All standards and indicators in the guidance should be read and implemented in consideration of the principle of the best interests of the child as outlined above.

As such, the guidance does not endeavour to create a model for the perfect reception system; instead, it aims at compiling agreed standards, indicators and good practices, which are applicable and achievable across all MS.

The standards included in this document reflect already existing practices in MS, i.e.the standard represents commonly agreed practice and compliance should be ‘ensured’ throughout national reception systems.

The indicators represent a tool to measure compliance with the standard.Alternative indicators are used in situations where different options can be applied to measure compliance with the standard.Indicators listed under e ach standard should be understood as cumulative without hierarchy.

The additional remarks represent an indication as to what could satisfy an indicator. In light of the different national contexts, the applicability of the ‘additional remarks’ might vary across MS.

The term good practice does not result from a formal evaluation and assessments but is based on current practice of some MS. While not representing a commonly agreed standard at this stage, MS are nonetheless encouraged to consider adopting these good practices into their national systems.Examples of good practices in the guidance refer to higher existing standards within EU+ States with the aim of promoting these examples

Figure 8. Examples of standards, indicators, remarks and good practices.

Annex I includes a table, which summarises all standards and indicators listed in this document. This table should, however, be considered in conjunction with the main document which provides additional clarifications (additional remarks, good practices) that support the interpretation of the guidance.

EASO’s mission is to support MS and associated countries in the implementation of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) in the EU+ territory (EU+ States plus Iceland and Liechtenstein) through, inter alia, common training, common quality and common country of origin information.As with all EASO support tools, this guidance is based on the common standards of the CEAS. The guidance should be seen as complementary to the other available tools, particularly the:

• EASO Practical guide on the best interests of the child in asylum procedures;
• EASO Guidance on reception conditions: operational standards and indicators;
• EASO Practical guide on age assessment;
• EASO Practical guide on family tracing;
• EASO Training module on interviewing children; and
• EASO Tool for identification of persons with special needs (EASO IPSN Tool).

This guidance has been developed for the functioning of the reception system. Situations falling under an emergency framework fall outside the scope of this guidance. Such situations are addressed by the EASO Guidance on contingency planning in the context of reception. Still, this guidance and the standards and indicators included should be taken into account as far as possible even in situations falling under an emergency framework. As set out in the EASO Guidance on contingency planning in the context of reception, every human being is valued and respected, regardless of the emergency situation. The application of this guidance should be carried out in accordance with the CRC and the EU Charter, all the while keeping the RCD in mind.

Previous

...............

Home

...................

Next