The principle of equality and its French counterpart, i.e. the non-recognition of ethnic minorities, is a very important guideline of French policies, including social ones. This option makes it difficult to monitor policies that target ethnic groups, such as “Roma”. However, while this ethnic term is used in the EU Framework, as well as on the title of the French NRIS of 2011, its content is actually not considered ethnic in France. One of the main “added values” of the EU Framework is to improve the use of European funds, especially ERDF et ESF. However, the very EU Commission’s summary sheet “The European Social Fund and Roma”, published a few months before the adoption of the Framework, specifies in this way its scope: While recognising the specific cultural identities of all Roma, the EU institutions use “Roma” as an umbrella term that also incorporates other groups of people who share more or less similar cultural characteristics and a history of marginalisation in European societies, such as Sinti, Travellers, Ashkali, Camminanti, etc.” Defined in this way, the target is indeed a social group, determined on social criteria of exclusion and marginalisation. However, the inaccurate use of an ethnonym for this social group displaces systematically the subject of discussions between France and the EU and further ethnicises poverty, neither addressing accurately the aspects of discrimination, exclusion nor marginalisation. Marginalised, the victims of antigypsyism – not all of whom are necessarily ethnic Rroma but who are perceived as such – see their marginalisation reinforced and enlarged. Marginalised for other reasons, those who are not perceived as “Roma”, feel twice excluded because they have the justifiable impression that “Roma” get the support that they need, but they are refused that support because they do not belong to that ethnic community. This can lead to, and has on occasion led to the development of antigypsyist attitudes. The policy framework of the French NRIS is an inter-ministerial circular of 26 August 2012 on anticipating and accompanying the evacuation of illicit encampments. The Inter-ministerial delegation for emergency housing and access to housing (DIHAL), a body under the authority of the Prime Minister, is in charge of the follow up of this policy’s implementation. The DIHAL is also in charge of the secretariat of the National consultative commission of the gens du voyage, but these two mandates are clearly separated. Currently, for the circular’s mandate, the DIHAL is allocated a yearly budget of 3 million EUR, which represents 170 EUR per person per year for the people targeted by the circular. Its role is also reduced because it has no hierarchical power over local authorities, who maintain exclusivity over any initiatives concerning the implementation of possible integration projects related to the circular. Only in cases where local authorities approach the DIHAL voluntarily, can the DIHAL contribute financially and/or with expertise. At the local level, however, most often political will is directed toward evictions. Vested with the competence on public order, mayors and prefects do collaborate actively in this sense, giving it precedence over a voluntary and constructive approach of resorption of shanty-towns and access to fundamental rights for their inhabitants. Participation of Roma is very weak, as is the entirety of Rromani civil society in France. In the last two years a process of empowerment of Rromani organisations was initiated with the 16 May Movement, a mutual support network of Rromani grassroots’ organisations. Although it focuses on inhabitants of shanty-towns, its request of support has been declined by DIHAL. The budgets allocated especially for both Roma and gens du voyage are not only too low, but have also declined in recent years. While follow-up bodies exist, such as the national follow-up group on the implementation of the circular of 2012 or the National Consultative Commission on gens du voyage, their role is reduced to consultation and is not a guarantee of efficiency of the programs or projects put in place and financed by these budget lines. Access to funding for Roma inclusion activities is also difficult. In the case where EU funds are concerned, they require a high structural and financial solidity for the applicant to be able to advance the necessary amounts. In addition, their management depends on the political orientation of each region.