How a social inclusion service is funded

Read your grant agreement before you read this. A social inclusion service in Ireland is funded from one of two different EU funds, and they do not share rules, bodies or deadlines. ESF+ runs through the EIST programme, with DFHERIS as Managing Authority — that is the route for employment, education and social inclusion work, including SICAP through the Department of Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht. AMIF runs through the Funds Administration Unit of the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration — that is the route for work with international protection applicants and third-country nationals, and it awards money two ways, through open calls and through direct awards to bodies with a unique capacity. The full chain for each is on its own page; this one shows what the two have in common.

ESF+ or AMIF — not both at onceReg. (EU) 2021/1057 (ESF+) · Reg. (EU) 2021/1147 (AMIF) · CPR Reg. (EU) 2021/1060ESF+ EIST: €1.08bn, €508m from the EU · AMIF Ireland: €98.73m, €83.57m from the EU (programme as amended, March 2026)
One programme, too many disconnected records. Delivery notes, partner decisions, expenditure, results and reporting evidence often sit in different places.

How the money reaches an organisation

Every level here can be asked for its own process map. That is the point of yours.

🏛
European Commission — DG Employment (ESF+) or DG HOME (AMIF)
Approves the programme, receives the annual accounts and accepts the assurance package. Which directorate is behind your money depends on which fund pays you.
🏛
Managing Authority — DFHERIS for ESF+, the Funds Administration Unit of the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration for AMIF
Runs the programme, verifies claims and draws up the accounts. Under ESF+ the accounting function is in DFHERIS; under AMIF it sits with the Funds Administration Unit.
🏢
The body that published your call
Under ESF+ that is an Intermediate Body named in writing under CPR Art. 71(3) — for SICAP the Department of Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht, with Pobal as its agent; for employment actions the Department of Social Protection. Under AMIF there is no intermediate body for the main programme; a separate intermediate authority inside the Department handles Returns.
👉 Your organisation sits at this level
🤝
Your organisation — the beneficiary that claims
Signs the agreement, keeps the participant records the fund requires, and claims the cost back afterwards. Both funds reimburse verified spending; neither pays in advance.
👥
Participants
The people the service is for. Under AMIF the project must see and copy a document confirming eligibility before it can register someone; under ESF+ the common indicators are collected under an EU rule, and only the special-category questions can be declined.
⚖️
Audit Chain
Built upward from your own records, and the same shape in both funds. Your files and claims → management verifications by the body that awarded the money (CPR Art. 74) → the accounting function draws up the accounts (Art. 76) → the Audit Authority audits independently (Art. 77): for ESF+ the Internal & EU Audit Unit of the Department of Education and Youth, for AMIF the designated Audit Authority under the Department that runs the fund → the European Commission. Alongside, not above: the Comptroller and Auditor General, the European Court of Auditors, and OLAF.

Process maps under this programme

Where this came from

Human reviewed2026-09-08Automatically checkedMonitoring pendingCurrent source statusAutomatic check incomplete — human check requiredThe source could not be reached automatically. Published content has been preserved for human checking.

Read against the source on 2026-09-08. This is the human-reviewed version.

What that check changed: This entry claimed two funds at once and had received neither of the 7 September corrections, so it carried the superseded version of both. Its AMIF figure was €63.52m — the January 2025 snapshot, since replaced by €98.73m in the March 2026 amendment — and its bodies were the pre-correction ones for ESF+ as well. Rewritten on 8 September to do the honest thing instead of averaging two funds into one chain: it now says plainly that ESF+ and AMIF do not share rules, bodies or deadlines, names which route is which, and sends the reader to the fund’s own entry for the full chain. It also carries the two things that differ most in practice — under AMIF the project must see and copy a document confirming eligibility before it can register someone, and under ESF+ the common participant indicators are collected under an EU rule rather than under consent.