Universities and higher education institutions, research institutes and laboratories, schools and colleges running exchange programmes, and the research offices and HR teams inside them. We also work with nonprofits, NGOs and foundations that host volunteers or place international staff. The common thread is an institution with its own obligations, not simply an employer.

Yes. Nonprofits are often worse served by general immigration advice, because it treats every incoming person as a worker. Voluntary service, traineeships and educational projects are separate categories with their own conditions and durations. If your organisation hosts people who are not employees, those categories are usually the relevant ones.

Yes. Size does not change the routes available, though it often changes the internal capacity to handle them. Smaller institutes are more likely to hit the accreditation question, because recognition as a research organisation is not automatic. That is worth establishing before you advertise a funded post.

Yes, for pupil exchange schemes, educational projects and incoming teaching staff. Pupil exchange has its own category under the common European rules, separate from both work and study routes. Teaching staff usually fall under ordinary national work routes rather than the research category, and some teaching roles are regulated professions.

Largely yes. The volunteer, traineeship and educational project categories apply to hosting organisations generally, not only to academic bodies. The researcher route differs, as it requires a research organisation. If your foundation funds or hosts research, the first question is whether it qualifies as one in the destination country.

A third country national holding a doctoral degree, or a higher education qualification giving access to doctoral programmes, who a research organisation has selected to carry out research for which that qualification is normally required. Not every academic post meets that definition, and professional, technical and administrative staff generally do not.

An agreement between a research organisation and a researcher to carry out a specific research project, used as the basis for a researcher residence permit. It distinguishes this route from ordinary employment immigration, and places the obligation on your institution rather than only on the individual.

At minimum, the title or purpose of the research activity and the start and end dates, or the estimated duration. National requirements can add to that. We review agreements against what the destination country expects before they are signed, which is considerably cheaper than discovering a defect after an application is refused.

No. A research organisation can only sign where funds for the research are available, and it is satisfied with the researcher’s qualifications and skills. Signing in anticipation of a grant creates a document that may not support an application. Where a funding decision is pending, plan the immigration timeline around it rather than ahead of it.

In several countries, yes. Germany treats an agreement from a recognised research body as the straightforward path, while agreements from other institutions go to the local foreigners authority for review. France requires an accredited higher research or education institution. Establish your position in the destination country before a recruitment round, not during one.

Then that is the first problem to solve, and it is an institutional one rather than a case one. We will tell you what the accreditation route involves and how long it is likely to take. In the meantime, an ordinary national work route may be available for the same individual, and we will assess that.

No. It is a distinct category with its own basis, conditions,s and mobility rights. It also carries obligations for the hosting institution that an ordinary work permit does not. Treating the two as interchangeable is one of the commonest errors we see in institutional cases.

Under common European rules, researchers are generally allowed a period to remain after completing their research to look for work or set up a business. The length and the conditions are set nationally within that framework, so confirm the position for your destination. It is worth telling researchers early, because it affects retention.

Sometimes, under intra-European mobility provisions, but the procedure depends on the destination and the length of the stay. Check the specific pair of countries before anyone travels. Rules aren’t reciprocal everywhere, and a permit that supports mobility into one member state may not support it into another.

No. Ireland does not recognise hosting agreements issued elsewhere, and Irish agreements cannot be used in other countries. Only an agreement issued in Ireland by an accredited Irish institution has effect there, and the researcher must be physically based in Ireland while working under it. Separate permissions exist for visiting academics.

A provision allowing a researcher who holds a permit in one member state to carry out research in another for a limited period without a full new application. Austria, for example, applies short-term rules where the stay is under 180 days in 360 days. The threshold and the procedure are national.

The arrangement that applies when research in the second country exceeds the short-term threshold. In Austria, that means a residence permit for researcher mobility, issued when the activity is for a qualifying research institution and a hosting agreement with that institution is in place. Other countries structure it differently.

Yes, and it is tied to the original permit. In Austria, the maximum permissible period is two years within the validity of the researcher permit issued by the other member state. Plan multi-country projects against that ceiling, because a project that outlasts it needs a different arrangement in the second country.

No. The researcher category has a specific definition, and posts that do not meet it run through ordinary national work routes instead. Assuming the researcher route applies because the employer is a university is a frequent and costly mistake. We assess each post against the definition rather than against the institution type.

They generally fall outside the researcher category entirely and are treated as ordinary employees under national work routes. That usually means a different application, different evidence and sometimes a labour market test that the researcher route avoids. Budget more time for these cases than for academic ones.

Where the post meets the qualification and salary conditions, ns and the individual wants the longer-term position and mobility that route offers. It is worth comparing rather than defaulting. The Blue Card applies in 25 of the 27 EU member states, and not in Ireland or Denmark, so it is not available everywhere.

In many countries,s yes, and sometimes it is the better route. Seniority does not determine the category. What determines it is the nature of the activity, the qualification held, and whether a hosting agreement is in place. We compare the available options rather than assuming the academic route is automatically right.

Usually not on its own. The researcher category is defined by research activity, and a post that is wholly or mainly teaching often sits outside it. Some countries allow researchers to teach alongside their research. Where the balance is unclear, describe the actual duties to us rather than the job title.

No. Acceptance by the institution and permission to be in the country are separate decisions made by different bodies. Admission is a prerequisite for the immigration application, not a substitute. Students who assume otherwise usually discover the gap when they try to book travel.

Generally yes, within limits. The common European rules require member states to permit a minimum amount of work alongside study, and the actual allowance is set nationally. Because the limits differ and breaching them puts the student’s status at risk, check the figure for your country rather than applying one from elsewhere.

The common rules provide for a period after completing studies during which a graduate may remain to look for work or set up a business. The duration and the conditions are national. For institutions competing for international students, state this accurately in your admissions materials, because applicants ask about it constantly.

Yes, in almost all cases. The amount is set nationally and usually expressed as a monthly figure, and the accepted evidence varies. Scholarship letters, sponsor declarations and bank statements are treated differently in different countries, so confirm what your destination accepts before advising an applicant.

No, but it is common. Requirements depend on the country and on the language of instruction, and some institutions set their own standard above the immigration requirement. Keep the two separate in your communications, because an applicant who satisfies the university may still need something different for the residence application.

Yes, considerably. Voluntary service has its own category under the common European rules, with its own conditions and maximum duration, separate from work routes. The same applies to traineeships, pupil exchange and educational projects. Treating a volunteer as a worker is a common and expensive error.

Voluntary service under the European Solidarity Corps, and previously the European Voluntary Service, is named explicitly in the common European rules as a basis for entry and residence. If your placements run under that programme, the category exists for exactly that purpose and should be used rather than an improvised alternative.

Traineeship categories carry their own maximum duration, shorter than most work routes, and it is fixed rather than extendable in many countries. Confirm the limit for your destination before agreeing a placement length, because a traineeship agreed for longer than the category permits cannot simply be shortened after the person has arrived.

Usually yes, and pupil exchange is a named category in the common European rules rather than something handled under tourist arrangements. Several countries apply their own conditions around the receiving school, the host family and the duration. Start earlier than you would for an adult, because the additional checks take time.

Volunteering categories generally assume no employment relationship, though allowances, accommodation and expenses are often permitted within programme rules. Where the payment starts to look like a wage, the category may no longer fit. Describe the arrangement to us in full rather than summarising it as unpaid.

Generally yes, including on a move to another member state under the mobility provisions, though the conditions are national and so are the family work rights. For a senior appointment this often decides whether an offer is accepted, so establish the position before the contract stage rather than afterwards.

It depends on the country and on the permit the spouse receives. Some dependent permits carry full labour market access, some require a separate authorisation, and some carry none. Dual career couples ask this first, and an institution that can answer it accurately has a real advantage in recruitment.

Usually yes, though running the applications together is often simpler and cheaper. A later application is assessed on its own merits and against the rules in force at that time, which may have changed. If you know family will follow, please tell us at the outset so the sequencing is planned rather than improvised.

Family members of researchers can generally accompany them on a move to another member state, under conditions set nationally. Do not assume the family position mirrors the researcher’s automatically. Where a project involves time in two countries, check the family arrangements for both before anyone commits to the move.

No. Different authorities decide immigration permission and the right to practise a regulated profession under different rules. Academic medicine, clinical psychology, teaching and several engineering fields are affected. Qualification recognition runs alongside the immigration application and is often the longer of the two, so start early.

For a regulated profession, yes, and the immigration route does not substitute for it. For an unregulated academic post, formal recognition is often unnecessary, though the immigration application may still require evidence that the qualification meets the route’s standard. The two requirements are separate and should be tracked separately.

Longer than institutions expect, and long enough that it frequently controls the start date rather than the immigration application. The national recognition authority sets the timescale, which varies by profession and country. Start as soon as an appointment is likely, rather than waiting for a signed contract.

The competent national authority for that profession in the destination country, not the employing institution and not us. We can tell you whether recognition is required, which body handles it, and what it generally involves, and we can prepare the documents. The decision itself is not ours or yours.

Three separate timescales apply. Preparing the hosting agreement and documents, which your institution largely controls. Consular appointment availability, which the consulate controls. Authority processing, which the authority controls and publishes as a target rather than a promise. We will not give you one combined figure, because a single number is always wrong.

As soon as the appointment is likely, not when the contract is signed. Hosting agreements, accreditation checks, document legalisation and qualification recognition all run before the application itself and are the usual causes of delay. Working backwards from a project start date is the right way to plan.

That depends on the route and the country. Typically, the hosting agreement or contract, evidence of the institution’s status or accreditation, confirmation of funding, and details of the role and its conditions. We issue a route-specific list after the assessment rather than a generic one, because a generic list wastes your time.

Sometimes, and it is one of the questions where the national answer matters most. Some routes permit an in-country application or a change of status; others require the application from abroad, and a few depend on the applicant’s current permission. Confirm before anyone travels.

Tell us as soon as you know. A hosting agreement stating dates that no longer match the reality can undermine an application, and a permit issued for a period that no longer fits creates problems later. Amending a document before submission is straightforward. Correcting it after a decision is not.

Yes, and where a funded project brings in a group, it is usually better handled as one engagement. That gives you a single point of contact, a shared record of dates and conditions, and institutional documents coordinated across the applications rather than requested repeatedly. The scope is agreed in writing before work starts.

Yes, and that is the usual arrangement. Your office holds the institutional knowledge, the funding position and the relationship with the individual. We hold the route detail across countries and the document standards each authority expects. It works as a division of labour rather than a handover.

Yes. Many institutions keep a firm for regulated matters and use us for the preparation and coordination underneath. We will clearly state which parts of a case belong to a professional admitted in the destination country, so there is no confusion about responsibility and no duplicated work being billed twice.

The destination country, the nationality of the people involved, the category they fall into, and the dates you are working towards. If a funded project is driving the timeline, tell us when it starts. Document lists come after the assessment because they are route-specific, and a generic list helps nobody.