• Most Member States distribute child protection responsibilities among ministries and across national, regional and local authorities.
• Child protection responsibilities at national level are assigned to and/or shared among ministries of welfare, social affairs, justice and education in many Member States.
• Member States’ approaches to the decentralisation of child protection systems vary. Some Member States assign responsibilities to regional or local authorities and other bodies. For instance, child protection is a regional-level responsibility in some federal states or Member States with autonomous territories.
• National authorities maintain the right and responsibility to coordinate and set standards at national level in some Member States. In others, local or regional authorities carry full responsibility and enjoy high levels of autonomy.

Child protection responsibilities are decentralised at different levels, apart from in Ireland, Luxembourg and Malta. These three countries have established centralised authorities. Ireland has the Child and Family Agency, which reports to the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth. Luxembourg has the National Office for Children (Office National de l’Enfance). Malta has the Child Protection Directorate and the Directorate for Alternative Care (Children and Youth).

Sweden decentralises the operation of its child protection system. However, it uses national law to supervise and regulate this.

Some Member States assign responsibilities to regional/provincial authorities: Belgium and Cyprus. Others assign them to local/municipal authorities: Bulgaria, Germany, Estonia, Portugal and Romania.

In Belgium, Spain and Austria, child protection responsibility lies at regional level. However, municipal authorities bear primary responsibility for child protection.

Regional and local authorities share responsibilities in 16 Member States: Czechia, Denmark, Greece, Spain, France, Croatia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia and Finland. Municipalities hold no primary responsibility for child protection.

In some Member States, there are specific directorates for child protection, such as Romania’s General Directorate of Social Assistance and Child Protection. These directorates are in charge of ensuring the implementation of social policies in the field of child protection. They also ensure implementation of policies on other people, groups or communities in need of social assistance. The directorates have a role in the administration and provision of social assistance benefits and social services.

However, these general directorates are often understaffed and underfunded. These issues prevent them from playing a significant role in ensuring the comprehensive protection of children. This is the case for Romania’s general directorate.

Other important initiatives have been introduced in several Member States. For example, the National Child Protection Service in Hungary is a unified institution responsible for the Budapest Child Protection Service and 19 regional child protection services in 19 counties. It represents the interests of children and promotes equal opportunities. The service aims to ensure regional institutions operate under the same principles and guidelines, making child protection services available to all children in all regions. It manages expert committees on child protection, hires guardians and coordinates placement activities.

In Spain, the Ministry of Social Rights and Agenda 2030, the Directorate General for Child and Adolescent Rights, the Public Ministry, the Spanish Ombudsman and the Childhood Observatory coordinate child protection policies. The Childhood Observatory plays a main role. The Childhood Observatory studies and monitors the quality of life of the child and adolescent population. It makes recommendations on public policies affecting children and adolescents.

Civil society organisations, non-state, private and community actors also play important roles. In some Member States, such as Hungary, civil society organisations are registered in tribunal courts. In Hungary, various authorities, including the National Tax and Customs Administration, the Hungarian State Audit Office and the respective court, control the organisations. Act CLXXXI of 2011 and Act V of 2013 regulate legal supervision.

The situation in Slovenia is somewhat different: agreements with civil society organisations are not in place. Slovenia’s child protection system is closely connected to the national social protection system. The national system covers measures for children, including initial social assistance, personal assistance, crime victim assistance and institutional care.

In addition, the Slovenian Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities collaborates with non-governmental organisations to publish public calls for proposals and co-financing of social protection programmes and programmes targeting families. The last public call for funding of family centre activities was published in 2020 for 2021–2025.

• In principle, the ministry assigned primary responsibility for child protection has a national coordinating and monitoring role. Subordinate administrative structures, such as national authorities or departments, assume responsibility for the day-to-day tasks.
• In most EU Member States, there are mechanisms for inter-agency cooperation between actors with responsibility for child protection. However, often operational coordination is challenging because of the overlapping roles and responsibilities of actors in child protection and the failure to clearly delineate these roles and responsibilities.

Coordination responsibilities, including monitoring, lie with the ministry that primarily holds responsibility for child protection in eight Member States (see Table 4): Belgium, Czechia, Greece, France, Latvia, Lithuania, Finland and Sweden. Within the ministry, a specific administrative unit is typically developed for this coordination.

Thirteen Member States have established a distinct authority to coordinate and often monitor the implementation of national policy and legislation. This applies to Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Croatia, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania and Slovakia.

In Estonia, Greece and Croatia, there is no formal regulation of the cooperation between actors with responsibilities for child protection.

In 13 EU Member States, a single authority is responsible for monitoring data collection and centralised coordination and data sharing at national level. In addition, 10 of those Member States have a national database for collecting relevant data.

Table 4 – Authorities with coordination responsibility and/or data sharing at national level, by EU Member State

Source: Franet, 2023.

In most Member States, the national legal framework allows national, regional and local authorities to outsource child protection services to non-state actors. These actors can be, for example, civil society organisations, private and religious institutions, and for-profit and not-for-profit associations that offer child protection services. This is the case in Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Finland and Sweden.

• Civil society organisations play an increasingly important role in this context. They provide key child protection services, such as alternative care, that traditionally only state actors offered.
• Private commercial entities offer alternative care services, such as residential and foster care, in most Member States.
• The growing involvement of the private sector can create challenges linked primarily to potential conflicts between the child’s best interests and the private sector’s profit interests. As a result, effective monitoring is essential.
• Some Member States are reinforcing cooperation between public and private entities to improve coordination between alternative care services.
• In recent years, several service providers, such as organisations or public authorities, have developed or strengthened their capacity in the area of mental health.

In 24 Member States, the national legal framework allows for subcontracting and/or outsourcing alternative care services to private/commercial institutions and companies. This is the case in Bulgaria, Czechia, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Croatia, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia, Finland and Sweden.

In some Member States – such as, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands and Finland – private commercial entities play an important role as service providers and run a large share of the alternative care settings.

Other Member States, such as Bulgaria and Lithuania, do have legal provisions for this. However, alternative care services have up to now been subcontracted and/or outsourced only to non-profit institutions.

For example, in Croatia, several non-profit institutions provide protection for children. These institutions include the Croatian Institute for Social Work, Centre for Special Guardianship and the Family Centre. Their work covers those with disabilities, those at risk of poverty, immigrants, and victims of abuse, exploitation and violence. These institutions also assist children in court proceedings and children with addiction, behavioural problems and sanctions.

In the Netherlands, non-profit institutions such as the Municipal Centre for Youth and Families provide crucial support to children and parents. The centre operates under the Youth Law. It offers information, counselling and assistance with child development and parenting. The centre focuses on positive support, including healthcare and support for families and their children.

Equally noteworthy is the situation in Hungary. Services are offered in a multilevel manner throughout the country. For example, since 2016, family and children welfare centres have been responsible for all family and children centres in a county. The counties, in turn, are divided into districts.

The centres provide special assistance regarding key issues. For example, centres cover issues concerning child–parent contact, social work in schools and social work in hospitals. They provide experts in legal and psychological assistance and support professional child protection work in the district and county.

Church-related organisations are also involved in child protection in 10 Member States: Czechia, Denmark, Greece, Croatia, Hungary, Malta, Austria, Poland, Portugal and Slovenia. Religious institutions provide, for instance, financial support, assistance of various kinds and counselling, care centres, crisis accommodation and other services. They also undertake street work.