Blog post written by Haydn Hammersley – Social Policy Coordinator.
We hear the term “institution” a lot, but what does it really mean?
According to the definition agreed to by members of the European Expert Group on the Transition from Institutional to Community-based Care (EEG), an institution is a care setting that displays any of the following characteristics:
- Residents are isolated from the broader community and/or compelled to live together;
- Residents do not have sufficient control over their lives and over decisions which affect them;
- The requirements of the organisation itself tend to take precedence over the residents’ individual needs.
Is it permitted to allocate EU funds to support institutional care?
The European Union, through the funding it distributes to the Member States, forbids money going towards institutional care. We see this most clearly in the Common Provisions Regulation, the legal text that sets out the rules for the use of funds such as the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), both of which are highly significant for investing in social inclusion.
This regulation contains, in its annex, a list of what are known as “enabling conditions”. These are essentially the rules that must be followed for an action to be eligible for funding. Enabling condition 4.3 clarifies that relevant investments made through the ERDF and ESF+ must display “measures for the shift from institutional to family- and community-based care”. For the ERDF specifically, which is the fund with the biggest risk of being used to fund institutions since it can be used for developing and renovating infrastructure and buildings, the enabling conditions state the need for “measures for the shift from institutional to family- and community-based care” and “measures to promote community and family-based services through de-institutionalisation, including prevention and primary care, home-care and community-based services.”
In other words, if you are funding institutional care, this clearly does no fulfil the eligibility criteria and you should not receive the money.
How to prevent the funding of institutions: a new guide
Up to here then things seem pretty simple. We have a definition of what an institution is, and specific wording in the EU funding regulations explaining that money must be used to move away from such settings in favour of community-based services. Unfortunately, this alone is not enough to prevent EU funds going towards renovating or building new institutions.
In some cases, what we come up against is a very clear disregard for the funding regulations. This was the case recently in Poland where EU funds were being approved for the creation of large scale institutions, in some cases being built in old school building, housing a very large number of people in segregated and controlled premises, and depicting institutionalisation in its most traditional sense.
In other cases, the misuse of funding is more nuanced and thus more difficult to oppose. One of the issues is that definition of institutions, such as that given above, is easy to manipulate and thus open to interpretation by the national managing authorities that decide where the EU funds will go. The definition we have referenced points to the ethos and character of services as a deciding factor in what makes an institution, which are things that can be easily hidden and difficult to decipher when funding proposals are made.
The response of the European Commission to this problem has been to propose guidance to the EU Member States on Independent Living and Inclusion in the Community, planned for release later this year. The aim of the guidance will be to offer more clarify on what things the managing authorities should look out for when assessing funding proposals.
The EEG guidance: a proposal to improve independent living and social inclusion
To assist the Commission in this task, the European Expert Group on the Transition from Institutional to Community-based Care have produced their own guidance in parallel. The EEG guidance sets out a series of “red flags” that managing authorities should be aware of, and which indicate that the funding proposal will likely further institutionalisation.
In the same way, it also presents a list of positive characteristics to look out for, which would indicate that the proposed action will be community-based and lead to greater autonomy and social inclusion for service users. The guide is divided into 6 instructional sections, each with specific criteria to look out for. The sections are:
- How to spot an institution and ensure funding does not go to continuing institutional care
- How to invest money in services that promote independent living and inclusion in the community
- How to adapt services for the specific needs of children and minors, and how to offer support to families
- Promoting independent living and inclusion through accessible environments
- How to avoid expenditures that indirectly reinforce segregation
- How to better monitor improvements in the provision of personal assistance and inclusion in the community
You can read the entire EEG guidance here (PDF format).
Contact
Haydn Hammersley, EDF Social Policy Coordinator
haydn.hammersley@edf-feph.org
Photo credit: iStock