The project Bridge is co-funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the Servicio Espanol para la Internacionalizacion de la Educacion (SEPIE). Neither the European Union nor the National Agency SEPIE can be held responsible for them. -- Number: 2025-1-ES01-KA220-HED-000359236 --

The BRIDGE Digital Museum brings together good practices, educational proposals and images that inspire reflection and action

Social Challenges Analyse social challenges to intercultural dialogue, social inclusion and democratic cohesion Good Practices Discover experiences that generate social impact Educational Space Access teaching guides, activities and materials for the classroom Documentary Photography Explore the social challenges in a visual, reflective and educational way

LEVEL 1. @nclusion – Fostering inclusion of LGBTQI+ migrants at local level

BRIDGE Main Challenge: A.5. Discrimination, racism and sociocultural polarisation, including hate speech

What problem does it address?

In Italy, LGBTQI+ migrants and refugees face compounded discrimination: hostility within reception centres, absence of hate-crime protections for homotransphobia, and near-total lack of specialised reception facilities. Front-line professionals — municipal staff and migrant-support workers — often lack SOGI-specific competencies, reproducing exclusion even when discrimination is not intended.

What does it propose?

@nclusion conducted mixed-methods field research with 53 municipal staff, 38 migrant-support professionals, 7 LGBTQI+ organisation representatives, and 4 LGBTQI+ migrants themselves, to diagnose knowledge gaps and structural barriers, generating the evidence base for a forthcoming professional training curriculum on LGBTQI+ migrant inclusion.

Why is it an inspiring practice?
  • • Documents a population Italy does not officially count, using direct testimony from LGBTQI+ migrants themselves.
  • • Engages three professional stakeholder groups plus the affected community, rather than professionals alone.
  • • Uses trauma-informed, narrative interviews to let migrants define barriers in their own terms.
  • • Explicitly distinguishes diagnosis-stage co-production from not-yet-realised co-design of interventions.
  • • Feeds directly into a forthcoming professional training curriculum grounded in documented gaps.
Resources you'll find
  • • D2.2 National Report Italy (Cesie, February 2025)
  • • Three diagnostic questionnaire instruments (municipal staff; migrant-support organisations; LGBTQI+ organisations)
  • • Documentation of seven Italian good practices (R.A.R.O., Casa Marcella, Pink Refugees, Rise the Difference, I-Care, Africa Arcigay, A Casa di Ornella)
  • • Project website: https://inclusionproject.eu/.
Featured results
53
Municipal staff surveyed
38
Migrant-support professionals surveyed
7
LGBTQI+ organisation representatives surveyed
4
LGBTQI+ migrants/refugees interviewed
7
Existing national good practices documented
1
National diagnostic report published
What can visitors learn?
• How compounded discrimination against LGBTQI+ migrants can be documented despite the absence of official statistics.
• How to combine professional surveys with trauma-informed migrant testimony in a single diagnosis.
• How the gap between existing legislation and everyday institutional practice reproduces exclusion.
• Which concrete institutional behaviours (invasive questioning, imposed binary norms) constitute abuses of authority.
• How a diagnostic phase can be designed to feed directly into future training design.

LEVEL 2. EXPLORE BEST PRACTICE

Introduction

@nclusion documents discrimination against LGBTQI+ migrants and refugees in Italy through surveys of 53 municipal staff and 38 migrant-support professionals, plus interviews with 7 LGBTQI+ organisations and 4 LGBTQI+ migrants themselves. Findings show over 90% of professionals recognise barriers to participation, yet only 42.3% had ever served an LGBTQI+ migrant, evidencing the need for targeted training.

  • Coordinating organisation: CESIE – Centro Europeo di Studi e Iniziative
  • Participating countries: Cyprus (CY), France (FR), Germany (DE), Greece (GR), Italy (IT), Poland (PL), Spain (ES)
  • Duration: 2024-ongoing
  • BRIDGE Main Challenge: A.5. Discrimination, racism and sociocultural polarisation, including hate speech
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
  • SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
  • SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
  • SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals
Secondary Challenges
  • A.1. Structural and intersectional inequalities that shape inclusion and social cohesion

The Challenge

What social issue does it address?

LGBTQI+ migrants and refugees in Italy face compounded discrimination shaped by the absence of hate-crime protections for homotransphobia, near-total lack of specialised reception facilities, and front-line professionals who often lack SOGI-specific training, resulting in invasive questioning, imposed binary gender expectations, and pressure to conceal identity.

Why is it important?

Without targeted intervention, professional knowledge gaps and institutional blind spots continue to reproduce exclusion for one of the most structurally invisible and under-protected migrant subgroups in the Italian asylum system.

How does it contribute to the BRIDGE Challenge?

@nclusion generates rigorous national evidence on discrimination against LGBTQI+ migrants, directly documenting the sociocultural polarisation and institutional gaps that the BRIDGE Challenge targets, and grounding a forthcoming training response in that evidence.

How does it work?

Researchers surveyed 53 municipal staff and 38 migrant-support professionals, and interviewed 7 LGBTQI+ organisations and 4 LGBTQI+ migrants/refugees, producing a national diagnostic report that will feed directly into a professional training curriculum.

What might inspire you?
Ideas for adaptation
  1. Combine professional surveys with trauma-informed migrant testimony.
  2. Document a population your country does not officially count.
  3. Let migrants define, in their own words, which barriers matter most.
  4. Separate diagnosis co-production from not-yet-realised co-design.
  5. Map good practices already run by local LGBTQI+ organisations
  6. Ask professionals to self-assess their own competency gaps first.
  7. Use anonymised, GDPR-compliant testimony from a hard-to-reach group.
  8. Distinguish evidence depth from statistical representativeness
  9. Feed diagnostic findings directly into a future training curriculum.
  10. Name specific institutional behaviours that constitute abuses of power
Resources created

@nclusion D2.2 National Report

Digital publication

National/transnational report on discrimination against LGBTQI+ migrants in Italy, based on surveys of professionals and direct testimonies

Professionals, Policy Makers

inclusionproject.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/WP2_@nclusion_Transnational-Report-ENG.pdf

@nclusion project website

Interactive digital resource

Official website of the @nclusion project: information on the consortium, partner countries and activities for LGBTQI+ migrant inclusion.

Researchers, Policy Makers, General Public

inclusionproject.eu