Providing Services

Municipal authorities may have an interest in providing appropriate access to different kinds of services for migrants with irregular status. This section provides general information on the reasons why cities may feel the need to provide services to migrants regardeless of status, and how they do so across different areas of service provision. The C-MISE Guidance was designed to provide extensive information on municipal policies and practices across a range of service areas, and on governance and administration, as an evidence base upon which municipalities may develop their own approach. These practices may offer a blueprint for other local authorities invested in making sure that everyone on their territory can access basic services, regardless of migration status.

Cities may be invested in providing certain services as a consequence of a legal duty. Municipalities may be required to provide some services to people regardless of migration status as a matter of national law (e.g. education for children of school age). As public authorities, they are also expected to respect the state’s obligations under European human rights standards, including the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the Council of Europe’s European Social Charter, which includes an obligation to provide basic shelter and care to the vulnerable. Municipalities may also feel the need to take initiatives to reduce the number of people with irregular status in their area through, for instance, the provision of counselling on regularisations or voluntary returns (see "Addressing irregularity"). Cities may provide services to irregular migrants in order to achieve their social policy objectives (e.g. ensuring community safety, public health, child protection and welfare, fighting homelessness and squatting), to ensure the efficient administration of public services, to respect professional ethics, to reassure the public or safeguard their public image. More information on the reasons why cities may feel prompted to provide services to migrants with irregular status are presented in the C-MISE Guidance (p. 11-15).

Municipal approaches towards irregular migrants are evolving across Europe. Some municipalities have formal policies and a specific budget allocation for services geared toward irregular migrants. Others are making informal adaptations based on short term needs. While service provision is generally intended to address the immediate effects of exclusion, in some cases the municipality also seeks to address the underlying problem of irregular status by facilitating access to legal advice.

Access is often more extensive for children and vulnerable adults, reflecting national legal frameworks as well as the priorities of the municipality. Municipalities may facilitate access to mainstream services such as school, or for instance extend the services of social workers dealing with homelessness to migrants with irregular status. A municipality may allow irregular migrants to access mainstream services from which they would otherwise be excluded, paying the provider if required. This avoids the development of parallel services and ensures a constant standard of service provision. As such, they may offer services such as education, legal advice, assistance to return, shelter, etc. In order to ensure that those requiring services feel able to come forward, there are a number of procedural steps that municipalities can take. First, municipalities may lift the requirement on individuals to provide their immigration status when accessing services. If information on immigration status needs to be recorded for this service, municipalities may set up “firewalls” to ensure that personal information will not be disclosed to immigration enforcement agencies.

Alternatively, if national law requires evidence on immigration status before a service is used, municipalities may partner with NGOs or provide funding to NGOs to provide the service. Indeed, NGOs may either not ask for information on immigration status or, if that information is needed to provide the service, have no duty to disclose it. These NGOs may also be better suited to provide the service, as they may have closer proximity with irregular migrants, who tend to be wary of approaching official services due to fears of detection and deportation. Providing certain services through NGOs may also represent a most suitable alternative if provision of services is a sensitive issue or when municipalities are looking to reduce their direct costs.

The C-MISE Guidance provides extensive information on general principles on providing access to services, applying to any area of service provision. If you want to learn more about local initiatives in this area, follow the link below and access the C-MISE Guidance (pages 24-30).

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic posed unprecedented challenges to European cities in their responses to new and old social needs. On the one hand, it exacerbated sanitary, social and economic vulnerabilities and exposed the risks of having groups of informal residents at the margins of society with limited or no contacts with the authorities. On the other, the new context revamped the policy debate over the opportunity of formally including certain irregular migrants into European societies, as a consequence of both public health considerations, but also reflections on the essential contribution to local economies and societies made by migrants, including those with irregular status, and particularly in the agricultural and care sectors. During the pandemic, additional reasons in support of inclusive service provision (including, for instance, the need to provide facilities for self-isolation) led national and local authorities to revisit their policies and provide additional services to all, regardless of migration status.

Cities’ approaches towards irregular migrants are evolving across Europe. They reflect a complex pattern of entitlements and restrictions at European, national and local levels; and the tensions in multi-level governance that can emerge where national, regional and municipal priorities do not coincide.65 Some cities have formal policies relating to irregular migrants and a specific budget allocation for relevant services. Others are making adaptations which are less formal in approach, or less coordinated across the authority. While other cities have to yet develop an approach towards its irregular migrant populations.

Access to services is often more extensive for children and vulnerable adults, reflecting national legal frameworks as well as the priorities of the municipality. While some service provision is intended to address the immediate effects of exclusion, in other cases the municipality also seeks to address the underlying problem of irregular status, for example by facilitating access to legal advice.

Municipalities may facilitate access to mainstream services where this is appropriate. Examples include admitting children to mainstream schools and pre-school facilities, or extending the services of social workers dealing with homelessness to homeless migrants with irregular status. A municipality may enable an individual to pay for a mainstream service from which they would otherwise be excluded. In other cases, separate arrangements may be made for irregular migrants, or they may be included within a service provided for other migrants. The service may be provided in whole or part by staff working for the authority or another public sector body. Alternatively, funding may be provided to NGOs to provide the service, in particular where there are restrictions on the municipality providing the service, or concerns about data sharing.

In order to ensure that those requiring services feel able to come forward, municipalities need to be able to provide assurances that personal information will not be disclosed to authorities responsible for enforcing immigration laws. There are a number of ways in which such a data ‘firewall’ can be erected.

Facilitating access to mainstream services with other residents and/or other migrants

Municipalities may facilitate access to an existing service where possible, paying the provider if required. This avoids the development of ‘parallel’ services, ensuring that standards of service provision are maintained for all service users.

Helsinki provides children and pregnant women with irregular status with the same health services as Finnish nationals in its public clinics and hospitals. Other irregular migrants can receive treatment for a wider range of illnesses than are accessible under national arrangements.
Barcelona encourages migrants to access Spanish and Catalan language classes, training and employment services, regardless of immigration status.
Ghent provides an information and advice service for all migrants and for Belgian nationals.
Liverpool decided in 2018 to open its night and day shelters to any rough sleeper, regardless of immigration status. This is also the case in Oslo.

Provide a service for irregular migrants who cannot access a mainstream service

An alternative arrangement is made for situations where it is not possible for irregular migrants to use a mainstream service.

Cities of Helsinki and Espoo have created specific units within the department of social services that may provide necessary social services, based on an individual assessment, for any irregular migrant in need in the municipality. This support may include shelter, cash assistance for food and other necessities, a transportation card, and social and legal guidance.
Five Dutch municipalities (Amsterdam, Eindhoven, Groningen, Rotterdam and Utrecht) have run a pilot project together with the national government to offer shelter and case management (LVV) to irregular migrants on the condition that they were working towards voluntary return, onward migration or regularisation. Participants receive shelter, counselling and financial support for food and other necessities. During their participation in the programme, people are temporarily protected from detention and deportation.
In Malmö, irregular migrants can apply for emergency assistance, usually in the form of financial assistance for food and medicine and/or a space in a municipal shelter for people experiencing homelessness. When a person does not have a residence permit, the application is examined in relation to the person’s need, to prevent danger to life and health. They must show they are staying in the municipality, are in an emergency situation, unable to meet their basic needs, and are not receiving assistance from the Swedish Migration Agency.
Cities such as Frankfurt and Dusseldorf established or fund clinics, sometimes in association with NGOs that provide medical care for those without access to the mainstream healthcare system.
Cities such as Utrecht and Helsinki provide access to legal advice for resolution of immigration status, whether directly or through an NGO.
Genoa provides a range of services (including shelter and food) directly to vulnerable irregular migrants, including unaccompanied minors, victims of trafficking and pregnant women.

In Focus: Provision through or in partnership with NGOs

Municipalities may provide a service in partnership with an NGO or may fund, or contribute to the funding of, an NGO service provider.

Why do municipalities work with or fund NGOs to provide services?

An NGO can be well informed regarding the changing situation of irregular migrants and have the expertise to meet their particular needs.• Irregular migrants may be more confident in approaching an NGO than an official council service
An NGO may not be bound by any legal duty to transfer personal information on service users to immigration authorities
Provision through an NGO may be less sensitive politically than direct provision by the council
Outsourcing a service to an NGO may prove less expensive

What can be done by local authorities?

There are a number of different possible arrangements.

Partner with one or more NGOs to provide a service

Düsseldorf funds an NGO to provide medical consultations and refer patients to specialist doctors, covering the cost of care provided.
Barcelona’s SAIER advice service is provided in partnership with six NGOs which together have the necessary expertise to advise on a wide range of issues.
Munich provides healthcare services for people without health insurance in cooperation with an NGO, Café 104, which provides free medical advice as well as advice and representation on immigration status.
Zurich designated funds to various NGOs to provide direct support to their clients to meet basic needs in the form of direct cash payments as well as vouchers for food.
The Trust for London funds secondments to the Greater London Authority for people working in civil society organisations to support migrants.
The NGO called Greater Manchester Immigration Aid Unit has collaborated closely with local authorities to support migrants with irregular status leaving the councils’ care.

Funding NGOs to provide a service or contributing to the cost

This is common practice across a range of services. Examples include:

The City of Zurich created a pilot program that offers “Basic Economic Aid” through civil society organizations to any person without access to traditional forms of social protection. It is based on living in Switzerland for 5 years (of which 2 years in Zurich) and the amounts disbursed are similar to asylum welfare (lower than normal social assistance). The pilot program was suspended by a higher authority, but a project with a similar approach was submitted by the local parliament in 2023 and is currently being examined by the responsible authorities.
Utrecht, Eindhoven and Nijmegen, where funding to NGOs includes covering the cost of some health services and medicines for which the individuals cannot otherwise receive reimbursement (such as dental care).
Stockholm and Gothenburg provide funding for places in NGO shelters for victims of domestic violence and other irregular migrants who are homeless.
Warsaw provides 40 percent of the funding for a medical NGO that provides services to uninsured residents, irrespective of immigration status.
Oslo funds an accommodation centre, managed by the Salvation Army and the Red Cross, which provides overnight stays during the winter for those without rights to other social services. Amsterdam funds an NGO to provide an allowance to irregular migrants in critical need with no means to sustain themselves (but itself authorises each case before payment).
Barcelona works with a network of 120 NGOs and provides funding to advice providers so that they may remain up to date on changes in law and regulations affecting their clients.

Providing other means of support

In addition to or instead of providing funding to an NGO, a municipality can provide other means of support. This might include endorsing an application from an NGO to an external funder, or vouching for the importance of the services the NGO provides.

Athens supports the Melissa Network, an NGO providing a range of services to migrant women, by endorsing the value of its work in funding applications and recommending it as a reliable partner for projects.

Many municipalities take steps to safeguard the personal data of service users from immigration enforcement authorities, while continuing to fulfill their responsibilities under national law. Provision of a service for people with irregular immigration status is only effective if the service users are reassured that their personal details will not be reported to immigration law enforcement authorities. Fear of detection and removal is a significant deterrent to using a service, even where an individual is entitled to do so under national law or municipal policy.

A separation between public immigration enforcement activities targeted at irregular migrants and the provision of services to them is known as a ‘firewall’. Firewalls are particularly relevant to such services as healthcare, social services, education and access to the justice system. Firewalls are implemented to ensure that individuals are not deterred from accessing essential services by a fear that doing so could lead to their arrest and deportation.

A legal firewall to prevent disclosure may be provided for by national legislation in relation to particular services to which government considers access important. Municipalities should be informed about the circumstances in which they are, or are not, required to transfer information on service users with irregular status to police or immigration authorities, and about the potential relevance of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) for their handling of this sensitive data.

Expand All

Legal and policy background

The Council of Europe’s European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) recommends that governments establish personal data ‘firewalls’ to prevent certain social service providers from sharing the personal data of irregular migrants for purposes of immigration control and enforcement. General Policy Recommendation 16, ‘On safeguarding irregularly present migrants from discrimination’ (2016), provides guidance relating to healthcare, education, housing, labour protection, policing and criminal justice, and specialised advice agencies.
Objective 15 of the UN Global Compact for Migration commits signatory states to: ‘Ensure that cooperation between service providers and immigration authorities does not exacerbate vulnerabilities of irregular migrants by compromising their safe access to basic services or unlawfully infringing upon the human rights to privacy, liberty and security of person at places of basic service delivery’ (para 31b).
The European Commission’s proposal for a Directive on combating violence against women and domestic violence (COM (2022) 105 final, 8 March 2022) addresses safe reporting through Article 16(5) by foreseeing that competent authorities may transfer information on residence status to migration authorities after the completion of the first individual assessment. However, at no point should a victim's residence status be shared without consent with any stakeholder – including migration authorities. This deters reporting of violence and hinders victims from accessing essential services and support; and violates their fundamental human rights to privacy and data protection, enshrined in Article 7 and Article 8 EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The European Parliament has proposed to delete the exception proposed by the Commission and has also proposed Article 19 paragraph 1a, ensuring that the individual assessment of support needs and the provision of support services are not dependent on the victim pressing charges, which is crucial for accessing victims support general and specialised services without any barriers.
National laws or regulations may, in particular circumstances, explicitly prohibit the transfer of information on immigration status to police or immigration authorities. In many countries, medical professionals and teachers are required to observe confidentiality laws regarding patient and student data. In Spain, this is also the case for data on the municipal register (except in the case of serious crime, where police may gain access). Under Swiss law, there is a firewall between tax and immigration authorities, so that individuals may pay tax without fear of their personal data being accessed for immigration purposes.
In contexts where there is a general requirement for public servants to report migrants with irregular status, a specific service may be the subject of an exemption. This is the case in Germany with respect to information held by doctors and teachers, and in the UK with respect to patients seeking treatment for a range of conditions including transferable diseases.
Professional associations may advise their members that transfer of data on service users would breach the ethics of their profession, as recommended by the World Medical Association (WMA). The WMA also urges local authorities to ensure access to adequate healthcare regardless of legal status.
National policy may provide for alternative administrative arrangements for service users with irregular status, allowing them to access services for which other residents have an identity code or number. For example, in Italy, where children are entitled to education until age 18, irregular migrants are exempt from the requirement to present the fiscal code of the student, and those of his or her parents, upon registration at a school. Instead, the Ministry of Education has provided a specific mechanism wherein such migrants may obtain a temporary code from the school to be used for the purpose of registration.
The COVID-19 pandemic also led to the reinforcement of firewalls in some countries, such as Ireland, to ensure that no data is shared between service providers and immigration authorities in compliance with the firewall principle.75 Similarly, the UK government has provided guidance to the National Health Service to ensure that no immigration checks are performed for people accessing testing and treatment for COVID-19, which are provided for free to all foreigners.76 Post-pandemic, however, the new Immigration Act does require from July 2023 some internal reporting within the healthcare system on patients’ migration status.

What can be done by local authorities?

There are a number of procedural steps that municipalities can take to ensure that someone with irregular status is confident that they can use a service without immigration authorities being informed.

Not ask service users for information on immigration status

The simplest step that a municipality can take to ensure access to a service is to remove a requirement that the immigration status of the individual is identified to the service provider. Municipalities can also ensure that their services, and those of NGOs that they fund, do not ask for information on immigration status unless they are required to do so as a matter of national law. For many services (such as libraries, social and cultural services, and public transport) there is usually no expectation that individuals will be asked for information that identifies their immigration status. Irregular migrants will therefore feel able to use these services. Where information on immigration status is currently required, municipalities can review whether this is necessary.

Zurich decided to review all relevant services to establish if immigration status is identified and, if so, whether such information is needed. The review will be repeated regularly to identify possible improvements in accessibility.
Athens has a food distribution service which is open to all those in need without questions asked about immigration status.
Amsterdam police initiated the policy (now nationwide) of enabling victims of and witnesses to crime to make reports without reference to their immigration status.
Italian municipalities, including Turin, Florence and Genoa, instructed municipal kindergartens not to require any documentation relating to a regular residence at enrolment.

The simplest step that a municipality can take to ensure access to a service is to remove any requirement that the immigration status of the individual is identified to the service provider.

Alternative measures where municipalities are required or need to identify immigration status

If information on immigration status is recorded because relevant for the service, the municipality can adopt a policy not to disclose such information if not required to do so. If national law requires evidence on immigration status before a service is used, funding can be provided to an external organisation to provide the service (usually an NGO). The NGO may either not ask for information on immigration status or, if that information is needed to provide the service, have no duty to disclose it.

Rotterdam asks midwives, general practitioners and schools to refer children for vaccinations regardless of immigration status, so as to avoid these children being excluded from that service.
Dusseldorf externalised reimbursements for medical services offered to irregular migrants to an NGO, which is not bound by a legal duty to report patients with irregular status. Otherwise, local welfare affairs offices reimbursing medical treatments for uninsured patients may be obliged to report those with irregular status.
Frankfurt established a local health clinic where irregular migrants can obtain free medical consultations anonymously.
Munich set up a mechanism for anonymous immigration case reviews, where irregular migrants, through the mediation of an NGO, can anonymously request an opinion on their chances of regularisation from immigration authorities.

If proof of identity, but not of immigration status, is required, municipalities can issue a local civic card that can be accepted as proof of identity or residence in the city when accessing services such as enrolment in a school. Such cards can be issued only to irregular migrants, or alternatively to all local residents so that the card provides no indication of status (a practice widely adopted in the USA).

Providing Services