Introduction Measures for Newly-Arrived Migrants

5. What is included in introduction measures for new arrivals?

Why is this an issue?

Once the scope of eligibility has been determined, policy makers need to decide which measures will be delivered with public support. The suite of measures may be more extensive in a holistic integration programme such as those often made available to refugees. Alternatively, there may be instead a menu of targeted measures for which the migrant is eligible according to status or individual trajectory, e.g. if they are a job seeker. Some countries have mandated curricula for settlement programming (including Belgium (Flanders), France, Germany, the Netherlands), though these remain the minority. No matter the context, policy makers must determine which measures best support the endeavour of integration.

To do so, countries should consider the needs of migrants alongside their own policy regarding level of support. Having physical needs met is a baseline for humanitarian migrants. Other policy measures, particularly those designed to aid in language acquisition, are important for all migrants regardless of category. Some countries may want to go further to help migrants access the labour market and integrate broadly into society, while others, especially those where the majority of migrants arrive with a job in hand, may leave responsibility for labour-market integration to the migrant or the employer. Even these countries may provide job measures in the context of the public employment service, but they may not be specifically targeted to new arrivals. High overqualification rates in some countries may indicate that labour-market measures are needed even when migrants have high employment rates. Migrant overqualification rates are high compared to the native born in most OECD and EU countries, even though employment rates are similar in many countries. Overall, over 8 million foreign-born workers are overqualified in the OECD (and 3 million in the EU) (OECD/European Union, 2018[2]).

Policy makers also need to consider which measures would best motivate migrants to pursue integration as soon as possible after arrival. Competing demands on the migrant’s time means the utility of the measure needs to be clear. A country that implements measures that are unattractive to migrants risks both needless spending and the undermining of its own integration goals.

The question of what measures are included in the introduction catalogue should also be periodically revisited. As society’s needs change, so do the needs of recent arrivals to the country. Courses and integration counselling need to evolve along with these changes. Increased use of information and technology systems in the workplace, for instance, has led to a technological literacy gap. Digital literacy is vital to communication and success on the job market in most OECD and EU countries, but until recently, it has not been an area of focus for migrant integration. In part encouraged by circumstances surrounding the COVID‑19 pandemic, policy makers in several countries have recognised the need for digital literacy training and have increasingly incorporated such training into refugee resettlement programmes.

How to approach it

Ensure that migrants have the skills to facilitate labour-market integration

Developing basic skills and education

Across the OECD, 37% of the foreign-born are highly educated, a larger share than among the native‑born (32%). With the exception of Iceland and the Latin American OECD countries, the share of highly education individuals among immigrants has actually increased by 7 percentage points over the past decade. However, a significant number of the foreign-born are poorly educated (27%). The share of the immigrant population that is poorly educated is higher in Europe, surpassing 35% in Belgium, Italy, France, Greece, Malta, and Spain. In Türkiye, the share is over 50% (OECD/European Union, 2018[2]). In particular, a considerable number of humanitarian migrants arrive in OECD and EU countries with little or no previous education, and thus struggle to integrate. Specific supports are needed to ensure that migrants can acquire the knowledge and skills which are generally considered to be the barest necessities for any prospect of long-term employability. Introduction measures should include literacy training and adult education as necessary (Annex Table 4.A.1). Even where so entitled, immigrants are less likely to participate in adult education than the native born. The failure to attend may be associated with a lack of counselling regarding available opportunities. Tying this counselling to the initial assessment process could increase participation.

In some countries, policy makers have noted the need to make higher education accessible for migrants receiving government support. Investment in education is important for long-term labour market integration of refugees, especially in countries that have relatively few low-skilled jobs for which elementary education would be sufficient (Hernes et al., 2020[31]). Promoting higher education could alleviate problems with skills mismatch. In some cases, education initiatives have been driven by universities themselves. The Central European University offers the Open Learning Initiative, with full- or part-time programmes to help refugees access higher education. A small number of countries have, however, introduced systematic measures. Estonia, Finland and Sweden are among the countries that permit job-seeking migrants to use their integration benefit to pursue academic education. Canada and Denmark do the same for refugees. Eligibility for such programmes is determined on the municipal level in Belgium (Flanders). Norway’s new Integration Act removed a criterion that migrants be in need of basic skills to participate. Migrants with some education may now remain in the introduction programme and can receive financial support while pursing further education. The Netherlands’ Civic Integration Act, implemented in January 2022, contemplates an education route primarily intended for young people who want to obtain a diploma. In Germany, certain migrants under the age of 30 (or 35 for a master’s degree) are eligible for educational benefits under the Federal Training Assistance Act. In 2018, Slovenia introduced rules and exams to improve assessment of knowledge of foreigners wishing to continue education at the secondary level (or apply for a job requiring completed school education) or wishing to enrol in tertiary level higher vocational or academic programmes. The National Education Institute of Slovenia (NEIS) issues certificates to candidates who demonstrate competencies of primary education. The National Examinations Centre awards certificates to aid in enrolment in tertiary education.

Recognising and building vocational skills

Among challenges faced by new arrivals, their persistent employment gap with native‑born citizens often takes precedence, particularly in the EU, where immigrant unemployment is 11.5% against the native‑born 7.5%. Migrant unemployment places pressure on both migrant families and the government system. Work-rights are one key policy lever, but so is well-targeted social support to achieve long-term labour-market integration. Still, while self-sufficiency is one goal for integration, early self-sufficiency through employment may not equal stable long-term integration. Evidence suggests that policies focused solely on rapid self‑sufficiency may lead to faster employment but not to long-term establishment on the labour market (Hernes et al., 2020[31]). Over-qualification rates are high and a gender gap is evident.

Box 5.1. Public Employment Centres and Intercultural Expertise – the Norwegian Experience

Given their expertise, public employment services are a natural fit for job-related measures, but locating services for migrants within these bodies risks leaving behind migrants who have not identified as job seekers. The metrics of success of public employment offices and their services, often on a case‑by-case basis, are frequently in tension with the specific needs of migrants, who may need more specialised programmes than provided by the mainstream services. In Norway, welfare administration and employment services are co‑ordinated under the aegis of the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Organisation (NAV). In the past, Norway has experimented with specific employment offices to facilitate labour-market integration of migrants. The “NAV intro” offices were located in Norway’s four largest cities and provided each migrant with a specialised caseworker. The target groups were both low- and high-qualified migrants, as they were seen as least likely to be sufficiently cared for in the mainstream public employment office. Specialised expertise on diversity and the needs of migrants, close connections with employers built over time, and regular contact with migrants in work placement were crucial to finding work for difficult-to-place migrants. However, such plans are difficult to mainstream to all areas where migrants live, thus resulting in inequality of access. They may also take needed resources from “regular” employment centres by causing such specialised expertise to concentrate in one specialised centre. A better approach may be to provide basic training on the needs of migrants to all employment centres, acknowledging that areas with a large migrant presence may need a somewhat higher concentration of experts. In 2015, Norway decided to discontinue NAV Intro, instead integrating services for the foreign-born into their regular NAV offices.

Across the OECD, nearly two of three immigrants have obtained their qualifications from abroad. The vast majority of countries have established a right to have those qualifications assessed – at least for certain qualification types. Establishing a universal right to the assessment of foreign qualifications in regulated and not-regulated professions will either help match a migrant to a job for which they are qualified or help them identify the need for additional training (OECD, 2017[32]).

Information about how to obtain recognition could also be improved. The establishment of a centralised, one‑stop-shop for assessment and recognition of qualifications and skills will strengthen systems for recognition of prior learning and increase transparency. Ideally, this would be seated within the same body that is charge with directing migrants to or providing them with job matching or training. Online tools and phone hotlines are also useful. In Denmark, the Assessment of Foreign Qualifications Act entitles all holders of foreign qualifications to an assessment through the central recognition agency. Denmark has also developed an online portfolio (Min kompetencemappe or “My Competence Portfolio”) that helps migrants describe and document qualifications. Austria and Germany have instituted similar frameworks and technologies.

Publicly funded skills assessments and other supports are most often made available to humanitarian migrants in the OECD and EU. In some countries, such as Belgium (Flanders), Canada, and Israel, such measures are available to all migrants with legal status, and in others, these are available to job seekers as the public employment service deems necessary (Annex Table 5.A.1). In the past, Norway has experimented with targeting employment measures to migrants determined to have greater need (both high- and low-qualified) (Box 5.1). Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine led to the mass displacement of Ukrainians since February 2022. Some countries have offered this group labour market integration support in addition to work rights. Portugal’s Institute of Employment and Vocational Training (IEFP) has mobilised a task force to co‑ordinate skills matching between new Ukrainian arrivals and Portuguese businesses.

Many countries provide assessments and job matching through their public employment services, for example in Austria, Belgium (Flanders), Finland, Latvia, New Zealand, the Slovak Republic, and Sweden. In some countries, such as the Czech Republic and Italy, employment measures are not specifically tailored to the migrant population but rather simply made available to eligible migrants. In others, such as Sweden, specific measures providing targeted employment support for migrants are seated within the employment service (Box 5.2). The French Ministry of Labour’s Skills Investment Plan (a EUR 15 billion investment in upskilling and sustainable employment planned from 2018‑22) sets out EUR 63 million for the HOPE scheme, designed specifically to provide training, socio-professional support, and employment opportunities for refugees.1 Austria provides mentoring and counselling in different languages in specialised counselling centres. Other countries provide information to new arrivals about recognition options within the framework of an introduction programme.

Once a migrant’s credentials, academic or otherwise, have been assessed, they still require a way to show prospective employers that they have a recognised competency. Recognition procedures have been established in almost all OECD and EU countries, but in many countries, they are only accessible by certain categories of migrants or for certain formal qualifications. In Colombia, all migrants with regular status are able to access assessment through the National Apprenticeship Service and job training programmes through the Public Employment Service, but the government’s Ministry of Education has also implemented a fast track to validate credentials from Venezuela to bring migrants in need into formal employment. Some European countries have taken steps to facilitate expedited credential recognition for Ukrainians fleeing the war in their country. Poland and the Slovak Republic have shortened the timeline for recognition of medical qualifications for this group. Germany and the Czech Republic have both implemented “fast track” measures to speed the employment of Ukrainian teachers in their schools, which also serves the purpose of facilitating the education of large numbers of newly arrived Ukrainian children.

Box 5.2. Swedish Fast-Track Integration Programme

Sweden has developed a fast-track programme (Snabbspår), aimed at newly arrived immigrants (within 3 years if residency) who have experience or education in a profession where there is a labour shortage in the Swedish labour market. The fast-track programme is managed by the Swedish Public Employment Service (which is the responsible unit for introduction programmes in Sweden). Migrants must be registered as job seekers and have participated recently in the Establishment Programme (etableringsprogrammet). Participants review past experience with a counsellor who helps find the suitable fast track and translate any degrees or certificates. The aim of the fast-track programme is to combine validation of previous education/skills, internships, language training, and tailor-made supplementary education to quickly find a job where the participant’s previous education and experience will be used. Participants may receive social benefits (often an introduction benefit) while participating in the programme. The selected professions and content of the programme have been chosen and developed in co‑operation with relevant employers and trade unions. Over 40 fast-track programmes for different professions/careers have been developed, such as electrician, chef, doctor, nurse, dentist, pharmacist, teacher, butcher, baker, civil engineer, architect, social scientist (economist, lawyer), veterinary nurse, carpenter, and machine operator.

Link to the Swedish Public Employment Service’s webpage (in different languages): https://arbetsformedlingen.se/other-languages/english-engelska/extra-stod/stod-a-o/snabbspar

Job matching and counselling will be sufficient for many migrants, but others will benefit from upskilling and training. Major employers can play an important role in identifying the skills that are needed on the job.

Once skills gaps have been identified, countries should provide access to whatever upskilling or training is necessary. Denmark has worked with and supported employers who hire refugees (and accompanying family) through its Basic Integration Training Programme (IGU) since 2016. IGU is a 2‑year course that combines wage‑subsidised work with the opportunity to pursue education, upskilling, or even language learning, as needed. The company and the refugee agree together on the composition of the programme. The company then receives a bonus payment after the first 6 months and then again when the IGU is completed. IGU has generally been viewed as successful, with over 1 500 recorded programmes in 2018. However, the salary for a single adult is lower than the integration benefit once children’s allowances are considered, which has led some municipalities to advocate a higher pay grade to encourage greater participation by single parents (Bendixen and Lauritzen, 2019[33]). Although Denmark is not bound by the EU Temporary Protection Directive regarding Ukrainian migrants, the government extended eligibility for this programme to Ukrainians under a special law that entered into force in March 2022.

Partial recognition and bridging courses are cost-effective options in cases where migrants demonstrate some skills but cannot meet all of a host-country’s job qualification requirements. The topping-up approach prevents migrants from having to start from scratch, provides employers with credentials they recognise, and increase a country’s attractiveness for educated migrants. Such programmes are well established in Australia, Canada, Germany, New Zealand, and the United States.

Other migrants may benefit from specific mentorship programmes and encouragement to undertake additional training. The organisation Duo for a Job, initially undertaken in Brussels, but expanded in the Netherlands, Belgium, and France, matches migrants with native mentors who work together on a job search. Weekly contacts are encouraged, and 9 out of 10 mentors continue with mentorship after the migrant has graduated from the programme. This type of mentorship can also occur as part of a full package of measures within the context of state‑sponsored job programmes, as has been done by Network IQ, in Germany.2 Such mentorship may be particularly effective for migrant women. Contact with native women entrepreneurs who can address specific gender-related challenges on the host-country labour market could provide significant benefit in reducing the gender gap in employment.

Make sure that migrants have needed language skills while minimising lock-in effects

Countries have widely acknowledged the need to support migrants in developing a working knowledge of the host country’s language so they may participate fully in society. Speaking the host-country language allows migrants to access services, to communicate with employers, and to develop social contacts with native speakers. Putting in place effective language training for new arrivals provides a high return on investment, provided it is designed to match individual needs, and today, the majority of OECD and EU countries have some sort of language learning requirement (Annex Table 5.A.2).

Immigrants who speak the host-country language have significantly higher employment rates than those who report language difficulties – independent of the reason for migration and the level and origin of qualifications (Zorlu and Hartog, 2018[4]). How well immigrants master the host-country language also determines whether and to what extent they can use their qualifications. Unsurprisingly then, with the exception of Central and South American countries that receive migrants primarily from neighbouring states with a shared language, language education makes up the bulk of host-country expenditures on integration across the OECD.

Still, despite the known importance of language proficiency, it remains less clear whether state‑supported language training is increasing migrants’ labour-market performance. Attendance can pose challenges because of concurrent obligations, such as the need to work or look for a job. Supported courses tend to stop at initial or intermediate proficiency levels, not going far enough to avoid underemployment, particularly in countries with a low volume of low-skilled jobs. In most country, the number of supported course hours is limited (Figure 5.1), although in some cases, notably those where knowledge of the host-country language is less essential to labour-market success, such as in Malta, this decision is by design. Other barriers, such as the need to spend time developing trade‑related skills, suggest that language needs to be considered within a more holistic integration approach, rather than as an isolated skill to learn. Countries can improve the connection between language learning and labour-market insertion by addressing these issues, particularly by adding courses at higher or vocation-tailored levels and by working with employers to assist migrants in learning while working or developing necessary experience.

Figure 5.1. Hours of publicly-supported language training available by migrant category

Note: A dashed bar indicates that the country offers unlimited hours of training up to a certain language level or within a specified time. In some countries, migrants with specific needs may be eligible for more hours than the basic standard course.

Source: OECD questionnaire on introduction measures for new arrivals 2021.

Combining language instruction and vocational training has proven more effective than separate, parallel or sequential trainings in terms of future labour market inclusion, but the number of immigrants benefiting from vocation-specific language training in OECD and EU countries remains limited. The number of immigrants interested in a particular occupation or sector is often too low for providers to consider it worthwhile to develop the capacity to organise trainings regularly.

Still, despite its costs and organisational challenges, vocational language training in different forms is gradually increasing in prevalence. Vocation-specific courses have been embraced by Austria, Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Israel, Luxembourg, Portugal, and Sweden. Many countries offer courses that are specifically tailored to assisting with skills-recognition in high-need occupations, such as medicine. However, only a few countries have thus far been able to deliver work-related trainings in a wide range of occupations. This is the case in Portugal, where technical, sector-specific Portuguese courses are offered in retailing, hospitality, beauty care, construction, and civil engineering. Portugal has also recently authorised Qualification Centres to host these courses so that less-qualified trainees may gain easier access to skills and qualification reinforcement programmes onsite. Likewise, Sweden provides specific language schemes for certain occupations such as teachers, academics, engineers, economists, lawyers, social/human resources personnel, systems specialists, health care workers, entrepreneurs, bakers, craftspeople, and bus and truck drivers. Germany has implemented special vocational training courses for health, retail, and technical professions and is currently testing courses for apprentices in craft trades.

Another way to enhance the effectiveness of language training with regards to labour market integration and to strengthen on-the‑job and vocational language training options is to involve actors responsible for ALMPs in the design and delivery of language programmes, as has been done in Australia. In co‑operation with employers and professional bodies, ALMP providers can develop curricula, teaching material, training, and certifications for integrated language and vocational training and link language training to out-of-class activities, such as mentoring and job placements schemes.

On-the‑job language training may help address employers’ reticence about immigrants’ language qualifications. Co‑operation with employers can increase their understanding of what the language levels actually mean and assure them that successful learners have in fact acquired the language skills required for the job (OECD, 2021[10]). While rare, government partnerships with employers to provide on-the‑job language training have seen success. Germany and Finland have both created such partnerships. As part of the Finnish Integration Plan, local Public Employment Service Offices (under the Ministry of Employment and Economy) provide language courses that include a “working life period,” during which migrants work at a Finnish worksite. The office also provides support services for employers that offer Workplace Finnish or Workplace Swedish. The programme is tailored to the needs and language proficiency of the employees. Duration of the programme, delivery method (in person or distance), group size, and time of course offering are all negotiable. The employer pays 30‑50% of the training costs, and the rest is covered. Norway has taken a slightly different approach, encouraging public or private entities to provide training to workers themselves using Kompetansepluss (Skills Plus) funding. Certain Norwegian language‑training providers independently advertise their assistance to employers in applying for the funding and organising courses.

Find innovative ways to promote civic integration

New arrivals not only need language and job support, but also need to understand how the host country society functions and its expectations for its residents. For many host countries, civic integration measures have thus become an important component of integration programmes. These courses theoretically ensure that migrants know, understand, and respect the host country’s history, institutions, and shared values (Carrera and Wiesbrock, 2009[34]). Policy makers have approached the sensitive question of values from a variety of perspectives. It is important to understand how best to make the host country’s values explicit while respecting cultural and individual differences. Such a balance is key to avoiding alienating the migrant population to be integrated as well as to fostering a more welcoming society.

Box 5.3. Incorporating sociocultural inclusion into civic integration

Governments have increasingly recognised the need to support social and civic integration with active measures. France’s 2018 National Strategy for the Integration of Refugees has a specific focus on fostering links between migrants and the native‑born. Canada’s Settlement Program includes services that focus on building connections and promoting social cohesion. A wide variety of activities support informal learning for newcomers, such as conversation circles, museum visits, peer support through recreation activities, community events, and matching opportunities for cross-cultural exchange with Indigenous peoples and broader host communities. In Latvia, the Ministry of Culture has funded an improvisational theatre language club.

Beginning in 2022, Belgium (Flanders) has added a “Flemish buddy” to its formal introduction measures. This individual will act as a sponsor who can provide new arrivals with a network, ideally increasing their chances of finding a job or lodging.

Immigration New Zealand supports the “Welcoming Communities” programme, which – while not expressly dedicated to language learning – brings migrants together with native‑born members of their local communities to build connections for better social and economic participation. Similar initiatives exist in Australia, Canada, and the United States. Such programmes have the added benefit of potentially reducing the number of course hours needed for civic integration programmes by indirectly encouraging social inclusion in the host community.

Chile has placed emphasis on inclusion of immigrant players in on sports teams, particularly football and basketball, to create networks and exchanges. Surveys conducted for the Departamento de Extranjería y Migración indicate that native perception of immigrants has improved since the beginning of this initiative.

Romania, supported by the European Union’s Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF), encourages non-profit organisations to develop opportunities for interaction between migrants and native‑born. Regional integration centres partner with the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the Ecumenical Association of Romanian Churches to develop integration programmes, such as InterACT Plus, that specifically incorporate social and cultural activities to facilitate dialogue and interaction. These include celebrations of host and origin country national holidays, sports events, trips in Romania, museum visits, and cultural orientation sessions. Locally, the municipality of Bucharest created the General Directorate for Integration of Foreign Citizens and Diversity, which is charged with, among other things, increasing awareness of the native population regarding integration and collaborating with the immigrant community on design and implementation of cultural diversity initiatives.

The question of how a country works is a complicated one. Even those countries that offer a civic integration or “Life in…” course recognise that rarely is any society truly understood through a short civics lesson. Moreover, understanding the existence of certain norms is not the same as sharing them. That notwithstanding, such measures are considered as signalling to migrants and to the host-country society that social integration matters and is expected by migrants. While some countries have required a civics test (Annex Table 5.A.3) as a threshold for eligibility for residency, it is clear that this juridical requirement is unlikely to reflect the complexities of true sociocultural integration. Where civics courses and tests are required, they should be subject to carefully evaluated quality criteria. Policy makers should also recognise that integration occurs over the long-term, as a process over many years without a firm end-date, and thus cannot not rely on civics examinations alone to further migrant integration.

Some countries have sought to innovate civic integration by expressly including sociocultural integration measures in their integration programmes. These measures recognise the significance of exposure to cultural norms in informal, low-pressure environments and acknowledge the importance of direct government support to reduce the potential for dilution of responsibility that may occur with the addition of multiple stakeholders (Box 5.3).

Box 5.4. Public libraries and civic integration in Norway, Sweden, and the United States

Public libraries, as local centres of information, frequently act as a point of entry for immigrants into host society. They are repositories of information, provide fora for discussions, and serve as a point of access for internet for migrants who do not possess their own computer or internet connection. Countries such as Norway have invested in public libraries as independent meeting places and arenas for public discussion and debate (Ministry of Culture, 2014[35]) and used them to promote political integration through conversation-based programming and language clubs. Organisers invite local politicians, government employees, and religious representatives to speak about their work. Library language programmes in Oslo and Moss have organised tours to the Norwegian Parliament.

A study on a similar language café held at Malmo City Library in Sweden indicated that the programme supported language learning, information exchange on economic and social issues, and expansion of social networks (Johnston and Audunson, 2017[36]).

In the United States, libraries play a critical role in serving immigrant communities. The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has collaborated with the Institute of Museum and Library Services to provide training opportunities for librarians on immigration topics and to provide citizenship and other educational materials to libraries. USCIS issues guidelines for libraries to build a Citizenship Corner that can be tailored to the available space and to the immigrant population, with flyers in English, Chinese, Spanish, Korean, Tagalog, and Vietnamese. USCIS will also help libraries organise citizenship events and information sessions.

Civic integration can be enriched by increased exposure to social life involving host-country natives. Most countries rely on non-profit organisations that provide conversation groups and “language buddy” mentoring. In Portugal, the organisation SPEAK (www.speak.social), founded with the support of the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, operates on a city level, bringing together newcomers and locals through community-led language groups and cultural exchange events. The organisation, which expressly aims to reduce isolation and encourage inclusiveness, is now active in 12 Portuguese cities and has expanded to 10 other countries. In several countries, including Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, and the Netherlands, language buddies have organised exchanges around sport, and in 2016, a European Commission report outlined good practices in designing such programmes for social inclusion (European Commission, 2016[37]). In Sweden, Hej Främling! Sverige organises language exchange through sport- and nature‑related activities such as hiking and winter games in eight Swedish counties. Municipalities have an important role to play, given the need to increase migrant-native contact in the communities where the migrants live. In the Netherlands, subsidised community centres play a role in increasing integration. Meevaart, a communal centre in Amsterdam, created Meevaart Ontwikkelgroep (MOG), a foundation focused on providing activities by and for neighbourhood residents. It contains a café and 12 classrooms that offer hospitality to migrants, locals and refugees to meet, eat, and organise activities and training. Activities that promote the social integration of different target groups are prioritised. Amsterdam has 3‑4 of these community centres per city district. Public libraries are also a convenient and open forum that have been recognised to increase inclusion and integration (Box 5.4).

Annex 5.A. Additional information on labour language and civic integration measures

Annex Table 5.A.1. Characteristics of public labour-market measures

	Mainstream versus targeted measures		Individual skills assessment/recognition
		Eligibility Category	Y/N	If yes, detail
Australia	Employment orientation provided in humanitarian programme, but otherwise mainstream	All migrants	Yes	Provided by employment services (Jobactive programme)
Austria	Targeted mentoring, counselling for foreign qualifications, competence check	All migrants	Yes (for refugees or upon individual decision of caseworker)	Conducted by specialised counselling centres using multilingual interviews and trials (brief internships)
Belgium (Flanders)	Mainstream	Unemployed migrants	Yes	Qualifications/diploma recognition by National Academic Recognition Information Centre
Canada	Targeted work placements, mentorship, preparation for licensure/certification, networking opportunities, job search skills, employment counselling and job matching services	All migrants	Yes	Case manager may refer to mainstream employment supports
Chile	Mainstream	–	No	n/a
Colombia	Mainstream	A migrants in regular status	No	n/a
Croatia	Mainstream	Humanitarian migrants	Yes	Recognition of foreign qualifications
Czech Republic	Mainstream	Humanitarian, labour and EU/EEA migrants	Yes	Counselling at the Labour office
Denmark	Targeted (individual guidance and qualification, internships with relevant businesses, possible employment at a business with a wage subsidy)	Humanitarian migrants; All new arrivals	No	Skills are noted during the activation programme for asylum seekers
Estonia	Targeted work module	All migrants	Yes	Conducted by the ENIC/NARIC (Academic Recognition Information Centre)
Finland	Targeted integration training	All job seekers	Yes	Several options exist depending on reported skill level (vocational, highly educated) using a holistic assessment method
France	Targeted (partnership between the Office of Immigration and Integration and public employment services)	All newcomers with a CIR	Yes	The public employment service is piloting projects to improve assessment and recognition of prior learning and experience (Experience without Borders)
Germany	Mainstream	All migrants	Yes (for migrants with vocational experience but lacking a German credential)	MySkills: image and video-based questions to identify capability; Valikom: a Chamber of Commerce procedure to confirm skills; internships, practical work periods
Greece	Targeted measures for asylum seekers and refugees; all others access mainstream measures	All migrants with right to work	Yes	“Employability support” for asylum seekers includes job counselling and access to job-related certifications
Iceland	–	–	–	–
Ireland
Israel	Targeted	All migrants	Yes	Depends on professional goals
Italy	Mainstream	All migrants	No	Mainstream services may be available
Japan	Targeted (counselling and assistance, workplace adjustment training with employers)	Humanitarian migrants	No	n/a
Korea	n/a	n/a	No	n/a
Latvia	Targeted (partnership between social mentors and the State Employment Agency)	Humanitarian migrants, including asylum seekers	Yes (if registered as unemployed)	Through the State Employment Agency, assessment of skills and motivation, career consultations, individual job search plans
Lithuania	Mainstream	Humanitarian migrants and lawful residents exempted from work permit requirement	Yes	Employment Service checks skills and knowledge unless the desired profession is regulated. Competent authorities for regulated professions have established procedures
Luxembourg	Mainstream	–	No	PES pilot programme Connection4Works includes skills screening for refugees
Malta	Mainstream	–	Yes (for those enrolled in voluntary I Belong programme)	Transcript of qualifications is prepared that includes work experience and other skills
Mexico	Mainstream	Refugees and migrants with residence	No	Services exist for returning Mexicans
Netherlands	Mainstream, though some municipalities have targeted measures	Migrants with a work or temporary residence permit	Yes	Mainstream measures may include a skills assessment or credential recognition
New Zealand	Targeted (cohort specific pathways)	Refugees, residents, and certain visa holders (such as Essential Skills)	Yes	Depends on visa status. Refugees access New Zealand Qualifications Authority; residents access Careers NZ
Norway	Targeted (individualised under integration programme)	NIP participants	Yes (NIP)	Comprehensive skills mapping is conducted on municipal level using digital tool (Kompas)
Poland	Some targeted measures exist in certain local labour offices; mainstream measures are available	Humanitarian migrants access targeted measures; jobseekers access mainstream measures	Yes (jobseekers)	Career counsellors assess professional capabilities and may develop an individual action plan for jobseekers (and must do so for registered unemployed).
Portugal	Mainstream (supported by integration centres)	All migrants	Not systematically	–
Romania	Targeted (vocational training, counselling and mediation of employer relationship)	All migrants	No	n/a
Slovak Republic	Mainstream (though humanitarian migrants may receive specific services as “disadvantaged jobseekers”)	Humanitarian migrants; all residents	Not systematically	Aptitude test to receive certificate of accredited training (test is in host-country language)
Slovenia	n/a	n/a	No	n/a
Spain	Mainstream	All migrants	No	n/a
Sweden	Targeted (introduction programme)	Humanitarian migrants	Yes (for registered job seekers)	Public Employment Service creates structured evaluation of knowledge and experience
Switzerland	Targeted	Humanitarian level; others based on canton	Yes	Canton performs a competency assessment to develop integration plan
Türkiye	n/a	n/a	Yes (refugees)	Job and Vocational Counsellors assess using in-person interviews and profiling tools
United Kingdom	Targeted (support to access mainstream measures through Jobcentre Plus)	Resettled refugees; Welcome Hubs may provide some assistance to Hong Kong British Nationals Overseas	No	n/a
United States	Targeted (for refugees); mainstream availability varies by region	Refugees; other eligibility varies by region	Yes (refugees and certain other humanitarian categories)	Methods used by employment specialists vary according to state and locality

Note: n/a = information is not applicable.

Source: OECD questionnaire on introduction measures for new arrivals 2021.

Annex Table 5.A.2. Characteristics of publicly available language courses

	Obligatory		Length of Typical Programme	Target language level		Vocational language courses available
	Yes/No	If yes, sanction for non-participation		Yes/No (and level)	Obligation to reach target level prior to naturalisation
Australia	No	n/a	Eligible until proficiency of Vocational English reached	No	n/a	Yes (SLPET)
Austria	Yes (humanitarian migrants and migrants receiving social benefits/ registered as unemployed)	Reduction or loss of benefits	Generally 240 lessons	Yes (B1)	Yes – humanitarian migrants; precondition of long-term residence	Yes, through Public Employment Service
Belgium (Flanders)	Yes (except labour and some family migrants)	Fine	240 hours	Yes (A2)	Yes. Additionally, CEFR B1 is required for migrants who are not working or studying two years after obtaining civic integration certificate	Yes
Canada	No	n/a	no limit	No, although language is among selection criteria for some migrant classes	CLB/NCLC Level 4 in English or French required for citizenship	Not systematically
Chile	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Colombia	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Croatia	Yes	Sanctions exist but are not enforced	280 hours	No	No	Not systematically
Czech Republic	No	n/a	n/a	Yes (A2)	Yes – precondition for permanent residence	No
Denmark	Yes (for refugees and their family members)	Reduction of benefits	Programme is one year (extendable) for refugees. For others – no predetermined number of hours (within 42 months)	Yes (partner/ spouse reunification; A2 within 9 months) No (all others)	There is a bonus for reaching B1	Yes (municipal level)
Estonia	Yes (for refugees)	Sanction for those receiving subsistence benefit	250 (700 for refugees)	Yes (A2 for prolongation of work permit after 5 years)	B1 is required for long-term residence permit	No
Finland	Yes (for migrants with an integration plan who receive unemployment benefits)	Sanction under unemployment regime	200‑300 study days	Yes (B1)	No	Yes
France	Yes (with exceptions for some work categories)	Possible non-renewal of visa	200‑400 hours	Yes (A1)	A2 is required for long-term residence permit	Not systematically
Germany	Yes (depending on existing knowledge of the German language and for those receiving benefits)	Reduction of benefits	600 hours	Yes (B1)	No	Yes
Greece	Yes (for HELIOS project only)	Dismissal from HELIOS programme	280 hours	For migrants not in HELIOS, free courses are offered to A2	No	No
Iceland	No	n/a	12 hours per week for 6 months	Yes	150 hours of Icelandic must be completed for permanent residence	No
Ireland
Israel	No	n/a	500 hours	Yes (Level 6 Hebrew is mandatory for academic studies)	No	Yes
Italy	Yes (under Integration Agreement)	possible non-renewal of visa	n/a (migrant is expected to reach A2 within 2 years)	Yes (A2)	Yes (possible extension of integration agreement for a year or removal)	Not systematically
Japan	No	n/a	572 units (refugee programme)	Yes for specially designated skills visas (N4 on JLPT)	Where required, a condition for entry and residence	No
Korea	No	n/a	485 hours	Yes (Basic Korean)	Yes (for permanent residency or citizenship)	No
Latvia	Yes (for migrants in unemployment services)	Loss of unemployment services	Dependent on language level	No	n/a	Yes
Lithuania	Yes (for humanitarian migrants)	Loss of integration support payments	190 hours	Yes (A2)	Yes	No
Luxembourg	No	n/a	120 hours (for social assistance recipients) – 240 hours	Yes (A1)	No	Yes (in pilot phase)
Malta	No	n/a	Stage 1: 20 hours Maltese, 20 hours English Stage 2: 50 hours Maltese	Yes (MQF Level 2 – Basic Maltese)	Condition for permanent residence	No
Mexico	No	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	No
Netherlands	Yes (though self-study is permitted)	n/a	n/a	Yes (B1 for most migrants, but a self-reliance route exists that has a target level of A1)	Migrants who do not pass the exam within 3 years may face administrative fine or withdrawal of temporary residence permit, unless they have an asylum permit. Language is also a precondition for permanent residence	Yes (in some cases, not systematically)
New Zealand	No	n/a	dependent on language level	Yes (minimum English level)	English is a precondition for visa (or prepay for lessons)	No
Norway	Yes	For NIP only, reduction in benefits	225 hours (labour migrants)’ 18 months‑3 years for NIP, based on target level	Yes (level is established based on prior education)	Condition for permanent residence	Yes (municipal level)
Poland	No	n/a	150 hours for migrants with knowledge of Latin alphabet; 200 hours for non-Latin alphabet	Yes (B1)	Condition for long-term EU residency but not always for Polish permanent residency*	Not systematically
Portugal	No	n/a	300 hours (PLA courses)	Yes (A2)	Condition for permanent residence	Yes
Romania	Yes (only refugees enrolled in integration programme)	Attend 50% or loss of financial and accommodation support	6 hours/week for one year	Yes (B1)	No	No
Slovak Republic	No	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	No
Slovenia	No, though tied to assistance for humanitarian migrants	Must attend 80% to receive extension of accommodation assistance	180 hours	Yes (A1)	A1 to extend temporary permit; A2 to receive permanent residence (to take affect 27 April 2023)	Yes
Spain	Yes (for migrants enrolled in state programmes)	Loss of state resources	n/a	No	n/a	n/a
Sweden	No, though tied to introduction benefit	Possible loss of introduction benefit	n/a	No	No	Yes, for migrants in introduction programme
Switzerland	Yes (if part of integration plan)	Sanctions are tied to overall integration effort, but include non-issuance or non-renewal of residence permit (B permit)	Specific level is defined in the integration contract	Yes (specific level is defined in the integration contract)	A1 written and A2 oral are required for settled migrant (C permit) status	Yes
Türkiye	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
United Kingdom	No	n/a	Dependent on language level (for refugees)	Yes (Entry Level 3 – equivalent to CEFR B1)	n/a	No
United States	No	n/a	n/a	No	Some English is required for citizenship	Yes (in some cases, not systematically)

Note: n/a = information is not applicable; * In Poland, spouses of Polish nationals, people of Polish origin, and humanitarian migrants do not need to prove Polish-language capability for permanent residency.

Source: OECD questionnaire on introduction measures for new arrivals 2021.

Annex Table 5.A.3. Characteristics of public civic integration measures

	Civic Integration Course				Civics Examination for Long-term Residence
	Obligatory	If Yes Sanction for non-participation	Language of instruction	Hours of instruction	Yes/No	Connection to legal status/sanction	Test offered in other than host-country language	Exceptions
Australia	No (though AMEP covers settlement topics)	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	For permanent residency, migrants are asked to sign a values statement	n/a	n/a
Austria	Yes, if humanitarian migrant or under integration agreement	Completion is tied to receipt of long-term residence	German (with translation available in common languages, i.e. Dari/Farsi, Arabic, English)	8 hours	Yes	Required for long-term residence	No	No
Belgium (Flanders)	Yes (except labour and some family migrants)	Fines from 50‑5000 euros	Various languages	60 hours	Yes (2022)	Extension of residence permit to more than 3 months	Yes	labour and some family migrants
Canada	No	n/a	Native tongue or simultaneous translation	No systematic rule	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Chile	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Colombia	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Croatia	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Czech  Republic	Yes (with exceptions for students, investors, Blue Card holders, EU transfers)	Fine of up to CZK 10 000	Czech (interpretation in English, Arabic, French, Mongolian, Russian, Serbian, Spanish, Ukrainian or Vietnamese)	4 hours	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Denmark	Yes (except self-supporting migrants)	n/a	Danish	Within language training	Yes	Permanent residence	No	Other options exist for permanent residence; exemptions for young children
Estonia	No	n/a	Estonian, English, Russian	5 days (refugees); 1 day (other migrants)	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Finland	Yes (for those in integration programme)	Yes, under employment statute	Multi-lingual	One‑third of the integration year	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
France	Yes (under integration contract)	Possible non-renewal of permit	French (interpretation provided)	4 days	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Germany	Yes (depending on existing knowledge of the German language and for those receiving benefits)	Reduction of benefits; inability to receive reimbursement for those who contribute	German	100 units (45 min each)	Yes	Reduction of period to naturalisation if passed, reimbursement of migrant contribution to course	No	n/a
Greece	Included in HELIOS course	n/a	Initial information and contact available in several languages	80 hours*	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Iceland	–	–	–	–	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Ireland
Israel	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Italy	Yes	Completion is tied to receipt of long-term residence	Italian	10 hours	Yes		–	Educational exemption
Japan	No	No	Japanese, English, French, Burmese	120 units (45 min each) for refugees	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Korea	No (incentives are given for permanent residency)	No	Korean	30 hours	Yes	Linked to permanent residency	No	n/a
Latvia	No	n/a	Latvian, Russian, English, or through interpreter	20‑30 hours for humanitarian migrants; 16‑30 for third-country nationals	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Lithuania	Yes (if under an integration plan)	Reduced benefits	English or through interpreter	40 hours	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Luxembourg	No	n/a	CAI: Luxembourgish, German, French, English, Portuguese	6 hours	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Malta	No	n/a	English	Stage 1: 20 hours Stage 2: 120 hours	No (though course is graded)	Certificate of completion is a necessary step to permanent residence	n/a	n/a
Mexico	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Netherlands	No (self-study is permitted)	n/a	n/a	Knowledge of Dutch Society is part of the language learning routes	Yes	Fines possible if exam not passed within 3‑year integration period; possible refusal of long-term residence permit	No	Individual exceptions possible; migrants from the EU, Liechtenstein, Norway, Iceland, and Switzerland are exempt from integration)
New Zealand	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Norway	Yes (NIP)	Reduction in integration benefit	Many languages available	75 hours	Yes	Required for permanent residence	Yes	No (may be retaken)
Poland	No	n/a	n/a	Depends on individual civic or language measure	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Portugal	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Romania	Yes (resettled refugee)	Attend 50% or lose financial and accommodation support	Migrant’s mother tongue	6 hours/week for 3 months	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Slovak  Republic	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Slovenia	No (but integrated in language course)	No	Slovenian	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Spain	Yes (in some cases)	Nonrenewal of permit	–	40 hours	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Sweden	Yes, if enrolled in introduction programme	Reduction or withdrawal of benefits	Mother tongue or other known language	100 hours	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Switzerland	Yes (if part of integration plan)	n/a	Varies between cantons	Varies between cantons	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
Türkiye	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
United Kingdom	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a
United States	No	n/a	n/a	n/a	No	n/a	n/a	n/a

Note: n/a = information is not applicable; *The Greek HELIOS courses include language, cultural orientation, job readiness, and life skills.

Source: OECD questionnaire on introduction measures for new arrivals 2021.

Notes

← 1.  France’s Scheme for the Professional Integration of Refugees: https://www.gouvernement.fr/en/scheme-for-the-professional-integration-of-refugees.

← 2.  Funded by the German Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS) and the European Social Fund (ESF), the Network “Integration through Qualification (IQ)” programme works to strengthen intercultural competences among labour market stakeholders and to help migrants attain employment appropriate to their education (https://www.netzwerk-iq.de/en/).