Introduction

• Author: Applica, Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion (European Commission), Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER)
• Pages: 4-4

Report on the online consultation

4

Introduction

Following the call in 2015 from the European Parliament to introduce a Child Guarantee

and the subsequent request to the Commission in 2017 to implement a Preparatory Action

to expl ore its potential scope, the Commission launched a study in 2018 which aims at

examining and making proposals as to how a specific programme could best be developed

in order to fight poverty and social exclusion amongst the EU’s most disadvantaged children

(i.e. children living in precarious family situations, children residing in institutions, children

of recent migrants and refugees and children with disabilities and other children with

special needs) and to ensure th eir access to the five key policy areas identified by the

European Parliament (i.e. free heal thcare, free education, free early childhood education

and care (ECEC), decent housing and adequate nutrition).

An online targeted consultation was conducted as part of the study. Its main goal was to

gather views on the feasibility, efficiency and overall benefits of a Child Guarantee in order

to help formulate the final recommendation in this regard. The consultation lasted 6 weeks

– from 14 January 2019 to 22 February 2019 – and the link to the questionnaire was sent

to more than 1 ,150 selected people. These consisted of managers in civil society

organisations working with children or concerned with child well-being, officials in public

authorities at national and sub-national levels, researchers and academics). The link was,

in some cases, forward ed by the contact p erson to associated organisations. In all, 301

valid replies were received.

The questionnaire began with questions to identify the profile of respondents in order to

put the replies i nto context. It then set out a set of multiple-choice questions and, where

relevant, the respondents were invited to clarify their replies and to add any further

comment they wished to make in a limited number of words. The questionnaire ended with

an open question, asking respondents to describe the kind of instrument that they think

should be put in place at EU level.

Once the consultation was closed, the validity of the information provided was checked by

identifying and coding missing replies, removing duplicates, checking for possible

inconsistencies in the answers given to different questions, and trying to detect any

‘campaigns’ by identifying identical replies to the open questions. Following this, the replies

to the multiple choice questions were analysed and the replies to the open questions were

divided according to the main themes and issues covered.

This synopsis presents the results of this analysis.

1 Profiles of the respondents

The majority of respondents (59%) r eplied to the questionnaire on behalf of an

organisation, while the remainder (41%) answered as individuals in their own professional

capacity (Figure 1).

A third of resp ondents worked in non-governmental organisations, platforms or network s

and a fifth in national public authorities. Some 13% of respondents were research ers or

academics, and 8% were from Managing Authorities for EU Structural Funds and 5% from

consultancies. Only 2% of r espondents were employed in an EU i nstitution or agency and

1% or less in each case worked in school s or nurseries, social partner organisations,

churches or religious communities or other non-specifi ed types of institution (Figure 2).