Young People Unfamiliar with the EU Youth Programmes amp up the work at the Estonian National Agency

On a grey March weekend in Tallinn, 19 teenagers arrived from six Estonian counties to spend two days at the Estonian National Agency of Erasmus+ and European Solidarity Corps—an organisation they knew very little about that was eager to know a lot about them.

In fact, the main selection rule for the participants was to have no previous experience with EU Programmes whatsoever.

For the Estonian National Agency, that was exactly the point.

Why ask first-timers?

Like many National Agencies, Estonia had long gathered feedback from those already inside the system: project organisers, youth workers, and repeat participants.

But they knew far less about those who had never even taken the first step of sending an application.

At the same time, the broader European conversation on youth involvement was shifting. The 2022 mapping of direct youth involvement in NAs had already highlighted two big tensions:

• Many agencies felt that they should involve young people directly.
• They were unsure how to do so meaningfully with limited time, resources, and experience.

Later work under the New Power in Youth partnership sharpened the message:

The Estonian National Agency had already attempted one ‘big’ answer. A few years earlier, they set up a permanent Youth Advisory Board. Ambition was high: young people would comment directly on programme guides, planning documents, and annual priorities. In practice, the format proved hard to sustain. The mandate wasn’t crystal clear, the schedule was tight, and it was difficult to keep the busy young people engaged over the long term.

So, when the team started planning a new involvement step, they deliberately chose something more focused and modest: a one-off consultative meeting with those engaging with the EU Youth Programmes for the first time.

The goal wasn’t to create another structure.

Another goal was to understand what keeps them away and what they would need and want from such programmes.

Designing the weekend: small step, serious intent

Crucially, this wasn’t a side project squeezed in ‘if there is time’. Youth involvement is part of the Estonian NA’s strategic work, backed by management and linked to the mission of the SALTO Participation & Information Resource Centre, hosted by the Estonian NA.

Youth Projects Coordinator Karin Öövel was put in charge of this youth involvement project and took up the responsibility of designing the weekend.

All this meant that the consultative meeting had:

• a dedicated coordinator;
• an allocated budget and prep time;
• a clear part in the NA’s wider strategy.

This aligned with what earlier mapping and guidance identified as the preconditions for meaningful involvement: a clear purpose, realistic ambitions, an appropriate time frame, and staff with the skills to motivate and empower young people.

The target group was precise. Participants must:

• be 14–18 years old;
• be from different parts of Estonia;
• have no prior experience in Erasmus+ or ESC activities.

This last part proved to be the most challenging, and so, to reach beyond the usual circles, the team:

• stepped out of standard NA communication channels;
• disseminated information via social media;
• filtered out applicants who had already attended NA events to keep the perspective fresh.

The National Agency also made several access and inclusion choices:

• All travel and participation costs were covered.
• The schedule was built around a weekend so that school and work would be less of a barrier.
• The facilitator could work in both Estonian and Russian (the two most spoken languages in Estonia), easing potential language barriers.

Inside the room: From everyday stress to European programmes

The two-day programme was designed together with an external facilitator, following very simple logic: start from their lives, not from our programmes. First, learn about young people’s reality and their free time (and lack thereof) and stress factors, and then, slowly, build a bridge from there to Erasmus+ and the ESC.

The group started with team-building and open conversations about everyday life, including:

• school pressure;
• homework and exams;
• part-time work, hobbies, family responsibilities;
• how much free time was actually left.

This wasn’t a warm-up gimmick. It mapped the real capacity these young people had to even consider extra opportunities. In line with earlier research, what emerged was not a lack of interest but familiar barriers: busyness and stress.

From there, case studies and puzzle-type exercises were introduced. Instead of asking abstract questions, they offered concrete scenarios, including:

• an after-school activity vs a weekend event;
• a short local project vs a longer exchange;
• joining with friends vs going alone.

After these activities, participants sorted and ‘built’ their ideal activities using these elements: topic, length, timing, place, support, and who they’d go with.

“What attracts (and what scares) you about EU programmes?”

The second day was almost entirely dedicated to what EU programmes can offer. It started with a bird eye’s-view presentation of the main opportunities, followed by the real-life stories from EuroPeers. They joined the meeting as guests and spoke directly from the experience and perspective of young people who had already taken up these opportunities.

Eventually, the participants mapped things that attract and scare them about joining E+ and ESC projects and gave harsh but honest feedback on the NA’s actual communication materials and social media:

• The language felt too complicated and institutional.
• There was a lot of text, not enough simple explanations or real stories.
• It wasn’t obvious that they, as ‘ordinary’ young people, were welcome.

The outcome of this two-day programme for the participants…

Overall, according to the feedback questionnaire, participants rated the weekend very positively, especially getting the chance to talk about their real struggles and feel genuinely listened to. One unplanned outcome was that the atmosphere sometimes felt like a ‘group therapy’ hub, offering a surprisingly rare chance for teenagers to talk about pressure and stress without judgment, and with adults who simply listened.

The likelihood of their participation in E+ or ESC programmes has risen from 7.8 to 9.1 (on a 10-point scale).

…and what has changed on a greater scale.

So, what did this one weekend actually change inside the institution? The short answer is: a lot.

On a broader level, the findings have strengthened the NA’s hand when advocating for more accessible programme design at the European level:

The weekend didn’t create these arguments, but it gave them real, recent evidence from actual first-timers.

The internal report was also shared more widely inside the Estonian Education and Youth Board, helping colleagues from both inside and outside the NA bubble to better understand why “just launching another call” doesn’t automatically bring in new young people.

System-wide changes

An even bigger opportunity soon came into view when the Estonian Education and Youth Board – Harno, a 400-person public body created in 2020, responsible for everything from state exams to teacher training to youth work development, drafted its first three-year strategy.

The National Agency proposed the idea of a permanent youth participation programme to the top management of Harno, and the decision was made to scale up from NA-only practices to a board-wide youth participation programme:

• Youth participation would be an explicit strategic objective, not a side activity, as this is a nationally important priority embedded in the Estonian Youth Sector Development Plan for 2021–2035, as well as one of Harno’s objectives in the newly formed internal strategy.
• A dedicated coordinator was appointed to support programme development and keep it running on a daily basis. This person was not a programme officer or regular coordinator of NA who would have other tasks to run. They are a dedicated project-based coordinator whose sole responsibility is to keep this programme running.
• Internal mapping identified where young people should have a say and where their initiative and opinions could have a real influence on the education and youth services managed by Harno.
• A nationwide campaign and a public call for participants brought together a new, more diverse group of young people to co-design a new, yearly participation programme across departments, not just in Erasmus+ and the ESC.

The NA is also promoting youth engagement in public institutions nationwide, intending to inspire other state-level institutions to set up their mechanisms to reach out to young people and give them decision-making power in their structures.

What other National Agencies can take from this

Every NA operates in a different legal and political context. Not everyone can immediately launch a big youth advisory board or a full participation programme.

But the Estonian experience points to some practical lessons that can be adapted elsewhere, especially if you’re considering a consultative meeting with young people with no prior programme experience.

A final thought

If there is one message from Estonia’s experience, backed by the mapping of practices and the newer research, it is this:

For Estonia, one small but serious step was inviting 19 complete newcomers into the room and asking them, honestly, “What makes all of this feel distant, stressful, or out of reach?”

For your NA, the next step might look different. But it can start just as simply: with a clear question, an open door, and a genuine willingness to listen, and then to act.

The series of articles on youth involvement in decision-making in National Agencies is a part of activities organised by SALTO Participation & Information Resource Centre and partners in an effort to encourage the right of young people to participation in decisions affecting them and to implement Aim 5 of Youth Participation Strategy “to encourage National Agencies and other actors to involve young people when making decisions about the management and implementation of the programmes, and to take a quality approach to youth participation when doing so”.

We are grateful to the authors, National Agencies and the young people themselves for dedicating time and effort to co-create activities together and to share their experience in doing so, inspiring us, National Agencies and other institutions.

Read more: