in employment. In order to reduce the gender gap in employment and the rate of Roma youth not in education, employment or training it is essential to incentivise and cooperate closely with private employers and to explicitly target Roma youth and women under mainstream policies (rather than creating parallel employment structures). Improving Roma employability should also include development of IT and foreign language skills. To ensure employment, however, other barriers also need to be addressed, in particular discrimination by employers, limited social network of Roma job-seekers or traditional gender roles in Roma communities. A combination of training, supported internships and antidiscrimination measures targeting employers can play an important role.

3. Health 

3.1. Focus of measures

The two most significant types of measures reported by a majority of Member States focus on removing general barriers to healthcare and promoting health awareness (13-14 MS), representing a balance between supply and demand-side interventions. Other relevant measures include targeted vaccination programmes and access to specialised health services (6-7 MS).

What about the substantive focus of the measures? Here we find that Member States most often opt for measures improving the supply side (staff, facilities) of health provision (26% of measures). They also address the demand side by health awareness and information campaigns (21%). Other significant groups of measures include general actions to improve health and sanitation infrastructure at local level, and provision of preventive services (16-17%). Highly important interventions – providing Roma with health insurance and targeting health care professionals with antidiscrimination campaigns – are much less widespread (6-7%).

3.2. Achievements and challenges

The achievements most often mentioned by NRCPs are: vaccination campaigns 26 ; other prevention and detection programmes 27 ; improving hygiene, health conditions and access to healthcare 28 ; awareness raising 29 ; health mediation 30 ; and multi-stakeholder cooperation involving national and local authorities and civil society 31 . There was a notable lack of reference to antidiscrimination efforts; improving hygienic living conditions; and access to healthy food.

Challenges reported include: lack of coordination and effective communication between the national and local levels; maintaining appropriate (national or EU) funding or staffing 32 ; lack of self-consciousness on health matters 33 ; lack of health insurance coverage among Roma 34 ; and insufficient knowledge of health professionals on Roma issues. 35 There was also concern about low vaccination rates among Roma, which in some countries are reported to contribute to higher premature mortality and morbidity rates 36 . Participation and empowerment of Roma in health care initiatives is considered challenging, also due to low literacy and language barriers 37 .

3.3. Policy learning

Both measures and evaluations are scarce in the area of health (as well as housing), limiting opportunities for policy learning and transfer. The most broadly used promising practices focus on prevention via vaccination campaigns and the training and employment of Roma health mediators. It is important, however, that targeted support services actively aim to improve health awareness, change behaviours and build long-term self-reliance and ability of Roma to engage with mainstream institutions, instead of dependence on permanent intermediaries and long-term parallel structures. Antidiscrimination measures targeting healthcare professionals should be prioritised.

4. Housing 

4.1. Focus of measures

The measures most commonly reported by Member States aim to: ensure access to public utilities (water, electricity, gas) and infrastructure for housing; support desegregation; promote non-discriminatory access to social housing (10-12 MS). Only a minority of Member States invest in integrated housing interventions targeting marginalised communities in the framework of local urban regeneration projects (7MS) or use ESIF for community-led local development or integrated territorial investments (4 MS). Only 2 Member States reported on provision of halting sites for non-sedentary Roma.

What about the substantive focus of the measures? Here we find that Member States most often focus on maintenance, provision and repair of municipal and social housing (27%); infrastructure in Roma settlements (16%); as well as legislative measures, construction permits or legalisation of informal housing (13%). Explicit active desegregation, including the removal of slums, as well as integrated territorial measures or social/infrastructural support for the homeless is much less common as a central focus of investment (7% each).

4.2. Achievements and challenges

NRCPs reported that the most significant achievements were in access to social housing 38 . Another important cluster of achievements mentioned by several NRCPs was the elimination of slums and spatial segregation 39 . NRCPs also referred to results in the provision of halting sites 40 , access to public utilities (such as water, electricity and gas) and infrastructure for housing 41 ; the legalisation of housing 42 ; and in urban regeneration 43 .

Reported challenges include: spatial segregation 44 ; barriers for Roma to access housing in the private sector 45 ; as well as public support for and legislation on access to social housing 46 .

4.3. Policy learning

Housing is the policy with the fewest examples of promising approaches common to several countries. It is also the area where a long-term, integrated and comprehensive approach has been found to be especially critical, including: complementing provision of housing with accompanying support combining elements of employment, education, health and community development; and embedding interventions in broader national policy and legislation on land and social housing. Promoting spatial desegregation requires a targeted, coordinated, and participatory process: engaging Roma beneficiaries in the design and implementation of community and individual housing options; combining infrastructural and human investments; and awareness raising to reduce ethnic tensions and overcome resistance from majority society. Other areas that need to be prioritised include: developing the social housing stock ensuring improved access for Roma; preventing forced evictions as part of a multi-stakeholder, broad housing approach; and providing sufficient and culturally appropriate halting sites for non-sedentary Roma.

II. Fighting discrimination and antigypsyism

1.Focus of measures

Antidiscrimination measures most reported by Member States include: fighting antigypsyism by awareness raising on the benefits of Roma inclusion; awareness raising about diversity; and combatting anti-Roma rhetoric and hate speech (10-12MS). Few Member States invest in measures that seek to protect Roma women and children by fighting multiple discrimination, (domestic) violence, or underage and forced marriages (2-4 MS). Only 4 Member States report investing in measures to ensure the effective enforcement of the Racial Equality Directive (2000/43/EC). Even fewer refer to local or regional desegregation measures (3MS), or fighting trafficking in human beings (2MS). Only one Member State reported measures to prevent unlawful evictions or begging with children; and to promote cross-border cooperation.

What about the substantive focus of the measures? Here we find that Member States most often invest in promoting Roma culture and heritage as a way to raise awareness and fight antigypsyism indirectly among the general public (22%). Somewhat fewer measures target awareness raising to directly fight discrimination and intolerance (18%). Other measures focus on capacity development of institutions (15%), Roma civil society (12%) and human rights monitoring mechanisms (11%). Key areas that received less focus were the provision of legal support, the empowerment of Roma women and desegregation (5-6%). Only 16% of reported antidiscrimination measures targeted explicitly Roma youth, and 10% targeted Roma women.

2.Achievements and challenges

The achievements most often mentioned by NRCPs were: improving the conditions of Roma women and children 47 ; combating antigypsyism by breaking stereotypes or promoting Roma culture and history 48 ; and involving all relevant actors (public authorities, civil society and Roma communities) in efforts to promote anti-discrimination 49 .

Several NRCPs referred to challenges of improving access to legal protection and rights awareness 50 , as well as difficulties in fighting against stereotypes 51 and improving the situation of Roma women and children. 52 The mere fact that several Member States 53 – including some with large Roma communities and several with very high rates of perceived discrimination among Roma – did not report any antidiscrimination measures underlines the gravity of challenges in this area.

3.Policy learning

Experience with Roma inclusion actions shows that long-term change in any of the policy areas requires tackling antigypsyism and discrimination towards Roma, and building trust between Roma and non-Roma communities. To succeed Roma inclusion actions in all policy areas must be linked to common values and include awareness raising among the general public. To fight stereotypes, hate speech, and hate crime it is necessary to build positive narratives on Roma among mainstream society and strengthen Roma identity, via specific targeted measures to fight antigypsyism and promote recognition of Roma history (including the Holocaust). The most successful actions do not just align with, but rather transform mainstream structures and policies by fighting prejudices and stereotypes and building a positive image of Roma among policy-makers and other stakeholders.

III. Roma inclusion in the enlargement Region

Western Balkans geared up their ambition beyond expectations and mandate 54 and endorsed the same Roma inclusion objectives and working methods 55 as Member States. Solid and sustainable improvements on Roma integration are necessary to progress towards the EU. To take into account the effects of previous accessions, especially in the field of free movement of persons, progress on Roma integration is for the first time included as a full element in the ongoing negotiation in the accession process for Chapter 23 “Judiciary and fundamental rights”. The results of the 2017 survey on the socio-economic situation of the Roma in the Western Balkans, has allowed the partners to identify new challenges, such as enhanced support for successful reintegration of returnees to the region, and establish a solid basis for defining the requirements of the future Roma policy. For the first time a dedicated annex to this Communication focuses on Roma inclusion in the enlargement region presenting both detailed horizontal and country specific information.

IV. Conclusions

The review of Roma inclusion measures underline the need to identify and develop with active Roma involvement interventions that: respond to and are proportionate with the scale of the challenges; promise measurable results; and include realistic options to generate acceptance by society at large. Success factors for planning, implementation and monitoring Roma inclusion interventions are identified as follows:

٠Sufficient time not only for implementation, but for planning, consultation, engaging stakeholders, building trust with communities, monitoring, evaluation and policy review

٠Systematic collection of robust data disaggregated by gender and age to inform needs and context analysis; build a baseline; set targets; and populate outcome and impact indicators

٠Embedding targeted interventions in mainstream policy and legal frameworks to ensure that they remain temporary and promote effective equal access of Roma to mainstream services, instead of creating permanent parallel structures

٠Strong multi-stakeholder partnership – to ensure ownership, shared responsibility and sustainability 56

٠Active participation of Roma and all stakeholders in all stages (planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and policy review)

٠Intersectional, cross-sectoral, integrated approaches to tackle multiple discrimination and multi-dimensional exclusion

٠Gender and child sensitive approach: planning, based on the analysis of the needs of Roma women and children; comprehensive approach; and continuous support especially in critical transitions

٠Accounting for the diversity among Roma: reflect on the real needs; ensure sensitivity to local contexts; and address the exclusion and discrimination patterns faced by specific Roma communities

٠Tackling extreme poverty with a combination of territorial and group targeting in comprehensive interventions to promote long-term change

٠Explicit but not exclusive targeting to ensure consideration of the wider context and prevent resentment from other disadvantaged groups

٠Prioritisation of prevention and early intervention to ensure cost efficiency and generate long-term, sustainable change

٠Desegregation (in education and housing) as a long-term priority instead of improving quality in segregated settings

٠Recognition of antigypsyism to promote a strong non-discrimination approach in Roma inclusion interventions in all areas 57

٠Expertise to ensure quality, non-discriminatory services

٠Building the capacity of civil society, public administration and Roma

٠Visible, long-term political and sufficient financial support (including allocation from the national budget) to ensure institutionalisation of promising practices and sustainability

٠Flexibility to ensure success by allowing for policy learning and adjustment

٠Independent quantitative and qualitative monitoring and evaluation to measure progress, and ensure policy review

(1)

COM (2011) 173. In line with the Council conclusions (EPSCO 106665/11) endorsing the framework, Member States were to develop “national Roma inclusion strategies, or integrated sets of policy measures within their broader social inclusion policies”. The terms ‘NRIS’ and ‘strategy’ also cover integrated sets of policy measures.

(2)

COM (2018) 785. The term ‘Roma’ is used to refer to a number of different groups (e.g. Roma, Sinti, Kale, Gypsies, Romanichels, Boyash, Ashkali, Egyptians, Yenish, Dom, Lom, Rom, Abdal) and includes Travellers, without denying the specificities of these groups.

(3)

 For country abbreviations see  www.ec.europa.eu/eurostat . All Member States (MS) with the exception of DK, FI and IE (and MT that has no Roma community) reported in 2018. Given late submission of the DE report, it could only be included in Annex 1 (country summaries), but not in the thematic analysis reflected in the Communication and the Staff Working Document (SWD).

(4)

Annex 1

(5)

SWD

(6)

Meta-evaluation of Roma inclusion interventions, European Commission, Joint Research Centre, forthcoming 2019

(7)

Ibid

(8)

 2013/C 378/01

(9)

AT, FR, EL, ES, IT, LV, RO

(10)

e.g. CZ, SK

(11)

e.g. HU, ES, LV

(12)

e.g. AT, ES, IT, PT

(13)

AT, CY, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, LT, NL

(14)

EL, ES, HR, RO

(15)

EL, LV, SE, SK

(16)

ES, LT, LV, PL

(17)

BG, EL, ES

(18)

AT, BG, EL

(19)

HR, IT, PT

(20)

  http://www.romaeducationfund.org/sites/default/files/publications/desegregation_toolkit__2015_web.pdf

(21)

BG, ES, HR

(22)

AT, BG, CZ, ES, FR, HR, HU, LV, NL, SK

(23)

AT, EL, PL, PT, SK

(24)

EE, ES, LT, LV, NL, PT, RO

(25)

BG, EE, FR, NL, PT

(26)

EL, FR, HU, HR

(27)

HU, PL, SI

(28)

AT, HU, RO

(29)

CZ, HU, LT, SI

(30)

FR, RO, SE, SK

(31)

BG, RO

(32)

EL, HU, LT, SE, RO

(33)

BG, CZ, EL, HR

(34)

BG, ES, HR, RO

(35)

AT, CZ,

(36)

ES, EL

(37)

BG, PL, SK,

(38)

AT, CZ, EL, HU, LV, LT, PT, RO

(39)

ES, FR, HU, IT, LT

(40)

FR, NL

(41)

SI

(42)

HR

(43)

BG

(44)

BG, CY, ES, SK

(45)

ES, LT, LV, NL

(46)

CZ, BG

(47)

BG, EE, ES, HU, HR, PT, SK

(48)

ES, FR, HU, LV

(49)

IT, ES, SI

(50)

AT, CZ, LT, PT

(51)

EE, ES, HR, LV

(52)

BG, ES, SK

(53)

CY, FR, EL, PL, RO

(54)

Point 6: “Promoting Roma Integration Beyond the EU: the particular situation of enlargement countries”. Three objectives were set for the enlargement countries: improved used of IPA funds; enhanced monitoring; closer cooperation with civil society.

(55)

 Report annually on implementation; appointed National Roma Contact Points; held Annual National Platforms closely involving civil society organisations; held Roma Seminars; report on fulfilment of their commitments in the Enlargement Package and the Stabilization and Association Agreement Subcommittees.

(56)

 This also implies close cooperation between stakeholders working with Roma and those developing and implementing mainstream public policies, as well as cooperation between local public and private service providers with civil society working closely with Roma communities.

(57)

This should also include the recognition of the specificities of antigypsyism, hate crime and anti-Roma rhetoric, as well as the challenges faced by Roma victims in accessing justice, protection and support (such as underreporting also due to fear of discrimination or reprisal by investigating authorities, risks of re-victimisation, impact of the authorities' own biased attitudes on criminal law responses, etc.).