1. Overview — what is the integration agreement?

The integration agreement (in German Integrationsvereinbarung, in French Convention d'intégration) is an administrative-law instrument of the Swiss Federal Act on Foreign Nationals and Integration (FNIA, Federal Act on Foreign Nationals and Integration, SR 142.20). It records in writing and on an individualised basis the integration objectives, measures, deadlines and financing agreed with a foreign national — typically in the areas of language competence and of school, vocational or economic integration — and may entail consequences under migration law in the event of non-fulfilment.

The legal basis is twofold: the integration criteria, on which objectives and measures are oriented, are set out in FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20 (integration criteria). The integration agreement as an instrument, by contrast, is governed by FNIA Art. 58b SR 142.20 (integration agreement and integration recommendation). At the enforcement level, both provisions are given concrete form by the Ordinance on Admission, Residence and Gainful Employment (OASA, SR 142.201), in particular Art. 77a–77g OASA SR 142.201 (implementing provisions on the integration criteria).

The instrument was introduced with the entry into force of the then Foreign Nationals Act (FNA, today FNIA) on 1 January 2008. In the course of the integration revision (Federal Act of 16 December 2016, in force since 1 January 2019), the integration criteria (FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20) and the integration agreement (FNIA Art. 58b SR 142.20) received their version currently in force. The corresponding implementing provisions of the ordinance (Art. 77a–77g OASA SR 142.201) were most recently supplemented by the revision of 27 November 2024 (in force since 1 January 2025).

The integration agreement is not to be confused with the integration recommendation. The recommendation (FNIA Art. 58b para. 4 SR 142.20) is informal in nature and entails no direct sanction consequences; it is addressed to groups of persons on whom an agreement cannot legally be imposed (in particular persons entitled to free movement). The agreement, by contrast, is binding: where the authority requires it, the residence permit is, under FNIA Art. 58b para. 3 SR 142.20, granted or extended only after its conclusion.

The integration agreement is used in practice above all in two constellations: (a) on the first grant of a permit to persons with a particular integration need — for example in family reunification without language skills — and (b) on the extension of a permit, where the cantonal authority identifies gaps in the integration criteria. Both cases of application are subject to the requirement of proportionality under FNIA Art. 96 SR 142.20 (exercise of discretion) and must take account of the personal circumstances of the person concerned (FNIA Art. 58a para. 2 SR 142.20, given concrete form in Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201).

2. FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20 and FNIA Art. 58b SR 142.20 — integration criteria and integration agreement (wording, state as at 01.01.2025)

FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20 (integration criteria) is the central provision for assessing integration in the migration-law context. The provision is structured as follows (paraphrased rendering; the official wording on Fedlex is always authoritative):

  • Para. 1 — In assessing integration, the competent authority takes account of the following criteria:
    • let. a: respect for public security and order,
    • let. b: respect for the values of the Federal Constitution,
    • let. c: language competence,
    • let. d: participation in economic life or the acquisition of education.
  • Para. 2 — Due account is to be taken of the circumstances of persons who, owing to a disability, an illness or other major personal circumstances, cannot fulfil the criteria under para. 1 let. c and d, or can fulfil them only under difficult conditions (hardship and proportionality limit).
  • Para. 3 — The Federal Council determines which language competence is required for the grant or extension of a permit (delegation provision; implemented in the OASA).

The enumeration of the integration criteria in para. 1 is exhaustive. In particular, FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20 contains four criteria (let. a–d) and no fifth criterion as well as no para. 4. Other aspects (e.g. membership of an association, voluntary engagement, contacts with Swiss nationals) are not autonomous integration criteria, but may be drawn upon as indicators within the overall assessment.

The hardship clause in FNIA Art. 58a para. 2 SR 142.20 acts as a proportionality limit: persons who, for health-related or comparable reasons, cannot fully fulfil the criteria let. c (language) and let. d (economy/education) must not be disadvantaged under migration law on that account. The clause is to be read in conjunction with Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201 (taking account of personal circumstances) (on this, section 8).

The integration agreement itself is governed not in the criteria provision, but in FNIA Art. 58b SR 142.20 (integration agreement and integration recommendation). Under FNIA Art. 58b para. 1 SR 142.20, the agreement fixes the objectives, the measures, the deadlines and the modalities of financing. It may, under para. 2, have as its object in particular the acquisition of language competence, school, vocational or economic integration as well as the acquisition of knowledge about the living conditions, the economic system and the legal order of Switzerland. Where the authority requires the conclusion of an agreement, the residence permit is, under para. 3, granted or extended only after its conclusion. Para. 4 permits mere integration recommendations vis-à-vis groups of persons on whom an agreement cannot be imposed.

3. The four integration criteria in detail (FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 SR 142.20, let. a–d)

FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 SR 142.20 enumerates four criteria. Each is given concrete form in the OASA. Sections 3.1–3.4 below deal with these four criteria; section 3.5 deals with the fifth naturalisation criterion, distinct from them, under the Swiss Citizenship Act.

3.1 let. a — respect for public security and order

This criterion (FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 let. a SR 142.20) requires that the foreign national respect the Swiss legal order. It is given concrete form in Art. 77a OASA SR 142.201 (failure to respect public security and order): a failure to respect exists in particular where the person disregards statutory provisions or rulings of the authorities, wilfully fails to fulfil obligations under public or private law, or publicly condones crimes against public peace. Indicators of deficits in practice are in particular criminal proceedings, final convictions and the repeated disregard of administrative-law orders.

The criterion is closely linked to the grounds for revocation under FNIA Art. 62 para. 1 SR 142.20 (revocation of the residence permit); Art. 77a OASA SR 142.201 refers expressly to FNIA Art. 62 para. 1 let. c SR 142.20 and FNIA Art. 63 para. 1 let. b SR 142.20. Indebtedness alone — for example debt-enforcement proceedings or certificates of loss — does not trigger revocation; it may, however, feed into the integration assessment via the "wilful non-fulfilment of public-law or private-law obligations". Cross-references: Debt Enforcement and Residence Law for the link between indebtedness and integration, Revocation of a Residence or Settlement Permit for the revocation constellation.

3.2 let. b — respect for the values of the Federal Constitution

This criterion (FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 let. b SR 142.20) is given concrete form in Art. 77c OASA SR 142.201 (respect for the values of the Federal Constitution). Among the determinative values are, under Art. 77c OASA SR 142.201, in particular (a) the principles of the rule of law and the free and democratic order of Switzerland, (b) fundamental rights such as the equality of women and men, the right to life and to personal freedom, freedom of belief and conscience as well as freedom of opinion, and (c) compulsory schooling. Deficits are documented in administrative practice in particular in the case of refusal to school the children or of active rejection of constitutional principles.

The criterion is formulated in abstract terms and is interpreted in cantonal administrative practice as well as in the case law of the Federal Supreme Court and the Federal Administrative Court. A merely divergent political, religious or ideological conviction does not, according to settled doctrine and case law, in principle realise the element of constitutional disloyalty — what is required is the active disregard of constitutional principles, not mere dissent. This reading corresponds to the protection of freedom of opinion, belief and conscience under Cst. Art. 15 SR 101 and Cst. Art. 16 SR 101 (Federal Constitution).

3.3 let. c — language competence

Language competence is, in practice, the most strongly quantified integration criterion (FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 let. c SR 142.20). The proof is governed by Art. 77d OASA SR 142.201 (language competence and proof of language competence); the required level follows from FNIA Art. 58a para. 3 SR 142.20 in conjunction with the OASA and is measured according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) (levels A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2).

The language must be a national language at the place of residence — German, French or Italian. Romansh is recognised as the fourth national language, but is of subordinate significance in migration practice. English is not a national language and does not meet the requirements.

The level requirements differ according to the procedure. The following values are the standard requirements of federal law; in family reunification there is room for manoeuvre and there are cantonal differences:

  • First B permit in family reunification: the language level depends on the reunification situation (FNIA Art. 42–44 SR 142.20, family reunification). In several constellations, a low level, or registration for a language-support offer, suffices for the grant; the exact level depends on the reunification situation and on cantonal practice. The requirement currently applicable is to be inquired about at the competent cantonal migration office.
  • Extension of the B permit with integration assessment: as a rule a basic oral level (guideline value A2 oral), depending on the canton with a written component.
  • Ordinary C settlement permit (FNIA Art. 34 para. 2 SR 142.20): B1 oral, A2 written — standard following the 2019 integration revision.
  • Early C settlement permit (FNIA Art. 34 para. 4 SR 142.20): B1 oral, A1 written — the written requirement is lowered compared with the ordinary grant of the C permit; in return, the provision requires a particularly successful integration and good communication in the national language spoken at the place of residence.
  • Ordinary naturalisation (SCA Art. 12 SR 141.0): B1 oral, A2 written; the concrete language requirements for naturalisation are governed by the Ordinance on Swiss Citizenship (OSC, SR 141.01) — an instrument to be distinguished from the FNIA/OASA framework.
  • Facilitated naturalisation for spouses of Swiss nationals (SCA Art. 21 SR 141.0): same language requirement as for ordinary naturalisation (OSC, SR 141.01).

Proof of language competence is, under Art. 77d OASA SR 142.201, deemed to be furnished in particular where the person (a) has command of the national language concerned, orally and in writing, as a mother tongue, (b) attended compulsory school in that national language for at least three years, (c) completed education at upper-secondary or tertiary level in the national language spoken at the place of residence, or (d) holds proof of language competence based on a recognised, quality-assured language-testing procedure.

The fide certificate is the Swiss standard language-proof procedure and is recognised in all cantons. It certifies oral and written competence separately and is taken at accredited fide centres. Alongside it, recognised international certificates are accepted, provided that they refer to the CEFR level and are based on a quality-assured testing procedure (cf. the official list on the fide or SEM platform).

Cantonal practice may deviate from the standard values mentioned on the first issue and the extension of the B permit, in particular in family reunification; the cantonal information sheets currently in force and the information from the competent cantonal migration office are determinative.

3.4 let. d — participation in economic life or acquisition of education

The fourth integration criterion (FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 let. d SR 142.20) is formulated as an alternative and is given concrete form in Art. 77e OASA SR 142.201 (participation in economic life or acquisition of education): participation in economic life is not lacking where the person can meet their living costs and maintenance obligations from earned income, assets or third-party benefits to which there is a legal entitlement; the acquisition of education is fulfilled where the person undertakes initial or continuing education.

Economic self-sufficiency is assessed in practice primarily by reference to the non-receipt of social assistance. Receipt of social assistance is not per se an integration deficit, but may — in the case of prolonged duration or absence of active job-seeking — be appraised as an indicator of impeded participation in economic life within the meaning of let. d. The authority takes account in this regard of whether the neediness is self-inflicted or not; this appraisal is made on a case-by-case basis.

Indebtedness — debt-enforcement proceedings, certificates of loss, tax arrears — does not on its own lead to a sanction under migration law. It may, however, feed indirectly into the integration assessment (via let. a, wilful non-fulfilment of obligations, and via let. d). In several cantons the link between indebtedness, social assistance and integration has been handled more strictly since 2024 — see, for the Canton of Aargau, the constellation documented in Debt Enforcement and Residence Law. There is no flat-rate Switzerland-wide threshold (amounts of debt-enforcement, duration of social-assistance receipt, amount of certificates of loss); the cantonal information sheets and the practice currently in force are determinative.

The alternative criterion of the acquisition of education covers constellations in which a person is not in gainful employment but is in a school, apprenticeship or study path. A recognised continuing education with certificate (higher vocational education, federal professional certificates, recognised university degrees) likewise fulfils the requirement. Care duties within the family (children or relatives in need of care) are not expressly mentioned in let. d, but may be taken into account under Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201 as a major personal circumstance (on this, section 8).

3.5 By way of comparison: the fifth criterion of the Swiss Citizenship Act (SCA Art. 12 para. 1 let. e SR 141.0)

FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20, which falls under migration law, knows only the four criteria let. a–d. A fifth criterion — the promotion and support of the integration of family members — exists, by contrast, in naturalisation law: SCA Art. 12 para. 1 let. e SR 141.0 (Swiss Citizenship Act) mentions, as an element of successful integration, also the promotion and support of the integration of the spouse, the registered partner, as well as of the minor children over whom parental authority is exercised.

This distinction is legally significant: in residence law (FNIA/OASA), the promotion of family integration is not an autonomous integration criterion, but at most feeds into the assessment via let. a (compulsory schooling of the children, cf. Art. 77c OASA SR 142.201) or via the overall assessment. In naturalisation law, by contrast, it is an express criterion under SCA Art. 12 para. 1 let. e SR 141.0. Whoever receives an injunction in the permit procedure should therefore not assume a fifth FNIA criterion; the ordinary naturalisation procedure is subject to its own catalogue of criteria.

4. Language as a central assessment criterion — level overview

Language competence has, in practice, particular weight among the four criteria owing to its objective measurability. Whereas respect for security and order (let. a) and constitutional loyalty (let. b) presuppose qualitative assessments, language competence can be evidenced directly by certificates, school reports or apprenticeship diplomas.

The following overview summarises the standard level thresholds explained in section 3.3 by procedure. The values for residence and settlement are based on the FNIA/OASA regime, the values for naturalisation on the citizenship regime (SCA/OSC) — two instruments to be distinguished:

ProcedureLegal basisOralWritten
First B permit family reunificationFNIA Art. 42–44 SR 142.20depends on situation and cantondepends on situation and canton
B extension with integration assessmentFNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20 / Art. 77d OASA SR 142.201guideline value A2depends on canton
C settlement permit ordinaryFNIA Art. 34 para. 2 SR 142.20B1A2
C settlement permit earlyFNIA Art. 34 para. 4 SR 142.20B1A1
Ordinary naturalisationSCA Art. 12 SR 141.0 / OSC SR 141.01B1A2
Facilitated naturalisation (spouses)SCA Art. 21 SR 141.0 / OSC SR 141.01B1A2

Cross-reference: the Language Proof (A1 / A2 / B1 fide) (planned) will deal in detail with recognised language proofs, the test centres and the recognition practice. Until then the following applies: the fide certificate is the Swiss standard procedure; recognised international certificates are accepted in all cantons, provided that they refer to the CEFR level and are based on a quality-assured testing procedure (Art. 77d OASA SR 142.201).

5. Economic participation as the second pillar

Alongside language, participation in economic life (FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 let. d SR 142.20; Art. 77e OASA SR 142.201) is the second strongly weighted integration criterion. Cantonal practice typically examines (a) gainful employment by reference to the employment contract and salary statements, (b) the social-assistance status by reference to the communal or cantonal confirmation, and (c), for the self-employed, economic viability by reference to tax documents, OASI contribution certificates and any accounting documents.

The assessment is made prospectively and retrospectively: the authority appraises both the current economic situation and the development over several years. A one-off period of joblessness following a termination does not regularly suffice to regard let. d as not fulfilled — the active job search and the prospect of reintegration into the labour market are determinative.

In the case of a substantial and prolonged dependence on social assistance, in addition to the integration criterion under FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20, an autonomous ground for revocation or non-extension under FNIA Art. 62 SR 142.20 (revocation of the residence permit) may also come into consideration. These two tracks — the integration assessment on the one hand, the ground for revocation on the other — are to be distinguished legally and are dealt with in detail in Debt Enforcement and Residence Law as well as in Revocation of a Residence or Settlement Permit. Dependence on social assistance as a ground for revocation is subject to its own requirements, refined in the case law of the Federal Supreme Court; the thresholds as to duration and amount differ from canton to canton, a Switzerland-wide flat rate does not exist.

6. Application of the integration agreement — FNIA Art. 58b SR 142.20 and OASA Art. 77g SR 142.201

The cantonal migration authority examines on a case-by-case basis, under Art. 77g para. 1 OASA SR 142.201, whether to conclude an integration agreement. It is not a mandatory measure, but a measure dependent on the particular integration need. Typical occasions are:

  • persons with a particular integration need on the first grant of a permit,
  • persons exhibiting integration deficits within the framework of the permit extension,
  • persons exhibiting deficits within the framework of an integration assessment in view of the C settlement permit,
  • persons moving in through family reunification and not having sufficient language skills.

In terms of content, objectives and measures are oriented on the integration criteria of FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 SR 142.20; due account is to be taken of the personal circumstances (FNIA Art. 58a para. 2 SR 142.20; Art. 77g para. 2 OASA SR 142.201). The agreement itself records, under FNIA Art. 58b para. 1 SR 142.20:

  • the concrete integration objectives (language level, gainful employment, course attendance),
  • the measures for achieving the objectives (language course, integration course, job search),
  • the deadline for achieving the objectives (in practice often 12 to 36 months),
  • the modalities of financing.

Where the authority makes the grant or extension dependent on an agreement, its objectives and measures count, under Art. 77g para. 4 OASA SR 142.201, as conditions of the permit. In the implementation, the cantonal authorities advise the person concerned, as far as necessary (Art. 77g para. 3 OASA SR 142.201).

Cantonal practice on the application of the agreement is heterogeneous. The following overview serves only for orientation; the current cantonal information sheets and the information from the competent cantonal migration office are always determinative:

  • VD (Vaud): has long used the convention d'intégration regularly and in formalised form, with defined level requirements, deadlines and proof obligations.
  • ZH (Zurich): application according to federal law and the directives of the SEM, with its own information sheet of the cantonal migration office; use in the case of deficits in language competence or economic participation.
  • GE (Geneva): differentiation according to the constellation, with an emphasis on language-course obligations.
  • BS (Basel-Stadt) and BE (Bern): case-by-case application; own cantonal language-support offers.
  • AG (Aargau): since 2024 stricter handling, in parallel with the practice in the area of indebtedness and social assistance (see Debt Enforcement and Residence Law).
  • LU, SG, TI, FR: own cantonal information sheets; the practice is not uniformly publicly documented.

The cantonal heterogeneity is provided for by law: FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20 and FNIA Art. 58b SR 142.20 are framework provisions, and the OASA largely leaves the operational arrangement to the cantons. The differentiation is admissible as long as the requirement of proportionality (FNIA Art. 96 SR 142.20) is preserved.

7. Procedure relating to the integration agreement

The typical course of the procedure, where the cantonal authority considers an integration agreement, can be structured in five steps (basis: FNIA Art. 58b SR 142.20 and Art. 77g OASA SR 142.201). The concrete arrangement depends on the canton.

Step 1 — examination of the occasion. The cantonal migration office examines, within the framework of a concrete administrative operation (first issue, extension, conversion into C), the integration status of the person (Art. 77g para. 1 OASA SR 142.201). The basis is the permit file, any extracts from the criminal records register and the debt-enforcement register, social-assistance confirmations and proofs of language competence. Where there are indicators of a particular integration need, the authority initiates step 2.

Step 2 — hearing and injunction. The authority grants the person the right to be heard (Cst. Art. 29 para. 2 SR 101, Federal Constitution). In practice this is regularly done in writing, with a deadline for comment. The person has the opportunity to comment on the objections, to submit their own proofs (e.g. a language certificate already obtained) or to assert particular circumstances under Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201.

Step 3 — conclusion of the agreement. If the authority, after the hearing, continues to affirm a particular integration need, the agreement is drawn up in writing (FNIA Art. 58b para. 1 SR 142.20). It contains objectives, measures, a deadline and financing modalities (see section 6). Where the authority requires its conclusion, the permit is, under FNIA Art. 58b para. 3 SR 142.20, granted or extended only after conclusion; the objectives and measures then count as conditions (Art. 77g para. 4 OASA SR 142.201).

Step 4 — fulfilment phase. During the agreed deadline, the person is to achieve the objectives. The cantonal authority may require interim reports or periodic proofs and advises the person in the implementation, as far as necessary (Art. 77g para. 3 OASA SR 142.201). Alongside this there are cantonal integration offers, language courses and advice centres.

Step 5 — review and consequence. At the expiry of the deadline, the authority reviews the achievement of the objectives. In the case of fulfilment, the grant or extension of the permit takes place under the ordinary procedure. If the agreement is not complied with, the authority first examines, under Art. 77g para. 5 OASA SR 142.201, whether the non-fulfilment rests on an excusable ground (FNIA Art. 62 para. 1 let. f SR 142.20). Where an excusable ground is lacking, the public interest and the personal circumstances of the person are to be weighed against each other (FNIA Art. 96 para. 1 SR 142.20). Possible consequences range from extension of the deadline through non-extension to revocation; proportionality is to be preserved at every stage.

8. Proportionality and hardship clause — FNIA Art. 58a para. 2 SR 142.20 and OASA Art. 77f SR 142.201

FNIA Art. 58a para. 2 SR 142.20 as well as Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201 give concrete form to the requirement of proportionality in the application of the integration criteria. The authority must take due account of the particular circumstances of a person where that person cannot fulfil, or can fulfil only under difficult conditions, the criteria let. c (language) and let. d (economy/education) owing to (a) a physical, mental or psychological disability, (b) a serious or long-lasting illness, or (c) other major personal circumstances; in these cases the criteria may be departed from.

Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201 names as major personal circumstances in particular (a) substantial difficulties in learning, reading and writing, (b) in-work poverty despite gainful employment, (c) family care duties, and (d) — since the revision of 27 November 2024, in force since 1 January 2025 — the negative consequences of domestic violence or of a forced marriage. There is thus an express ordinary-law anchor for taking these constellations into account; the relevant crisis situation is dealt with by the Help with Domestic Violence resource.

In practice this means that the language requirements may be reduced or waived for persons with a documented disability or serious illness. Typical application constellations are:

  • a physical, mental or psychological disability with effects on language acquisition,
  • serious or long-lasting illnesses,
  • pronounced difficulties in learning, reading and writing (in particular for the written component), where the person demonstrably endeavours to become literate,
  • further major personal circumstances under Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201, for example family care duties or the consequences of domestic violence.

Proof is regularly furnished by medical certificates, specialist medical reports or social reports. The cantonal authority appraises the proof according to its dutiful discretion; the concrete recognition practice differs from canton to canton.

The proportionality review follows the criteria developed by the Federal Supreme Court — suitability, necessity, reasonableness — and stands in the light of the fundamental-rights guarantees, in particular the protection of private and family life (Cst. Art. 13 SR 101, Federal Constitution; ECHR Art. 8 SR 0.101, European Convention on Human Rights).

9. Consequences in the event of non-compliance with the integration agreement

Non-compliance with a concluded integration agreement does not automatically lead to revocation. The procedure is governed by Art. 77g para. 5 OASA SR 142.201: the authority first examines whether the non-fulfilment rests on an excusable ground (FNIA Art. 62 para. 1 let. f SR 142.20). Where such a ground exists, any adverse consequence is dispensed with. Where an excusable ground is lacking, the public interest and the personal circumstances are to be weighed against each other (FNIA Art. 96 para. 1 SR 142.20).

The possible consequences can be outlined roughly as follows; the concrete handling depends on the canton:

  • First-time non-fulfilment / partial fulfilment: as a rule a written warning with extension of the deadline for making up the objectives.
  • Continued non-fulfilment without excusable ground: non-extension of the B permit or non-grant of the C settlement permit. An L permit is, in such cases, regularly not extended.
  • Serious non-fulfilment: revocation of an existing permit, provided that a ground for revocation under FNIA Art. 62 SR 142.20 exists — for integration agreements in particular FNIA Art. 62 para. 1 let. f SR 142.20 (non-fulfilment of the conditions of an agreement without excusable ground). Cross-reference: Revocation of a Residence or Settlement Permit for the complete revocation procedure.

Every consequence is subject to the requirement of proportionality (FNIA Art. 96 SR 142.20). According to the case law of the Federal Supreme Court, the mere non-fulfilment of an agreement — without additional circumstances — as a rule does not justify revocation in the case of long presence, intact family ties or documented efforts. The appraisal is always made on a case-by-case basis.

10. Which supporting documents practice takes into account

Beyond the formal proofs (language proof, salary statement, tax documents), cantonal practice in part also draws, within the framework of the overall assessment, on soft indicators. These are not autonomous integration criteria under FNIA Art. 58a SR 142.20; their weight is very variable in cantonal practice and is not standardised. The list below is purely descriptive and says nothing about whether a particular supporting document is regarded as sufficient in a concrete procedure:

  • Language proofs: fide, telc, Goethe-Institut, TestDaF, ÖSD for German; DELF/DALF, TCF, TEF for French; CELI, CILS, PLIDA, AIL for Italian.
  • Gainful-employment supporting documents: employment contract, salary statements, OASI extract.
  • Tax and social-insurance certificates: assessment or tax certificates, confirmation of the social-assistance office regarding non-receipt, extract from the debt-enforcement register.
  • School and education supporting documents: school reports of the children, diplomas of a vocational apprenticeship, university diplomas, continuing-education certificates.
  • Social participation: association memberships, voluntary engagement, parental involvement in school or kindergarten.
  • Residence stability: long uninterrupted duration of residence at the same location.

The cantonal assessment practice is not uniform: some cantons mention soft indicators expressly in their information sheets, others rely predominantly on the formal proofs (language proof, employment proof, social-assistance status). The practice determinative in the individual case is to be inquired about at the competent cantonal migration office.

11. Which documents the authority typically examines in the procedure

The following list is purely informative and describes the case file that cantonal authorities usually draw upon in the integration procedure. It is neither a set of instructions, nor individual legal advice, nor canton-specific information. SIP gives no strategies for maximising integration status, no "cleanup" recommendations and no positioning advice for ongoing procedures.

  • Language proof: confirmations of participation, interim reports and final certificates document language competence under FNIA Art. 58a para. 1 let. c SR 142.20. The recognised forms of proof follow from Art. 77d OASA SR 142.201.
  • Participation in economic life: employment contracts, salary statements, OASI certificates and tax assessments evidence the employment situation within the meaning of Art. 77e OASA SR 142.201.
  • In the case of social-assistance receipt: the authority regularly examines whether the neediness is self-inflicted or not and whether a job is being actively sought; a confirmation of the social services regarding neediness may be taken into account under Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201.
  • In the case of disability or illness: medical certificates, specialist medical reports and, where applicable, IV rulings are the usual supporting documents by means of which the hardship clause under FNIA Art. 58a para. 2 SR 142.20 (in conjunction with Art. 77f OASA SR 142.201) comes into application.
  • In the case of an education path: enrolment and study certificates, apprenticeship contracts and school reports evidence the fulfilment of the alternative "acquisition of education" under Art. 77e OASA SR 142.201.

Anti-scope: SIP conducts no coaching to maximise integration points, no advice to avoid an integration agreement and no strategy to reduce official objections. Whoever has received an injunction to conclude an integration agreement or cannot fulfil an existing agreement should engage a female or male lawyer entered in the professional register (BfR) and specialised in migration law.

12. Cross-references within SIP-v3

13. Anti-scope and referral obligations

This file explains federal law and names cantonal tendencies; it is neither legal representation nor individual legal advice within the meaning of the Federal Act on the Freedom of Movement of Lawyers (LLCA, SR 935.61). SIP-v3 expressly does not provide the following:

  • No individual integration assessment. SIP assesses no individual cases and gives no information as to whether a particular person fulfils the integration criteria or not.
  • No integration-maximisation strategy. SIP recommends no optimisations, no cleanup steps and no time-staggered measures to improve integration status.
  • No positioning advice. SIP does not advise on confrontation with a cantonal authority, nor on reaction to an injunction to conclude an integration agreement, nor on an appeal against a refusal ruling.
  • No lawyer recommendation on the merits. SIP names no specific firms and no specific lawyers. The only admissible referral is to the professional register (BfR) of the respective cantonal bar associations, in which all authorised lawyers with a specialisation in migration law are entered.

For individual questions, existing injunctions to conclude an integration agreement, a threatened refusal of extension or a revocation ruling already issued, a lawyer entered in the professional register (BfR) and specialised in migration law is to be engaged. The cantonal bar associations and the Swiss bar register make the corresponding directories publicly available.