Policy paper esf tni social inclusion indicators by A Blue Drum Evidence Room

Social inclusion indicators for ESF investments - Areas for development in addressing the 20% social inclusion target in the ESF April 2018

This report has been written by Fintan Farrell and Patrizia Brandellero, ESF Thematic Experts on Inclusion, through discussions in the ESF Thematic Network Inclusion (TNI) as part of the ESF Transnational Platform. However, the views expressed in the report do not necessarily reflect those of all the participants in the TNI, nor the views of the European Commission.

1. Introduction The Europe 2020 Strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth sets targets on poverty reduction by aiming to lift at least 20 million people out of the risk of poverty. Several flagship initiatives of the Europe 2020 Strategy support efforts to reach these targets and Cohesion policy is the EU's main instrument for achieving the 2020 targets. Statistics on the current situation show an EU average of 24.5% of people experiencing poverty and social exclusion, ranging from around 15% in the Czech Republic, Netherlands and Finland to rates between 35 and 47% in Greece, Romania and Bulgaria. The ESF regulation Article 4.2 states that “At least 20 % of the total ESF resources in each Member State shall be allocated to the thematic objective ‘promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination’.” In its baseline document adopted in 2016, the European Social Fund Thematic Network on Inclusion (ESF TNI) sets the policy background of its mandate and defines the main elements of its overall work programme including the following: “It is proposed that one cross-cutting piece of work be undertaken to develop soft indicators for social inclusion measures under ESF Funds. Work on this would be progressed at each meeting of the Social Inclusion Transnational Network.” The ESF TNI is interested in understanding how Member States currently account for delivering on this target, and to make suggestions for a further focus of the indicator tools to ensure that earmarked spending clearly addresses the current challenges and delivers measures with an impact on people experiencing poverty and exclusion. The current exercise is not intended to add additional layers to the earmarking and reporting on social inclusion targeted actions, but rather to reinforce the system in a way that supports the work of policy makers and those engaged in the delivery of the ESF alike who seek to support social inclusion through ESF funding by enhancing their potential for impactful results. The purpose of the present document is to: - Understand and make explicit the mechanisms currently in place for social inclusion earmarking of ESF spending; - Suggest ways to ensure a more in-depth inclusion-proofing of ESF spending;

- identify key social inclusion indicators, including soft indicators, that could ensure an adequate and targeted system for tracking the 20% ESF funding earmarked for social inclusion initiatives; - ensure that spending included under the earmarked 20% has an effective impact in terms of social inclusion, by reaching and impacting groups experiencing poverty and social exclusion; - suggest changes on process and indicators that would gain ownership from within the ESF system to ensure alignment, clear targeting and results. The present document is based on a desk research of existing EU documents and reports from 2016 (see Annex I), some of which are in turn, based on information available through the online database (SFC 2014) which stores quantitative and qualitative information from the 28 Partnership Agreements and all 184 ESF (mono and multi-fund) Operational Programmes across the 28 Member States. The Final report on the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Analysis of the outcome of the negotiations concerning the Partnership Agreements and ESF Operational Programmes, for the programming period 2014-2020â&#x20AC;? by the Fondazione G. Brodolini (with the support of CEPS and COWI) from 2016, and its in-depth analysis of data currently available has provided the main research basis for this document. This report has been developed by Fintan Farrell and Patrizia Brandellero, ESF Thematic Experts on Inclusion, through discussions in the ESF Thematic Network Inclusion (TNI) as part of the ESF Transnational platform. However, the views expressed in the report do not necessarily reflect those of all the participants in the TNI, nor the views of the European Commission.

2. Current ESF policy framework supporting social inclusion The Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) and the European Social Fund Regulation (EC 1304/2013) lay down provisions reinforcing the role of the ESF as the EUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s main financial instrument to achieve the Europe 2020 targets for employment, social inclusion and education. Relevant country-specific recommendations and National Reform Programmes, as well as the relevant Integrated Guidelines and other national strategies and reports also contribute to this. Overall for the 2014-2020 period, 187 ESF OPs have been adopted by the 28 MS, including mono and multi-fund programmes. These reflect a thematic concentration or ring fencing of ESF resources. The current framework proposes a set of approaches which are also intended to specifically support and target social inclusion measures: Thematic Objectives (TO)

In order to enhance impact, the ESF focuses its interventions on a limited number of IP under the ESF-relevant Thematic Objectives (TO) which are:  TO 8 - Promoting sustainable and quality employment and supporting labour mobility;  TO 9 - Promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination;  TO 10 - Investing in education, training and vocational training for skills and lifelong learning;  TO 11 - Enhancing institutional capacity of public authorities and stakeholders and efficient public administration. It should be noted that TO9 is not the only TO which is expected to contribute to achieving the policy objectives in the field of social inclusion. Such objectives may also be addressed by relevant interventions in the field of employment and human capital under TO8 and TO10, especially where IPs are dealing with increasing the access and participation in work, education and training for disadvantaged groups. Nonetheless, in this paper we will mainly look at the focus and scope of activities under TO9. It is spending programmed under TO9 that is counted for the 20% of ESF earmarked for social inclusion, combating poverty and discrimination. Specific Objectives (SO) Specific Objectives have been defined to narrow down the scope of the Investment Priorities (below) and fully capture and help measure the changes that the Member States seek through the support. Moreover, the specific objectives should be specific enough to quantitatively evaluate. They provide further qualitative information for monitoring purposes and include standard categories which can be chosen from by MS and which should relate to the IP selected. Investment priorities (IP) Nineteen IPs have been defined for the ESF within which actions need to be framed. The list of investment priorities is fixed and exhaustive and any action must therefore fall within one or more of the defined priorities. A specific set of six IP has been identified that should be addressed under the TO9 – Promoting social inclusion combating poverty and discrimination thematic objective (see box). Operational Programmes have to concentrate funding on a limited number of IP, depending on the level of development of the region. For more developed regions 80% of the ESF allocation should be concentrated in up to 5 IP, for transitional ones it is 70% and finally for less developed regions 60%. For each Member State at least 20% of ESF funds are to be allocated to promoting

Promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination (TO9) Investment priorities for TO9 i. Active inclusion; ii. Integration of marginalised communities, such as the Roma; iii. Combating discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation; iv. Enhancing access to affordable, sustainable and high-quality services, including health care and social services of general interest; v. Promoting the social economy and social enterprises; vi. Community-led local development strategies.

social inclusion and combating poverty, by programmes and actions under these investment priorities. Indicators In the current programming period, with a stronger focus on results, indicators are a key element of programming. The ESF regulation lays down a set of common indicators (see list in Annex). These include both common output indicators which measure what is directly produced/supplied through implementing the supported operations and result indicators which capture the expected effects brought about by ESF-funded interventions. The latter are defined at participant level (for both immediate and long-term) and at entity level. Member states further define programme-specific indicators and are advised to define indicators that best correspond with the SO within the IP, to facilitate capturing change achieved through the programme. Member States are asked to report on data relating to participants entering ESFsupported operations in their annual implementation reports based on the indicators provided. During the programming period, MS report on the common indicators even if these have not been selected to set milestones and targets in their programmes, as well as on their programme specific indicators. The data is collected based on a representative sample of participants within each investment priority for the output indicators on 'homeless or affected by housing exclusion' and 'from rural areas' and longer-term result indicators. The majority of indicators are otherwise collected at micro level. MS have selected almost 4800 output indicators across all TO in the ESF. The main indicators selected at national level are on employed participants, unemployed and disadvantaged participants and young people. Only around 30% of indicators selected at national level are drawn from the common indicators proposed in the ESF regulation annex I. Output indicators relate to the labour market status, age and level of education as well as disadvantages. 3. Current state of play on Social inclusion 20% earmarking Recent EU data1 available shows the total funding available for social inclusion for the current programming period was â&#x201A;Ź31.4B, of which â&#x201A;Ź21.3B came from EU sources, and involved 1.7M participants in Programmes across the EU.

1 https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/themes/9

According to a recent analysis looking at the 20% minimum allocation of total ESF towards social inclusion, around 25.6% of the total ESF budget is allocated to Promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination TO9:

Source: Report on “Analysis of the outcome of the negotiations concerning the Partnership Agreements and ESF Operational Programmes, for the programming period 2014-2020” by the Fondazione G. Brodolini, 2016

Most MS (20) have allocated between 20% and 30% of their ESF budgets to Thematic Objective 9. Only two MS stick to the minimum requirement of 20% (FI, LT), whereas 8 MS allocated more than 30% of their ESF budget to social inclusion (NL, LV, IR, BE, DE, FR, AT, MA).”2

2 The analysis of the outcome of the negotiations concerning the Partnership Agreements and ESF Operational Programmes, for the programming period 2014-2020 - Final report, Fondazione G. Brodolini with the support of CEPS and COWI, 2016

A breakdown of allocations according to the 6 IPs for TO9 shows the following : Promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination (TO9) Investment priorities selected for TO9 IP ESF % Number MS investe selecting IP d IP9.i Active inclusion 16.2% 27 IP9.ii Integration of marginalised communities, 1.8% 11 such as the Roma IP9.iii Combating discrimination based on sex, 0.5% 11 racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation IP9.iv Enhancing access to affordable, 4.7% 18 sustainable and high-quality services, including health care and social services of general interest IP9.v Promoting the social economy and social 1.6% 16 enterprises IP9.vi Community-led local development 0.8% 13 strategies

Comments

74.1% in NL 4.8% in BG RO CZ SK 10.9% CY

>5% in most

Highest 23% 4.5% in RO

Source: Report on â&#x20AC;&#x153;Analysis of the outcome of the negotiations concerning the Partnership Agreements and ESF Operational Programmes, for the programming period 2014-2020â&#x20AC;? by the Fondazione G. Brodolini, 2016

As the overview shows, most of the funding is targeted at IP9.i, Active Inclusion. All countries with the exception of Romania have selected this priority. The broad definition of this priority may make it easier to select it, and activities may be easier to fit under it than under other more narrowly defined priorities. While there is limited scope here to refer to the analysis that has been made of the Specific Objectives, it is fair to say that these do not always seem to narrow down the IP and target specific issues or groups in a way that can be measured. SO are sometimes broadly defined or not specific enough which leads to difficulties in measuring results.

4. Actions and target groups supported under TO9

Actions supported are both at individual and entity level. When looking at the overview and examples of activities, it is clear that there are several overlaps between the IPs earmarked for TO9 and those for TO8 and 10, focusing on employability and access to education. Examples of activities within the IPs are given below (more detailed examples of ESF practices are detailed in the full report by Brodolini Foundation): Promoting social inclusion, combating poverty and any discrimination (TO9) Investment priorities selected for TO9 and related activities IP Examples IP9.i Active inclusion pathways to employment, including integrated individualised approaches some flanking measures support to families at risk of poverty outreach developing local and regional partnerships IP9.ii Integration of marginalised Improvement and accessibility of communities, such as the Roma educational services, employment,

IP9.iii

IP9.iv

IP9.v IP9.vi

health Awareness raising on discrimination Local regional territorial policies Support equal opportunities Combating discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or Raise awareness belief, disability, age, or sexual Counseling, providing shelter orientation Enhancing access to affordable, Mostly actions supporting entities sustainable and high-quality (policies, working arrangements, services, including health care and integration), including the social services of general interest development of social services, including community-based services, the transition to community-based care, housing support, quality childcare services. Support start-ups Promoting the social economy and social enterprises Partnerships Community-led local development Support the development of plans for strategies guidance and training to vulnerable groups through actions such as community-based social work and territorial plans.

Target groups Under TO9, the main target groups to benefit from ESF support are shown in the graph below. The picture reveals that the target groups addressed in most IPs within TO9 are: the disadvantaged; people at risk of social exclusion and poverty; the unemployed (including long-term unemployed); women; persons with disabilities; Roma people; enterprises; migrants; local regional public organisations and entities.

It is clear that Member States have met the requirement to earmark at least 20% of ESF Funds for social inclusion, combating poverty and discrimination and the data shows that the funds earmarked for this purpose are primarily targeted at people experiencing poverty, exclusion and discrimination. The question nonetheless remains as to whether this includes those individuals and communities who experience high levels of poverty and social exclusion and are often very distant from the labour market. The question also remains as to whether the programmes meet the needs of those experiencing poverty, exclusion and discrimination (social inclusion) or whether they are focused on the needs of the labour market. 5. Targeting and measuring social inclusion â&#x20AC;&#x201C; current indicators Output indicators Output indicators relate to operations supported. An output is considered what is directly produced/supplied through the implementation of an ESF operation, measured in physical or monetary units. Outputs are measured at the level of supported people, supported entities, provided goods or services delivered. They are set at the level of investment priorities or specific objective.

The table below shows an aggregated summary of the 1195 output indicators selected under TO9, clustered to refer as closely as possible to the common indicators defined in the ESF regulation. They are shown by IP. The picture reveals a very high use of indicators on unemployed including LTU as well as inactive persons.

Aggregation of Output Indicator target values within TO 9

Result indicators Result indicators help assess the achievement of specific objectives, and are essential for the monitoring and evaluation of ESF programmes. 1085 result indicators have been identified. Based on the information below, where target and absolute values were defined based on the existing indicators, the most applied indicators relate to disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/training, gaining a qualification, in employment, including selfemployment upon leaving; Improved capacity/competence of Institutions/ Organisations; and in employment directly after leaving the project. Moreover, the target values show that a high number of institutions is expected to improve their capacities. The aggregated target values of the indicators show that 257,123 participants are expected to improve their labour market situation 6 months after leaving, and 138,234 participants to be in employment 6 months after leaving.

Aggregation of target values of result indicators for TO9 (absolute values)

From the data analysed, it is clear from the sheer volume of indicators in use that ensuring greater focus on social inclusion will not be solved by the adjustment of existing indicators or the addition of new indicators. However, some adjustment in the indicators could help and clearly other actions are also needed to strengthen the focus on social inclusion.

6. Suggestions to further focus the 20% earmarking on poverty and social exclusion The following suggestions are put forward to secure a greater focus on socially excluded groups and people experiencing poverty, exclusion and discrimination and to further target the earmarked 20% to ensure an actual impact on levels of poverty and social exclusion. For the reasons stated in the previous chapter the proposals go wider than just suggestions for adjustment or additions to existing indicators and include other actions to strengthen the focus on social inclusion.

General processes/policies:  Ensure that a Poverty reduction target is maintained as part of the general framework shaping the present and future ESF programme, in order to ensure visibility and ambition for the fight against poverty and social exclusion and to ensure that the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights is aimed at a reduction in poverty (Pillar Principles no. 6, 11, 12, 19 etc.) and inequality (Pillar Principle no. 3).  Increasing levels of in-work poverty demonstrate that while employment remains an important vehicle of social inclusion, it is not the panacea to social problems, nor it is enough to protect people from hardship. On the one hand, there are people in our societies who cannot work for a shorter or longer period of time, or need adjustments and reasonable accommodations in order to be able to take up a job in the open labour market. On the other, earning a wage is not always sufficient to protect employed people from experiencing poverty and social exclusion. For these reasons it is recommended that social inclusion be recognised as an objective in its own right and not just an objective in relation to employment. Therefore, the system of social indicators should be well balanced in order to take into account the importance of this objective and to ensure a) that it is well represented in the system of common indicators (annex I), at least, and b) that a good monitoring/evaluation system is set up to ensure that the impact of actions in terms of social inclusion can be well measured and evaluated.  Earmarking of European Social Fund spending towards promoting social inclusion and combating poverty must continue. It is recommended that, as a minimum, 30% of ESF spending in the future funding period is ring fenced for combating poverty, social exclusion and discrimination while ensuring that in real terms the funding available for this objective is at least on a par with the current ESF programming period.  The Active Inclusion approach for measures fighting poverty, exclusion and discrimination, should be encouraged in order to support all vulnerable groups that are facing poverty and are excluded from the labour market. This includes persons with disabilities, homeless people, ethnic minorities, people with drug

and alcohol dependency, family carers and other long-term unemployed people, prisoners and ex-prisoners and those who need support in access to services, including community-based services, and social protection, as well as in participating in society (e.g. families - including single parents, children, older people, migrants, ethnic minorities, undocumented people etc.) and people living in geographical or communities of interest experiencing poverty, exclusion or discrimination.  For the purpose of ensuring a clearer focus, it is recommended that in the context of ESF spending the following definition of Social inclusion be used: “Social inclusion is a process which ensures that those at risk of poverty and social exclusion gain the opportunities and resources necessary to participate fully in economic, social and cultural life and to enjoy a standard of living and well-being that is considered normal in the society in which they live. It ensures that they have greater participation in decision making which affects their lives and access to their fundamental rights” 3.  Ensure that ex-ante conditionality in relation to social inclusion is maintained, strengthened and given more prominence and monitored for actual impact both at the regulatory and programming level. Currently an ex-ante conditionality is applied on the existence and implementation of a national strategic policy framework for poverty reduction aiming at active inclusion of people excluded from the labour market. These strategic policy frameworks are currently drawn up in the preparation phase of the programming, which by definition is a timelimited and intensive period when it is difficult to achieve deep stakeholder engagement. The new ESF period should encourage these National strategies to be further developed during the implementation period of the Funds, with active stakeholder participation supported using the Funds. This should also include engagement in the implementation, evaluation and review of the strategies. Furthermore, poverty reduction should be decoupled from social inclusion. Exclusion is not a problem only in countries with high levels of poverty. For example, institutionalisation exists throughout the EU and not only in the twelve Member States to which the ex-ante conditionality is currently applicable. The next programming period should therefore secure that this ex-ante conditionality applies to all Member States.  Investment under all thematic objectives should be aligned to the ex-ante conditionality on social inclusion. Currently, investments in institutions continue under the thematic objectives on energy efficiency, digitalisation and transport.  Develop a focus not only on programmes tackling individuals who experience poverty, exclusion or discrimination but also a focus on inclusive community development. The Community Led Local Development instrument should be used as a model to develop area-based social inclusion strategies based on a 3 European Commission (2002), Joint Report on Social Inclusion 2002, Brussels

needs analysis to address geographical communities and communities of interest (for example: children and adults in institutions, Roma/Travellers, people with disabilities, single parents..) who experience high levels of poverty and exclusion.  Employment and training will remain a key focus for ESF. In the new period the focus must be on the quality of the employment addressing concerns about low wages, precariousness of contracts, an over-focus on activation, and the priority given to economic aims as opposed to people’s needs. A clear focus must be put on narrowing the gap to the labour market for those currently far from the labour market. Data should be collected on vulnerable groups and their access to projects aiming to improve the quality of employment, with special regard to persons with disabilities, women, migrants, Roma and others.  The current approach to investing in social economy and social enterprises should be kept and developed in the next MFF with the objectives of promoting social inclusion, fighting poverty and supporting the integration in the labour market and the other wide range of economic activities in which social enterprises are now present. We underline the importance to continue this kind of support and we ask Member States to further increase this focus in the next programming period. Relevant investment priorities for social economy should include the three main objectives of Social Inclusion, employment and Education.

Strengthening the use of Social Indicators: The reports studied show clear evidence that there is already a huge number of social indicators being used. Thus, the inclusion of additional social indicators or the adjustment of existing indicators must be carefully considered. It is therefore important to focus suggestions on the high-level indicators (common indicators included in the ESF Regulation that all countries have to report on). These high-level indicators could be strengthened from the perspective of social inclusion by the inclusion or adjustment of the existing indicators to include:  The number of participants engaged that are at or below the risk of poverty and social exclusion indicator  The extent to which the measures taken has lifted participants above the 40% or the 60% at risk-of-poverty rate  The number of participants engaged who experience severe material deprivation4. For participants aged below 18, child-specific indicators of material deprivation shall apply.5 4

The severe material deprivation rate represents the proportion of people living in households that cannot afford at least four of the following nine items: 1) mortgage or rent payments, utility bills, hire purchase instalments or other loan payments; 2) one week’s holiday away from home; 3) a meal with meat, chicken, fish or vegetarian equivalent every second day; 4) unexpected financial expenses; 5) a telephone (including mobile telephone); 6) a colour TV; 7) a washing machine; 8) a car; and 9) heating to keep the home adequately warm. 5

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3888793/5853037/KS-RA-12-018-EN.PDF/390c5677-90a6-4dc9-b97282d589df77c2

 % of participants from identifiable disadvantaged groups (e.g. children, disabled persons, lone parents, homeless people, children/minors/adults living in institutions, ethnic minorities, Roma/Travellers, prisoners/ex-prisoners, long term unemployed, people living in segregated settings…….)  The number of participants who have left institutional-type care settings  % of participants from geographical areas experiencing high levels of poverty and exclusion  % of participants who regard the intervention as having improved their situation and their chances to overcome poverty, exclusion and inequalities  % of participants who reach employment and who self-assess their employment as a quality job.

ANNEX I REGULATION (EU) No 1304/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 ANNEX I Common output and result indicators for ESF investments (1) Common output indicators for participants "Participants" ( 1 ) refers to persons benefiting directly from an ESF intervention who can be identified and asked for their characteristics, and for whom specific expenditure is earmarked. Other persons shall not be classified as participants. All data shall be broken down by gender. The common output indicators for participants are: — unemployed, including long-term unemployed*, — long-term unemployed*, — inactive*, — inactive, not in education or training*, — employed, including self-employed*, — below 25 years of age*, — above 54 years of age*, — above 54 years of age who are unemployed, including long-term unemployed, or inactive not in education or training*, — with primary (ISCED 1) or lower secondary education (ISCED 2)*, — with upper secondary (ISCED 3) or post-secondary education (ISCED 4)*, — with tertiary education (ISCED 5 to 8)*, — participants who live in jobless households*, — participants who live in jobless households with dependent children*, — participants who live in a single adult household with dependent children*, — migrants, participants with a foreign background, minorities (including marginalised communities such as the Roma)**, — participants with disabilities**, — other disadvantaged**. The total number of participants will be calculated automatically on the basis of the output indicators. These data on participants entering an ESF supported operation shall be provided in the annual implementation reports as specified in Article 50(1) and (2) and Article 111(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. — homeless or affected by housing exclusion*,

— from rural areas* ( 2 ). 6 The data on participants under the two above indicators will be provided in the annual implementation reports as specified in Article 50(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. The data shall be collected based on a representative sample of participants within each investment priority. Internal validity of the sample shall be ensured in such a way that the data can be generalised at the level of investment priority. (2) Common output indicators for entities are: — number of projects fully or partially implemented by social partners or nongovernmental organisations, — number of projects dedicated at sustainable participation and progress of women in employment, — number of projects targeting public administrations or public services at national, regional or local level, — number of supported micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (including cooperative enterprises, enterprises of the social economy). These data shall be provided in the annual implementation reports as specified in Article 50(1) and (2) and Article 111(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. (3) Common immediate result indicators for participants are: — inactive participants engaged in job searching upon leaving*, — participants in education/training upon leaving*, — participants gaining a qualification upon leaving*, — participants in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving*, — disadvantaged participants engaged in job searching, education/ training, gaining a qualification, in employment, including self-employment, upon leaving**. These data shall be provided in the annual implementation reports as specified in Article 50(1) and (2) and Article 111(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. All data shall be broken down by gender. (4) Common longer-term result indicators for participants are: ( 1 ) Managing authorities shall establish a system that records and stores individual participant data in computerised form as set out in Article 125 (2) (d) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. The data processing arrangements put in place by the Member States shall be in line with the provisions of Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995, p. 31), in particular Articles 7 and 8 thereof. Data reported under the indicators marked with * are personal data according to Article 7 of Directive 95/46/EC. Their processing is necessary for compliance with the legal obligation to which the controller is subject (Article 7(c) of Directive 95/46/EC). For the definition of controller, see Article 2 of Directive 95/46/EC. Data reported under the indicators marked with ** are a special category of data according to Article 8 of Directive 95/46/EC. Subject to the provision of suitable safeguards, Member States may, for reasons of substantial public interest, lay down exemptions in addition to those laid down in Article 8(2) of Directive 95/46/EC, either by national law or by decision of the supervisory authority (Article 8(4) of Directive 95/46/EC). ( 2 ) The data shall be collected at the level of smaller administrative units (local administrative units 2), in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1059/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003 on the establishment of a common classification of territorial units for statistics (NUTS) (OJ L 154, 21.6.2003, p. 1).

— participants in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving*, — participants with an improved labour market situation six months after leaving*, — participants above 54 years of age in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving*, — disadvantaged participants in employment, including self-employment, six months after leaving**. These data shall be provided in the annual implementation reports as specified in Article 50(5) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. They shall be collected based on a representative sample of participants within each investment priority. Internal validity of the sample shall be ensured in such a way.

ANNEX II References  “REGULATION (EU) No 1304/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006” - Annex 1 on Common output and result indicators for ESF investments  “The analysis of the outcome of the negotiations concerning the Partnership Agreements and ESF Operational Programmes, for the programming period 20142020 - Final report” Fondazione G. Brodolini with the support of CEPS and COWI, 2016  Follow up report on the 2008 recommendation on active inclusion (part of the social investment package, 2013 http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=9767&langId=en See annex (from page 58) for a quick overview of the Commission’s active inclusion indicators set.  EU portfolio of social indicators, 2015 http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=14239&langId=en Synthesis report of ESF 2016 annual implementation reports, Fondazione Giacomo Brodolini and COWI, December 2016 https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/4fd56da699bf-11e7-b92d-01aa75ed71a1/language-en/format-PDF  ‘Working age poverty: what policies help people finding a job and getting out of poverty?’ Chapter 2 of the Employment and Social Developments in Europe Report, 2013 http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&langId=en&pubId=7684  The better regulation toolbox: http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/guidelines/toc_tool_en.htm  Anton Hemerijck’s study on the returns of social investment: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&langId=en&pubId=7958&type=2 &furtherPubs=yes  Commission Staff working document “Taking stock of the 2013 Recommendation on "Investing in children: breaking the cycle of disadvantage", 2017  Commission Staff working document on the implementation of the 2008 Commission Recommendation on the active inclusion of people excluded from the labour market  “Developing social inclusion indicators for the structural funds - Guide for social inclusion NGOs and other monitoring committee members” EAPN report, 2008  “Barometer Report - EAPN’s Monitoring the implementation of the 20% of the European Social Funds for the fight against poverty”, EAPN report, 2016  Web resources ESF Operational Programme database on http://ec.europa.eu/esf