In a written answer to a parliamentary question from Alexander Jungbluth (ESN), the European Commission, represented by Executive Vice-President Roxana Mînzatu, defended the ESF-co-financed project 'JUMP – Additional Qualifications as a Pathway into Apprenticeship' in Cochem-Zell, Germany, as a complementary measure that does not replace state functions. The Commission stressed that the project's impact is measured at programme level, not project level, and that no misuse of funds has been identified.
The answer responds to Jungbluth's question of 27 January 2026, which raised concerns about whether such projects have structural impact or merely compensate for education system failures. The MEP asked for verifiable indicators on placements and costs, questioned the risk of ESF funds being used to establish parallel advisory systems substituting core state functions, and sought the Commission's assessment of subsidising pedagogical replacement structures without proven long-term effectiveness.
The Commission clarified that national authorities use programme-level indicators: output indicator CO06 (young people under 25) and result indicator CVR2 (participants gaining a qualification upon leaving). It stated that each programme document includes a chapter on excluding double funding or overlaps with other funds, and that it has no indication of misuse in Rhineland-Palatinate. Any suspected misuse should be reported to OLAF or EPPO.
Policy orientation and ambition The answer signals a clear policy orientation: the Commission views ESF funding as a tool for innovation and complementarity, not substitution. It emphasises European added value through co-financing innovative projects that can become best practices at national level. The tone is defensive but constructive, aiming to reassure that ESF funds are properly managed and that projects like JUMP address gaps without undermining state responsibilities.
Expected institutional follow-up No specific follow-up is announced. The Commission encourages evaluation of active market policies and coordination of national employment policies. Future scrutiny may arise from the European Parliament or OLAF if concrete evidence of misuse emerges, but the Commission currently sees no such case.
← Atlas › News › Employment & Social policy