The EMN report maps how European countries make use of alternative reception models.
This inform explores whether EMN Member and Observer Countries used alternatives to providing in-kind housing between 2020-2025 to applicants for international protection, while respecting their legal obligations and supporting applicants’ autonomy, addressing their vulnerability, and promoting their integration into society. It aims to identify and highlight innovative solutions that meet the requirements set in the recast Reception Conditions Directive 2013 for EMN Member Countries as well as similar solutions that can be found in EMN Observer Countries.
Read the report on the European Commission's website. (external website)
Key points to note
- Five European Migration Network (EMN) Member Countries reported implementing financial allowances as alternatives to in-kind housing during the reporting period (January 2020 to October 2025). These were used either as a continuous component of the reception system or as a contingency measure during periods of high pressure on reception centres. Germany reported using financial allowances to cover housing in excep tional cases, depending on individual needs and subject to the discretion of federal states.
- In EMN Member and Observer Countries providing financial allowances as alternatives to in-kind housing, eligibility was often linked to administrative require ments (e.g. formally accepting the reception offer), vulnerability assessments, or reception capacity con straints.
- Two distinct approaches were identified in determining the amount of financial allowances to cover housing: nationally fixed-rate systems and locally determined rates.
- All EMN Member and Observer Countries implementing alternatives to in-kind housing also reported systems to ensure that applicants have access to essential services such as legal support, psychological assistance, and healthcare.
- The majority of EMN Member Countries enable applicants to access mainstream public services available to their nationals or residents, or provide these services via reception centres, regardless of housing arrangements. Poland has developed specific mechanisms to provide services to applicants living outside reception centres.
- EMN Member and Observer Countries with alternatives to in-kind housing schemes reported specific measures to support applicants with special reception needs. Unaccompanied minors were expressly excluded from alternative to in-kind housing schemes in the majority of cases.
- Austria, France and Poland reported mechanisms to monitor applicants for international protection in alternatives to in-kind housing. Although not necessarily specific to applicants in private housing arrangements, they can provide oversight and ensure assessment of ongoing eligibility for financial allowances to cover housing. Cyprus and Ireland rely on applicants’ obligations to keep up-to-date records, while local authorities in Germany track applicants in alternative to in-kind housing schemes.