FINAL REPORT. Project output no. 6 Evaluation of CIP EQUAL Transnational Cooperation Principle. Client:

FINAL REPORT Project output no. 6 „Evaluation of CIP EQUAL Transnational Cooperation Principle“

Client: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí) Na Poříčním právu 1/376, 128 01 Praha 2

Contractor: Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. U Smaltovny 25 170 00 Praha 7

Version: 6 (final) In Prague, 19th December, 2008 This evaluation is financed from the EQUAL Community Initiative Programme, from “CIP EQUAL Evaluation” Project No. 9/2005, Reg. No. CZ.04.4.09/6.1.00.2/00.

EVALUATION OF CIP EQUAL TRANSNATIONAL CO-OPERATION PRINCIPLE

CONTENT 0.

1.

2.

INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 5 0.1

Foreword.......................................................................................................... 5

0.2

Authors of the Report........................................................................................ 6

0.3

List of abbreviations .......................................................................................... 6

0.4

Selected quotations from the evaluation visits and interviews .............................. 7

0.4.1

Czech Republic.............................................................................................. 7

0.4.2

Abroad ......................................................................................................... 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 9 1.1

SELECTED OBSERVATIONS ..............................................................................10

1.2

SELECTED FINDINGS .......................................................................................11

1.3

SELECTED RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................13

BACKGROUND AND THE NATIONAL STRATEGY .........................................................15 2.1

EU and ESF aid to the Czech Republic in the 2000–2006 period ..........................15

2.2

EU and ESF aid to the Czech Republic in the 2007–2013 period ..........................16

2.3

CIP EQUAL CZ in the 2004–2006 period ............................................................16

2.3.1

Legal framework ..........................................................................................16

2.3.2

Supporting infrastructure ..............................................................................17

2.3.3

Governmental policy .....................................................................................17

2.4

3.

EQUAL strategic areas and transnational cooperation .........................................18

2.4.1

Human resources development .....................................................................18

2.4.2

Employment strategy....................................................................................18

2.4.3

Innovation strategy ......................................................................................18

2.4.4

What has EQUAL brought .............................................................................19

EVALUATION OBJECTIVES AND METHODS................................................................19 3.1

Evaluation objectives and strategy of their fulfilment..........................................20

3.2

European and transnational aspect of the evaluation..........................................21

3.2.1

Selection criteria of the countries ..................................................................22

3.3

Target groups of the evaluation ........................................................................22

3.4

Evaluation methodology ...................................................................................23

3.4.1

Analysis of documents ..................................................................................23

3.4.2

Questionnaires .............................................................................................23

3.4.3

Evaluation visits ...........................................................................................24

3.4.4

Evaluation of processes ................................................................................24

3.4.5

Focus groups ...............................................................................................24

3.4.6

Continual (ongoing) evaluation......................................................................24

3.4.7

Case studies.................................................................................................25

3.4.8

Structured interviews....................................................................................25

3.4.9

SWOT..........................................................................................................25

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

2


4.

5.

6.

Observations according to the given evaluation tools .................................................26 4.1

Analysis of documents......................................................................................26

4.2

Questionnaire survey .......................................................................................27

4.3

Evaluation visits, interviews and case studies.....................................................29

4.4

Focus groups and evaluation of processes .........................................................29

Findings according to the selected topics...................................................................31 5.1

Preparation of the transnational cooperation......................................................31

5.2

Transnational cooperation administration and management................................32

5.3

Transnational cooperation implementation: activities, outputs ............................34

5.4

Sustainability, mainstreaming and wider partnership networks............................37

5.5

Monitoring and evaluation ................................................................................40

5.6

Management of the CIP EQUAL and other HRD programmes funded from the ESF 41

Description of the course of evaluation according to individual evaluation outputs .......42 6.1 Topic 1: Part of the study focused on the support in the preparation the first call of Priority axis Transnational Cooperation OP LZZ .............................................................42 6.2

Topic 2: Part of the study focused on the assessment of Czech DP’s work ...........44

6.3 Topic 3: Part of the study focused on the assessment of the work of DP supported in other EU Member States ..........................................................................................44 6.4 Topic 4: Analysis of the specific aspects and the added value of the ESF projects based on the support of transnational cooperation ........................................................44 6.5 Topic 5: Analysis of interesting approaches and specific areas of HRD in other EU countries ....................................................................................................................44 6.6 Topic 6: Part of the study focused on the synthesis of the findings from previous parts of the study (part 1) ...........................................................................................46 6.7 Topic 6: Part of the study focused on the synthesis of the findings from previous parts of the study (part 2) ...........................................................................................47 7.

Recommendations for the individual stakeholders ......................................................48 7.1

Recommendations for the entities submitting and implementing projects ............48

7.1.1

Transnational cooperation preparation...........................................................48

7.1.2

Transnational cooperation administration and management ............................48

7.1.3

Activities, added value ..................................................................................48

7.1.4

Sustainability, mainstreaming and wider partnership networks ........................48

7.1.5

Monitoring and evaluation.............................................................................49

7.2

Recommendations for MA and NSS ...................................................................49

7.2.1

Role within the framework of the programme and relations to other actors......49

7.2.2

Formulation of expected outputs and results of the transnational cooperation..49

7.2.3

Preparation of the partnership agreements ....................................................50

7.2.4

Transnational cooperation administration and management ............................50

7.2.5

Sustainability, mainstreaming and wider partnership networks ........................50

7.2.6

Monitoring and evaluation.............................................................................51

7.2.7

Conclusion to the recommendations for the managing authority......................52

7.3

Recommendations for the mainstreaming partners.............................................52


3


8.

Annexes (volume 2) .................................................................................................54 8.1 Terms of Reference (original document in Czech language) .....................................55 8.2

Evaluation Topics 1-6 .......................................................................................56

8.3

Questionnaire Survey .......................................................................................65

8.4

List of visited and interviewed contacts ...........................................................112

8.5

Evaluation Visits Scenario ...............................................................................115

8.6

Template for Evaluation Visits and Interviews ..................................................118

8.7

List of Case Studies........................................................................................119

8.8

Template for Case Studies ..............................................................................130

8.9

Structured list of Information Sources..............................................................132

8.10

Contact Data .................................................................................................144

8.11

Settlement of Comments ................................................................................231


4


0. INTRODUCTION 0.1

Foreword

The evaluation project “Evaluation of CIP EQUAL Transnational Cooperation Principle” commissioned by the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic (MoLSA) took place in the period from April to October 2008 in the territory of the Czech Republic and ten European Union (EU) countries, to be specific, in Austria, in Germany, in Poland, in Slovakia, in the Netherlands, in the United Kingdom, in Portugal, in Spain, in Italy and in France. The individual evaluation steps, i.e. analysis of documents, questionnaire survey, evaluation visits and interviews, case studies, focus groups, SWOT and process analysis took place in accordance with the stipulated time schedule. The evaluation output was in total six reports (including this Final Report), which, in accordance with the stipulated time schedule and the contract, answered the individual evaluation tasks and questions. This Final Report summarises the observations done by means of the mentioned evaluation tools (Chapter 4) and the findings based on their analysis with regard to the evaluation questions (Chapter 5) and brings recommendations directed at the individual recipients of the outputs of this evaluation and the target groups (Chapter 7). In this report, the evaluation methodology is introduced in details, including description of the particular tools (Chapter 3.4), namely on the basis of an analysis of global and partial evaluation objectives, thus the objectives covering wider evaluation context and its particular steps (Chapters 3.1-3.3). As we have structured the Final Report differently from the original tender documentation in the sense that we have used the above-mentioned combination of three views (observations according to the methods, findings according to the topics, recommendations according to the target groups), we mention an outline of the results of the evaluation according to the original points of the assignment by the contracting authority in Chapter 6. A highly valuable annex to this report is a summary of all the contacts and documents the twelvemember international team has gathered and used for the evaluation of the transnational cooperation (TC) principle of the Community Initiative Programme EQUAL (CIP EQUAL). We mention this annex above all because we presume further utilisation of these contacts and documents by the contracting authority’s representatives and also by the other evaluators. The Community Initiative EQUAL differed from the main forms of the aid from the European Social Fund (ESF) in the past periods, among others, by the transnational cooperation principle. During the 2007–2013 programming period, within the framework of the ESF programmes, also the chosen principles of the Community Initiative EQUAL are supported in cross-sectional way for the very first time. To be specific, besides the partnership and innovativeness principles, the transnational cooperation principle is concerned; the experience from CIP EQUAL is transposed into the Human Resources and Employment Operational Programme (OP LZZ), in which the transnational cooperation is included in the form of priority axes, to be specific, these are Priority axis 5a Transnational Cooperation (Convergence) and Priority axis 5b Transnational Cooperation (Regional Competitiveness and Employment). It is assumed that fulfilment of the transnational cooperation principle will enable to achieve still better results of the individual projects than those that would be able to be achieved without its application. Thus the sense of the evaluation of the transnational cooperation principle CIP EQUAL was, among others, to contribute to the improved quality of the results of the 2007-2013 programming period.


5


0.2

Authors of the Report

Bernd Baumgartl, Austria, Germany Eduardo Figueira, Portugal, Spain Jan Kroupa, Czech Republic Marco Lorenzoni, Italy, Belgium, France Václav Misterka, Czech Republic Adrianus Jan Peekstok, the Netherlands, Great Britain Jiří Pstružina, Czech Republic Linda Skolková, Czech Republic Maria Spindler, Austria Aleksander Surdej, Poland Jakub Štogr, Czech Republic Josef Štogr, Czech Republic, Slovakia Petra Štogrová Jedličková (head of the evaluation team), Czech Republic

0.3

List of abbreviations

CBA CIP EQUAL DPA ERDF ESF EES EU SPD MoLSA TC NSS NTF OP LZZ OP RLZ OP VK OPPA DP MA JROP TCA IB

Cost-Benefit Analysis Community Initiative Programme EQUAL Development Partnership Agreement European Regional Development Fund European Social Fund European Employment Strategy European Union Single Programming Document Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic Transnational cooperation National Support Structure National Training Fund Human Resources and Employment Operational Programme Human Resources Development Operational Programme Operational Programme Education for Competitiveness Operational Programme Prague – Adaptability Development Partnership Managing Authority Joint Regional Operational Programme Transnational Cooperation Agreement Intermediate Body

In the text, a breakdown of the abbreviation is always mentioned at the first occurrence, an abbreviation follows in parentheses. This is used further in the text; in exceptional cases also the full expression is used for the purposes to increase understandability and fluency of the text. In the Czech version of the report, the abbreviations created from the Czech expressions are preferred; in case the Czech abbreviation has not been established, an abbreviation created from the original English expression is used. An outline of other abbreviations that were used within this evaluation project framework is mentioned in Chapter 3.


6


0.4

Selected quotations interviews

from

the evaluation

visits

and

0.4.1 Czech Republic “The transnational cooperation was the most effective part of EQUAL at all.” 1 “It was an absolutely unique opportunity to compare culture – company, working culture, negotiation, discussions, and bearing, in the wider sense of the word – as far as to the pub.” “Selection of partners takes a lot of time, therefore it would be good to select from several partners that had been singled out, but there was neither time nor space to do so.” “At the beginning we did not suspect at all, what the transnational cooperation was in general, what was it good for, what we could expect from it and what was expected from us.” “The Czechs have realized they can learn something and that the matters are not secret, that everybody need not mind his own business and be afraid that someone would find out his tricks or “steal him something”.” “One has realized here we are not completely impossible idiots: for example, we had improved the Belgian project so that they gazed on it and will use our tools further.” “The project’s administration was incredibly demanding, it cannot be compared to other European projects at all: innovation, gender mainstreaming, horizontal topics … I am persuaded that none of the implementing entities has understood the content of these terms so far and that even the people from the MoLSA would not be able to define them precisely. And we were forced to pretend all the time we understand them and we work with them actively and to make up whole paragraphs about it into interim reports.” “I am sceptical that an obligatory partnership could bring concrete joint results – I cannot imagine this from our experience. But sharing experience, practice, approaches and tools, including transnational meetings are wonderful.” “I would leave out conferences for the next time – they are boring and mainly they are then just tourism for the most of the participants – and I would focus on study visits for small groups. It was the best thing of the whole EQUAL to se how people work somewhere else.”

0.4.2 Abroad “The transnational cooperation helped us to go back over some of our traditional services; for instance, the experience made by our Spanish partner gave us the idea to look critically to gender stereotypes on kids’ care where only women are traditionally considered suitable to this activity. We re-focused our services, which are now provided both to men and women.” “We wish we had linked up (more closely) our transnational cooperation activities with the public policies promoted at the local level. This would have allowed us to achieve some tangible results from the TC component.” “Transfer of tools among partners is a critical issue, as several partners feel this practice as a loosing of ownership over the tools.” “Dialogue with the Management Authority was very intense and burdensome on administrative issues, while the Authority was very much less interested in the TC content of the project..” “TC had a tremendous and beneficial effect of opening up the minds of national partners. It helped them in putting their specific local experience ‘in context’, by showing how under different national and local environments some trustable partners achieved their goals by the use of different approaches.” 1

This citation and the following mentioned citations come out from the coordinators of the transnational cooperation (as the case may be of the whole project) of the individual partnership organisations in the Czech Republic.


7


“Linguistic barriers shall not be underestimated, and specific instruments have to be budgeted for in order to let partners communicate effectively.” “Partners should devote to TC a comparable amount of resources..” “The provision for specific project management skills, with capacities in the area of conflict management and resolution, was a key element of our partnership, which proved being essential in order to solve critical situations.” “Being our first experience, we learned that in terms of TC we must be much more demanding since the planning phase, while being very much narrow in scope. We must build our project around very specific and job-related objectives.” “A lesson we learned is the following: avoid any aspect touching upon legislation and national specific contexts. Techniques, tools and technologies can be compared and exchanged, institutions cannot.” “We very much valued direct contacts among individuals. Direct interrelations, even those of an informal / social nature are essential for the achievement of common objectives.” “It is plenty of organizations, even solid and very well performing ones, which consider TC as an obligatory dimension of their national DPs, and do not take it seriously. This has to be understood during negotiation, and it is not an easy task.” “Partnerships have to invest hard to get real results from TC, it is not an easy job. One can do TC formally but not substantially, nobody will ever blame an organization for this… So, many DPs in reality committed very little during their TC partnerships.” “If there is one single recommendation to be addressed to Management Authorities this is: ‘Be committed to TC! Be involved yourselves in TC projects, touch with hands the benefits of international cooperation in order to convince implementing organizations of the real benefits of this instrument!”” “We were not supported by our Management Authority in assessing our achievements under the TC component; this would have considerably enhanced our capacity to monitor our progresses and to redress our plans.” “The scarce attention to TC of several MAs is deplorable. MAs shall understand the incredibly high potential of this instrument in order to value it, and to explain clearly to implementing organizations what the real benefits can be of its use.” “Ah, you want to talk about this e-PAIN.” 2 “It was said repeatedly that TC was a “value in itself”. Even if it was not specified and measured in details, the cooperation took place at several levels, between the actors in different countries and often has resulted in on-going cooperation. “ 3 “Awareness existed about the fact that the positive significance of TC had not been visualised and communicated sufficiently, the entities had not followed the mere “information exchange” and vague “mutual learning”.” “The possibility of the Austrian participating organisations to share the experience and to support origination of new ideas in international context was of the same importance in TC.”

2

Austrian Ministry official reacting to a request for an interview – QUAL in German means pain, suffering, torture This citation and the following two citations come from Austrian evaluation reports concerning the CIP EQUAL implementation. 3


8


1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The transnational cooperation was an obligatory part of the Community Initiative Programme EQUAL and a number of the participating organisations would not have included it in their projects on their own. However, the evaluation has proved that the participating bodies in absolute majority have gradually begun to perceive it as a component part of the programme and often, in spite of the initial disbelief and low expectations, they evaluate it as a very valuable and unexpectedly rewarding part. In a wide scale of particular results and outputs it is possible to find a common denominator: it is widening of the views, or in general “the experience“, widening of the context of thinking, perception, attitudes, behaviour, solutions etc. The most significant factors influencing efficiency and success of the transnational cooperation seem to be, according to the evaluation, compliance, as the case may be sharing the project objectives among partners, selection of a partner and partially the innovation rate of a particular project. Above all, thanks to this fact the preparatory and the initial stages of the project, which consequently have the principal impact on the whole implementation, seem to be as essential for the success of the transnational partnership. In this respect, also the cooperation with the managing authority and the quality of its support is mentioned as the key factors, too. In the course of the whole evaluation it also showed up that the Community Initiative Programme EQUAL had impacted in a specific context in the Czech Republic and it had interfered with it quite significantly. Without the framework understanding of this context it is neither possible to interpret the results nor to understand the findings. The following aspects of more general framework of the programme effects have shown up as the most substantial: •

Wider experience from implementation of similar programmes was missing on all parts – managing and support structures, recipients (organisations; partnerships), clients; the programme brings not only new methods of work, but it also sets a different climate as a whole thanks to the volume of means that are disposed of. Above all, the suite of the “europrofessionals” - people, who have an idea, in a better case even direct experience in work within the EU context, who have the necessary personality and knowledge qualifications, who have adequate language knowledge, etc. - is only coming into existence. This is valid more noticeably on the part of the managing structure.

•

Non-profit organisations in the Czech Republic are still unstable altogether as regards the sources of financing insomuch that the overwhelming majority of them practice the crisis management permanently instead of the strategic management. Reserves, own free sources that would not be spent in the operation and, above all prospect of any more stable financing with a more long-term perspective are missing completely. The situation is different in the implementation agencies that came into existence without their own mission for the purpose of “implementation” of the European projects and do not follow wider objectives or topics – these do not need to “feed” from the projects the operation of the insufficiently financed non-profit organisations and the administrative demands do not burden them excessively – account of them has been taken since the beginning (it means the funds for a coordinator’s and administrator’s salary are really used in this way and it is not necessary to pay from them normal employees of the organisation, who shall then “administer” the project somehow aside – in addition to their normal duties).

•

A tradition of formally negotiated partnerships that are not agreed on the basis of personal relations but on the basis of explicitly formulated objectives, clearly divided roles, rules stipulated in advance and open communication are missing. This relates both to transnational and national partnerships.

The comparison among the Czech Republic and the other EU countries included in the evaluation is interesting, above all because it has not been possible to trace any considerable difference in the respondents’ reactions to the same questions and themes; however, it is possible to trace the differences in comparable extent of cases, namely the substantial ones. The individual partial differences may be followed best in the results of the questionnaire investigation; however, it may be stated in general that the differences resulting from “maturity” and “immaturity” are concerned – namely both in good and bad meaning. Maturity and self-confidence of the senior EU Member States Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

9


bring, on the one hand, well-established procedures, beaten tracks, proved methods, rich experience with partnership, well-established work culture that is not based on personal relations, open communication with partners, namely including authorities and institutions, etc. However, it may bring at the same time certain routinism, lack of interest in the gist of the matter and endeavour to maintain the status quo, excessively established character and commonplace conterminous to becoming stale. Compared to that, the “immaturity” of the newer Member States carries round immaturity and instability of the environment, which almost is not ready to absorb the aid of similar extent, clientelism or servility towards authorities and at the same time unprofessionality of officials, unproven procedures, incomparable conditions, lack of data, unreflected own tradition, etc. on the one hand, but on the other hand it may be a source of unexpected innovation, unusual interest in the matter and resolve to do something for it, great drive, willingness to learn and absorb new things, endeavour to show oneself in front of the others, innovative approaches and the like. The transnational cooperation creates a new dimension of the programme contributions; it exceeds the individual level of learning and search for innovations where not only an individual learns but the whole organisation and when the innovations are not searched for in a geographically limited area. In addition to that, the European dimension has brought the projects the knowledge that the problems are not, as a rule, limited to particular institutions or geographical territories, that they are common under certain conditions and mainly that they are jointly understood and solved at the European level. Through this practical level, the cognition of the appurtenance to the EU and understanding of the essence of the European convergence occur then. All of it – the better an the worse – clashed in various extent and various proportions within the framework of the transnational cooperation within the framework of the evaluated projects, and it is possible to state with certainty that it was very inspiring and that the international partnership within the CIP EQUAL framework was appreciated as high in the Czech Republic as in the other participating European countries.

The following points summarise the most important observations, findings and recommendations, a more detailed and complete outline and reasoning are offered then by Chapters 4-7.

1.1

SELECTED OBSERVATIONS

•

In the first phases of preparation of the transnational partnership some organisations were little orientated, they did not get the necessary information in time, they did not make use of the whole time of the preparatory phase for good selection of partners, negotiating of the framework objectives and formulating of the basic theses of the development partnership (DP) and consequently of detailed obligations formulated in the Transnational Cooperation Agreement (TCA). At the beginning some organisations even did not pay the necessary attention to this matter, the transnational cooperation was an obligatory component part of the project and thus for a part of the projects only a “necessary supplement” of the project itself, implemented with the partners within the framework of the national state. Some implementing entities acknowledged this openly; it was obvious from the context at some others.

•

Some implementing entities chose the solution, according to which the guarantor of the transnational cooperation was one of the national partners, as a rule “specialised” in such activity. Only a smaller part of the organisations had already experience with a similar partnership with a foreign body. The managing authority and the support structure did not provide sufficiently efficient assistance at that time.

•

In the first stage of the project implementation acquaintance with the partners took place mostly and a realistic picture about the course of the project was thus created. However, in this stage neither evaluations nor partners’ reflections, comparisons with the expectations and the like proceeded as a rule. Only later the differences in approaches, which were not fortuitous but were related to “character” and local culture of the given region, were reflected.

•

The evaluation within the framework of the projects was limited to self-evaluation and questionnaires distributed at work meetings. Only a small part of DPs let an evaluation of the transnational cooperation drawn up (independently or within the framework of a larger whole,


10


e.g. of the project or TCA). Reflection of these tools and the ability to use them for management and implementation of the transnational cooperation in the project were negligible. •

Great part of the transnational partnership was implemented in “blocks”, the apex of which was always a joint meeting of a working group or only of an organisational team. Considerable part of the work in these blocks was carried out through e-mail exchange of documents in process. It was easy to classify the projects according to the groups participating in the international meetings – from managerial, research and creative groups (creating particular products, tools) to the projects focused of the “middle staff”, and in some cases also the target groups. The way of work and other related characteristics of the transnational cooperation differed thus a lot. Mutual compatibility of the individual national programmes was not a subject-matter of criticism; problems appeared from time to time due to unequal language knowledge.

•

Within the framework of the normal duties of the grant recipients, regular monitoring took place, which was used, however, above all as a formal tool for the individual financing stages and the content value and utilisation of which are minimal. Sometimes even considerable modifications discussed with the managing authority did not occur in the monitoring reports.

•

The project’s closure is a highly administratively demanding operation, which is, de facto, a separate phase requiring considerable drive – as a rule after factual termination of the transnational cooperation. Sometimes a problem is caused by the fact that not all partners close their projects at the same time and thus at the close of the project weakening of the transnational activities of those partners occurs, who have already finished their projects. The conditions for the project’s closure and detailed instructions were not, as a rule, handed over to the organisations sufficiently in advance.

•

The dissemination and mainstreaming stages shall be ensured within the framework of the final project activities, but due to all circumstances these activities sometimes fail to be completed till the project’s conclusion. After the project’s termination the organisations often do not have funds to maintain the employees, who were the specialists for implementation of the activities started within the framework of the EQUAL project; these often leave the organisation as of the date of the project’s closure.

•

As regards sustainability of the transnational cooperation, the organisations as a rule do not have own capacities and background that would enable to maintain and develop the created products and contacts.

•

As regards joint use of outputs from the projects, at the close of the project a part of the organisations turns to the managing authority with a request for political support in dissemination, e.g. at the meetings at the EU level. A part of the organisations turns to the managing authority after the project’s termination and they search for the funds to continue in distribution of the programme’s products, education of the target groups, product innovations and the like.

•

The information and communication background of the programme management and implementation was, within the framework of the Czech Republic, criticised by all the participating parties: the monitoring system was perceived rather as repression than as assistance, the databases of projects and partners were not updated regularly and an outline of the created products was missing completely. But at the same time both parties were learning during the programme implementation and they were improving these tools together.

1.2 •

SELECTED FINDINGS Preparation of the transnational partnership required from the part of methodological and information support of the managing authority above all information on partners and instructions, how to proceed at conclusion and a modification of partnership agreements. While the information support for the project preparation was sufficient, reliable records of modifications in the projects and the information on their outputs were missing completely in the databases kept at the central level.


11


•

In the countries that were included in the evaluation, various measures were recommended and somewhere also implemented on how to facilitate the process of creating transnational partnerships. For example, creation of a special measure or a project at the programme management level (not at the project level) was concerned. Or it was a recommendation of minimum extent of the partnership, which countries to focus on when searching for partners (further to the national strategies), which activities shall be strengthened (it is generally recommended to limit generic activities that miss the particular content); somewhere this principle was transposed into formation of a particular physical institution, the mission of which is to support transnational partnership in the projects in the given programme.

•

Even in cases where the approach to the transnational partnership was more or less formal and remained limited to several partial tools (for example to working groups), this approach has changed within the framework of the implementation thanks to the dynamics it was bringing. At the same time it has shown up that a whole number of “types” of partnerships exists associated with the partners’ expectations. Where these expectations had not been clarified mutually well, the cooperation remained more or less formal, for the substantial modifications were not then attainable realistically within the framework of the project already in progress (mutual agreement and then the approval process by more national managing authorities). Various types of expected cooperation may be identified according to the basic theses and expectations formulated at the preparation of the Development Partnership Agreement (DPA), further according to the chosen tools of the transnational cooperation and also according to the way how the local partners are engaged in the transnational cooperation.

•

Within the framework of the evaluation it has proved that the role of DPA was often underestimated, sometimes even the precise TCA was prepared right away (DPA used completely same formulations in the passages on partnership).

•

Role of the partners specialised in management of the transnational cooperation has shown up as disputable. In some cases this cooperation proceeded without any problems, sometimes the problems have occurred – but almost always this type of cooperation tended towards personal unions – a particular person ensuring the transnational cooperation was often employed with both bodies – both with the grant recipient and with the partner ensuring the transnational cooperation.

•

Czech organisations acceded, as a rule, during the search for partners to the groups that had already been forming and in the first stage of the project implementation they behaved, with some exceptions, relatively passively. A reflection of the type “we have had a lucky hand in selection of the partners” often appears. Thus it may be assumed that if they were in different situation (selection of the partners was not too lucky), they rather did not talk about problematic aspects of the transnational cooperation at all.

•

The transnational cooperation becomes complicated due to the language barrier, namely in several aspects. There are states distinguishing with common knowledge of English (northern countries but also Germany), others where the language knowledge complies approximately to the status in the Czech Republic, in some countries the knowledge of English is very low or these countries prefer their national language for communication within the framework of the transnational cooperation (the countries of the south). Interpreting is a significant brake for the transnational cooperation within the programmes of this type; however, it is necessary to differentiate, which participating groups are concerned. The Czech participant ensured, as a rule, that his representatives and his national partners’ representatives were communicative for common contact and for research and development of products. As regards the target group of the middle staff participating in special cognitive and training events, then interpreting is a common phenomenon.

•

Using of monitoring and evaluation of the transnational cooperation seems as very general - it is bound to quantified outputs (number of meetings, participation, realization of the planned events, etc.), namely in the international aspect – not specifically in the Czech environment. Thus they serve mainly for the identification whether the programme proceeds according to the planned structure. But it does not provide almost any other data that would be evaluated systematically.


12


•

As of the date of the project termination the facts often cumulate creating discontinuities and complications. This is related to the overall concept of the project financing where it is obvious that it is also a substantial source covering also the costs for the activity of the organisation as such. After the project termination (if a new one does not start fluently) the organisation solves then staffing and other subsistence problems. Admittedly, the organisation undertakes to sustainability of the outputs, but it is often at the limit of credibility; this fact depends, to considerable extent, on whether the organisation gains further projects. At the close of the project thus the organisation solves above all the way of survival till obtaining another source. This weakens its ability to deal actively with the processes related to mainstreaming.

•

Another problem is that at the close of the project the organisation gets into the stage of lobbying both at the level of national and EU political elites, but after the project termination it does not have any “initial platform” if it does has not created it during the project by formation of some independent structure or network. However, even in such case, financing of this activity is a big problem as a rule.

•

A question appears what role the managing authority should play in takeover and further utilisation of the outputs from the projects. It appears that the need of a central national or European database of outputs from the projects would solve not only the assistance when searching for suitable partners (on the basis of common or similar products) and a strong need to mainstream the outputs from the projects at a higher level than the project one and outside the framework of the project itself, but it would also be possible to eliminate creation of the same products and duplication of granting public funds.

1.3

SELECTED RECOMMENDATIONS

•

It is not necessary to extend the period for preparation of the transnational partnership but it is necessary to use it effectively from the beginning. Use of the DPA formulations seems as substantial in order to formulate in general the basic theses of the objectives and forms of the cooperation being prepared. Contrary to the definitive TCA, which defines the partners’ duties and their share in implementation of the joint parts of the projects precisely, the sense of DPA consists in searching for and subsequent declaration on the accord on the objectives and forms of work. In case of good DPA preparation, a number of problems resulting from mutual unacquaintance and different expectations may thus be prevented. Thus it should be referred to DPA in cases when problematic project stages or mutual disagreements of the partners are solved.

•

Since the beginning it should be also clear among the transnational partners what forms of cooperation are essential and how the national partners will be engaged in the transnational cooperation, namely also in case when their share in the given activities is ensured by financing through the grant recipient. Selection of the national partner, who takes over the role of the guarantor for the transnational cooperation, should always be reasoned very well.

•

A number of recommendations for the stage of selection of partners results from the project implementation. Accession to a partnership, which is managed as a whole by one strong partner (and moreover already continues in Actions 2 and 3), may be beneficial where the given organisation is not orientated and searches for a “helping hand” in the transnational cooperation. However, other types of organisations look rather for creative partners for team work, in which the contributions of all the engaged bodies will be valorised. Such partnerships are then managed in the rotary way as a rule. Within the framework of the project preparation and selection of partners it is thus suitable to formulate one’s expectations regarding the cooperation very precisely and to adjust to it the character of cooperation, types of partners and also the countries and regions the partners operate in.

•

It is suitable to find out already in the first selection stage whether and to what extent the potential partners dispose of the language knowledge and when and for which group interpreting will be ensured by some of the parties.

•

With regard to the clearly defined role of monitoring it is suitable to create, within the framework of the partnership, an own system of feedbacks and assessments corresponding to


13


the partnership type and the project’s orientation, as the case may be combined with an external evaluation. •

From the part of the managing authority a possibility should exist, after the introductory (getacquainted) stage of the transnational cooperation and its assessment, to carry out modifications in the project in standard way – as a natural reaction to the constellation created that could not have been the subject matter of the plan and contractual provisions before the beginning of the project.

•

Different rules of eligibility of costs were not perceived as a principal obstacle of implementation of the transnational partnership activities, rather a different financial background of the implementing organisations is concerned. Inasmuch as the transnational cooperation is, in an ideal case, an integral part of the project, it seems as suitable to search for possibilities of lump-sum financing of some types of costs related to the transnational cooperation.

•

The rules set at the beginning of the programme, as the case may be within the framework of a particular call should not change; if modifications are necessary, they should be only in favour of smoother project implementation of higher quality and on the basis of consensus of all the participating parties.

•

One of the aspects of sustainability is also the issue of maintaining and development of the know-how developed by the organisations, the bearers of which are particular employees. If the project termination means loss of these people, it is partially also a loss of the created know-how. The activities aiming at further development of the created know-how should thus take account also particular people, who are its bearers: the organisations should be able to “secure” against the loss of the know-how and the managing authority should be able to include them in consequential programmes (lobbying at national and European level, seminars, dissemination, mainstreaming).

•

Most of the findings are bound structurally to the ESF programmes character, in some cases only to the setting of the EQUAL programme rules. It may be said in general that the final stage of the project should be highly accentuated already during its approval process. Sufficiently mastered solution of the final stage including ensuring of further work with the products, education and dissemination should be an integral and significant part of the projects.

•

Monitoring and evaluation must comply with the global objectives and help to improve the quality of management and implementation of the projects and of the programme as a whole. For this reason also the sense of these activities must be obvious to all participants. It is necessary to help the project implementing entities to be able to use these tools in suitable way for their own quality management and the project cycle management. It is necessary for both parties to be able to use monitoring and evaluation strategically.


14


2. BACKGROUND AND THE NATIONAL STRATEGY Evaluation of the CIP EQUAL transnational cooperation principle was conducted within the framework of the whole programme, its objectives and context of national and European policies. The mentioned wider framework is outlined in this chapter; the following chapter explains then how the evaluation was interconnected with this wider context in particular. The Community Initiative EQUAL is one of the four Community initiatives, which were co-financed from the structural funds in the 2000– 2006 programming period. The Community Initiative EQUAL co-financed from the ESF is one of the tools to achieve the objectives of the European Employment Strategy (EES). The Community Initiative EQUAL is implemented in the whole territory of all Member States and differs from the main forms of aid from the ESF (operational programmes for Objective 1 and programme documents for Objective 3) due to inclusion of innovativeness and transnational cooperation. CIP EQUAL supports the transnational cooperation in development and promotion of new tools of fight against all forms of discriminations and inequalities in the labour market in the whole EU territory. The objective of the Initiative is thus to develop and promote the tools to support the members of disadvantaged groups (long-term unemployed, low-qualified, school graduates, older citizens, disabled persons, ethnical minorities, women, asylum seekers and the like), who encounter discrimination or unequal treatment either directly at work or when searching for it. One of the thematic areas of the Community Initiative EQUAL is focused on the issues of social inclusion and career opportunities of the asylum seekers.

2.1

EU and ESF aid to the Czech Republic in the 2000–2006 period

In the 2000-2006 EU programming period two rounds of calls to submit CIP EQUAL grant applications took place in the EU-15 Member Countries. The Czech Republic, as one of two candidate countries, took part also in the first round announced in 2001 in the Phare Programme. Since the accession of the Czech Republic to the EU, the ESF it has been a tool of direct EU aid to the Czech Republic in the area of human resources development, labour and employability; the aid was implemented by means of the operational programmes of the 2004-2006 programming period and by means of CIP EQUAL. Drawing of the ESF funds in the Czech Republic and in the Capital City of Prague was enabled by the following operational programmes: Human Resources Development Operational Programme (OP RLZ), managing authority (MA) MoLSA; Joint Programme Document for Objective 3 for Prague (JPD3), MA MoLSA and three Intermediate Bodies (IB). Further the ESF, together with the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), co-financed the Joint Regional Operational Programme (JROP) in the amount of EUR 47.28 million, i.e. ca 11.5 % of the total ESF allocation for the 2004–2006 period, i.e. EUR 409,713,575. The Czech Republic participated in the second round of the CIP EQUAL calls, financed by the ESF, on the basis of the Community Initiative Programme EQUAL CZ (CIP EQUAL CZ) after the accession of the Czech Republic to the EU in May 2004, together with partners from other Member Countries. The Community Initiative Programme EQUAL CZ, the MA of which became MoLSA and which was financed of 73 % from the ESF and of 27 % from the state budget of the Czech Republic, was approved by the European Commission in June 2004, namely for the 2004-2006 period; its implementation took place from June 2004 till the end of August 2008; MoLSA is responsible for the CIP EQUAL CZ management.


15


2.2

EU and ESF aid to the Czech Republic in the 2007–2013 period

The ESF functions in the Czech Republic also in the following programming period 2007–2013, in which the financial means from the ESF were divided in three operational programmes with their own managing authorities: Human Resources and Employment Operational Programme (OP LZZ), MoLSA is its MA; Operational Programme Education for Competitiveness (OP VK), the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sport is its MA; Operational Programme Prague – Adaptability (OPPA), the Capital City of Prague – Prague City Hall, EU Funds Department is its MA.

2.3

CIP EQUAL CZ in the 2004–2006 period

The CIP EQUAL CZ Programme defined the terms and conditions for providing aid from the ESF for the shortened programming period 2004–2006, with the implementation till August 2008. The objective of the CIP EQUAL CZ Programme was development, testing and implementing of new means for fight against all forms of discriminations and inequalities in the labour market. The CIP EQUAL CZ target groups were: •

citizens with low qualification or without qualification;

•

disabled persons;

•

national minorities;

•

graduates and young people;

•

citizens over 50 years;

•

women after maternity leave;

•

asylum seekers

•

and others.

The CIP EQUAL CZ budget was EUR 43,973,880, i.e. ca CZK 1.4 billion (as it was already mentioned above, of 73 % the ESF funds and of 27 % the funds of the state budget of the Czech Republic were concerned). The CIP EQUAL Programme had three implementation stages both in the Czech Republic and in the partner countries – these were Actions 1, 2 and 3. The foreign partners were both from the existing and new member countries. Besides their national regulations and rules of the programmes, the common regulations of the EU for the ESF and CIP EQUAL were valid for them.

2.3.1 Legal framework Condition for participation in the CIP EQUAL CZ Programme was, accordingly with the other Member Countries, creation of national development partnerships on the basis of DPA and of the partnership for transnational cooperation on the basis of TCA. According to the conditions of participation according to Chapter 2.1 of the Instructions for Applicants, an applicant could be a legal person with a registered office in the Czech Republic representing DPA; the conditions mentioned in the Instructions for Applicants related to the partners, too. The projects had to have a non-profit character. The project implementation was divided into three actions – Action 1 with the period of duration from one to five months, Actions 2 and 3 with simultaneous course in duration of 24–36 months. The Instructions for Applicants specified eligibility of expenses and other terms and conditions for the project budget. The grant amount for the individual applicants was not specified; however, the condition was that it had to correspond to the costs of the project activities. Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

16


2.3.2 Supporting infrastructure Within the framework of a CIP EQUAL CZ separate priority, technical assistance was provided to the managing authority and the development partnerships. Support to the development partnerships for the whole period of their work programme implementation belongs to the basic activities of the technical assistance. Another task of the technical assistance is monitoring of the individual DPs, namely including administration of the monitoring systems. Further the technical assistance ensured effective communication with the managing authority by means of timely providing of the information on the implementation of the individual projects and of the whole programme to the managing authority. During DP formation, creation of a project and of a budget and during preparation of a grant application the future applicants had a possibility to take part in regional seminars and a possibility to consult with the National Training Fund (NTF). They had also at their disposal the Instructions for Applicants, the Manual, list of frequently asked questions with answers and other information on the Internet sites. Later the National Support Structure (NSS) was charged with the technical assistance tasks to the managing authority including the support to the development partnerships. The company PricewaterhouseCoopers carried out the function of the National Support Structure for CIP EQUAL CZ. The technical assistance is further used to support monitoring, audits and evaluation of the activities carried out both in the Czech Republic as well as at the Europe-wide level and for preparation of studies, seminars, information events, collection, processing and dissemination of the obtained experience and results.

2.3.3 Governmental policy The framework strategic document for the area of support from the EU Structural Funds is the National Development Plan of the Czech Republic for the years 2004–2006. The main strategic documents of the Czech Republic for the area of human resources development, employment and social affairs are in particular: •

National Action Plan of Social Inclusion of the Czech Republic;

•

National Action Plan of Employment 2004–2006;

•

National Innovation Strategy of the Czech Republic;

•

National Plan of Support and Integration of Disabled Citizens for the Period 2006–2009.

The strategic documents of the Government of the Czech Republic were incorporated in the CIP EQUAL CZ Programme and in the program documents of the operational programmes. In CIP EQUAL CZ it was by means of the following priorities: •

Priority 1 – Improvement of employability;

•

Priority 2 – Development of entrepreneurship;

•

Priority 3 – Support of adaptability;

•

Priority 4 – Equal opportunities of men and women;

•

Priority 5 – Assistance to the asylum seekers in access to the labour market;

•

Priority 6 - Technical assistance.


17


2.4

EQUAL strategic areas and transnational cooperation

The starting point of the transnational cooperation was the announcement of common thematic areas for all EU states. Each thematic area had specific target groups and conditions for formation of development partnerships. The CIP EQUAL thematic areas come out from the original four pillars of the EES. The following thematic priorities are concerned: •

Improvement of employability;

•

Development of entrepreneurship;

•

Support of adaptability;

•

Equal opportunities of men and women.

The theme of support of the asylum seekers, which is within the CIP EQUAL framework designated as a thematic priority, was announced separately in the EU.

2.4.1 Human resources development The previous Community Initiatives ADAPT and EMPLOYMENT, focused on human resources development, took place in the 1994–1999 programming period. For CIP EQUAL in the 2000–2006 programming period it is characteristic that the human resources development became a crosswise theme and a result of programme and project activities. All-around development of abilities occurs with all persons engaged in the CIP EQUAL projects, thus the project management, partnership members and also their clients; however also NTS, NSS and MA are developed.

2.4.2 Employment strategy The European Employment Strategy endeavours for cooperation in the area of employment, contributes to better results and efficiency of the active employment policy, to improvement of the situation in the area of unemployment and social inclusion through fulfilment of the CIP EQUAL principles. Improvement of employability (a component part of the 1st pillar of EES): improvement of access and return to the labour market for those who have difficulty in being integrated; combating racism and xenophobia in access to the labour market. Development of entrepreneurship (a component part of the 2nd pillar of EES): assistance in setting up businesses by means of providing necessary tools for identification and exploitation of new opportunities for creating employment in towns and rural areas; strengthening of the third sector by means of social economy and community services, improvement of their quality. Support of adaptability (a component part of the 3rd pillar of EES): support of lifelong learning and employing persons endangered by discrimination and inequalities in access to the labour market; support of the adaptability of employers, firms and employees to economic and social changes and the use of new information technologies and other technical means. Equal opportunities for men and women (a component part of the 4th pillar of EES): harmonising of family and professional life, as well as the re-integration of men and women into the labour market, development of flexible and efficient forms of work organisation and support services; reducing differences in job opportunities for men and women in the labour market. Separate theme: assistance to the asylum seekers in their inclusion in the labour market.

2.4.3 Innovation strategy The innovation strategy has enabled to realize development of new means of fight against all forms of discriminations and inequalities in the labour market.


18


2.4.4 What has EQUAL brought CIP EQUAL was implemented in the whole EU territory, namely both in the developed and undeveloped areas; also in the Czech Republic CIP EQUAL was implemented in the whole territory. The transnational cooperation has showed up as possible and beneficial. Implementation of the principles of transnational cooperation, transnational and national partnership, stress on innovativeness, on development of new tools and know-how transfer – well-tried practice both in transnational and national measure – bring a significant contribution to social development and, in particular then to human resources development. In the 2007–2013 period it will be possible to apply in the Czech Republic advices from the CIP EQUAL implementation in all forms of transnational cooperation based on the partnership principles, in operational programmes and in other Community initiatives.

3. EVALUATION OBJECTIVES AND METHODS CIP EQUAL is an independent form of aid from the structural funds that supports development and promotion of new approaches to solving of inequalities and discrimination at work and access to employment. Its sense is to supplement other programmes contributing to achieving the objectives of EES and to serve as an innovative laboratory for development and promotion of new tools, while those that will prove useful will be supported further within the framework of the main forms of aid from the ESF during the following programming period. CIP EQUAL differed from the main forms of aid from the ESF in the past periods among others by the principle of transnational cooperation. Thus in the course of the 2007–2013 programming period also selected CIP EQUAL principles will be supported within the framework of the ESF programmes on cross-sectoral basis for the very first time. To be specific, the principles of innovativeness and transnational cooperation are concerned besides the partnership principle. It was decided on cross-sectoral support of these principles together with the EU Member States and the European Commission representatives on the basis of the experience with the CIP EQUAL implementation in individual EU Member States, therefore among others the documents, on which this decision was based, were used for preparation of the evaluation strategy. To be specific, this experience is transposed in OP LZZ, in which the transnational cooperation is included in the form of priority axes; Priority axis 5a Transnational Cooperation (Convergence) and Priority axis 5b Transnational Cooperation (Regional Competitiveness and Employment) are concerned. The global objective of these two priority axes is intensification of transnational cooperation in the area of human resources development and employment, the specific objective is then 1) to increase effectiveness of strategies and policies in the area of human resources and employment and 2) development of partnerships, pacts and initiatives in the area of human resources and employment. The transnational cooperation is appreciated above all for its potential: •

to verify, strengthen or improve the quality of the drafts of policies and strategies in elimination of inequalities in the labour market;

•

to increase knowledge, insight and professional background when searching for and rectification of causes of discrimination and inequalities in the labour market;

•

to obtain, share, transfer and disseminate knowledge, experience, contacts and good practice;

•

to build a sound basis for transnational comparison;

•

to create networks of actors, who assist to solve the given issues, including synergic effects connected with it;

•

to build the capacities of the participating organisations and bodies at regional and national level;

•

to increase the impact of the implemented projects and increase the effectiveness of the ESF implementation at local, regional and national level;

•

to increase efficiency and quality of project management and implementation;


19


•

to improve the quality of the outputs from projects;

•

to increase effectiveness of the expended funds by means of utilisation of the solutions already invented abroad thanks to inclusion of experience, credit and professional knowledge of foreign partners.

Within the framework of OP LZZ, it is possible to fulfil the transnational cooperation principle either at the level of separate projects directly based on the transnational cooperation but also horizontally, thus the transnational cooperation principle should apply in each of the OP LZZ financed projects if it increases its effectiveness and quality. It is assumed that fulfilment of the transnational cooperation principle will enable to achieve still better results of individual projects than those that would be able to be achieved without its application. All these starting points and all these assumptions were included in the strategy of evaluation of the CIP EQUAL transnational cooperation principle. The evaluation ranges within the framework defined in this way and follows up with the outputs of the previous evaluations and Final Reports (respective framework documents, reports and studies are mentioned in the list of the sources used). With regard to the requirement of follow-up and comparability of the CIP EQUAL evaluations, the standard methodology of evaluation was used Navreme Boheme, s.r.o., uses for other evaluations commissioned by the European Commission and that is recommended to the CIP EQUAL evaluators.

3.1

Evaluation objectives and strategy of their fulfilment

The partial evaluation of the transnational cooperation principle is related to the general objectives of the CIP EQUAL evaluation stipulated by the European Commission. We have numbered the general objectives of the CIP EQUAL evaluation for we use the numbers of the objectives afterwards for reference in the following text: 1. To support due course of the CIP EQUAL implementation and management; 2. To assess suitability of the chosen strategies, future possibility and available impacts of CIP EQUAL; 3. To identify and assess the added value of CIP EQUAL to the existing tools and policies in the labour market; 4. To contribute to identification, verification and promoting of suitable practises in implementation of the policy of inclusion and fight against discrimination and inequalities in the labour market; 5. To assess, to which extent CIP EQUAL succeeded in inclusion of its results into national policies and actions and into the ESF mainstreaming programmes; 6. To facilitate process of learning among all national bodies concerned; 7. To contribute to creation of expert capacities; 8. To enable utilisation of the acquired knowledge in the following programming period; 9. To facilitate comparability of the CIP EQUAL evaluation results at the level of the whole EU; 10. To ensure information sources for ex-post evaluation at the EU level that will be carried out by the European Commission. We have identified the following specific objectives for the evaluation of the CIP EQUAL transnational cooperation principle, which we understand as a partial one in this respect: 11. To analyse the practice of the existing transnational partnerships within the framework of DP CIP EQUAL; 12. To identify strengths and weaknesses, potential and risks of the transnational cooperation; 13. To analyse the wider context of implementation of the transnational cooperation, to identify conditions, under which it arises and develops optimally; 14. To gather examples of good practice and recommendations; Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

20


15. To collect suggestions from the part of technical and administrative support of the transnational cooperation supported within the ESF framework; 16. To identify suitable ways of searching for partners and formation of partnerships; 17. To describe management methods of partnerships; 18. To identify conditions necessary for realization of the transnational cooperation of the aid recipients from the ESF from the part of technical and administrative support; 19. To describe principles of evaluation of the quality of the transnational cooperation, namely including verification of tools for self-evaluation of the partnership and management of the partnership networks; 20. To formulate particular practical recommendations for implementation of the transnational cooperation for the DP members; 21. To formulate concrete practical recommendations for implementation of the transnational cooperation for the individual levels of the CIP EQUAL implementation structure. Except for the last objective that is directed directly at the implementation structures in the Czech Republic, all the other objectives relate both to the Czech and foreign reality. Thus the evaluation focused primarily on the assessment of the impact of the transnational cooperation financed from the Czech sources, but these findings were compared with the findings from ten selected EU countries, for the majority of the phenomena being explored has (minimum) European dimension.

3.2

European and transnational aspect of the evaluation

We have subjected the findings based on exploration of the national sample to comparison with the other EU countries and above all, we have carried out the whole evaluation in European discourse. We have in mind by this discourse the knowledge of the starting points of the relevant policies the phenomena being explored come out from, the knowledge of the European environment, actors and decision-making and communication principles, the knowledge of the requirements for quality and evaluation methods in the European environment (comprehension of the evaluation within the EU policies context) and the knowledge of the principle of partnership and transnational cooperation from the European programmes and their practical implementation in the European projects (in which we have also participated or we have evaluated them). Therefore Czech experts with international experience, who cooperated with six foreign experts, were the core of the evaluation team. For accomplishment of the evaluation of the CIP EQUAL transnational cooperation principle the following countries were selected: COUNTRY

ABBREVIATION

1. Czech Republic (core of the evaluation)

CZ

2. Italy

IT

3. Germany

DE

4. United Kingdom

UK

5. Poland

PL

6. France

FR

7. Slovakia

SK

8. Austria

AT

9. Spain

ES

10. the Netherlands

NL

11. Portugal

PT


21


3.2.1 Selection criteria of the countries 1. Role of the country in the partnership We have selected all the countries that were included in the development partnerships, in which CZ was in the role of a transnational secretary, and further the countries where the Czech partners were a part of the development partnership supported by the CIP EQUAL funds of the given country. 2. EU membership We have chosen both the representatives of the founding members (FR, IT, NL, DE) and the representatives of all enlargement waves: Western (1973, UK), Southern (1986, ES and PT), Northern (1995, AT) and Eastern (2004, PL and SK). This selection aspect proved useful at other evaluations in cases where we needed to compare the so-called milieu, thus mild, undescribed, uncodified differences in the environment that influence, to certain extent, the partnership and its management and are a condition of its functioning. In our case in particular, also finding out of the well-established practices and comparison of CZ with countries culturally close to us and, on the contrary, exposure to the contrast in advancement of the country from the point of view of ability to conclude and develop partnerships is concerned. 3. Maturity We have balanced the countries of South and North and the countries of West and East. Both countries, which have similar experience as CZ, and the old Member Countries, the countries of moderate development and countries, which that have grown suddenly quickly due to the EU membership, are represented. In the sample there are two countries with approximately the same number of inhabitants as CZ has, two countries with twice smaller and bigger population and six countries belonging to the most densely populated (and at the same time the most powerful) EU members.

3.3

Target groups of the evaluation

From the above mentioned objectives and the analysis of the evaluation themes and questions, the following target groups result, which we mention in alphabetical order; we have assigned an acronym to each of them for further references: TARGET GROUP

ACRONYM

Experts (in particular for the area of human resources development, the ESF and the ERDF, for the areas of partnership principle and transnational partnership, the ESF programming and implementation, management and financing)

EXP

Decisive sphere (politicians, national policy makers, representatives of MoLSA for the area of active employment policy, regional and local decision-makers, managers)

POLIT

European Commission (CIP EQUAL, Evaluation Department)

EC

Final recipients (representatives of development partnerships) in CZ

DP

Final recipients (representatives of development partnerships) in selected EU countries

DP EU

Clients (clients of services provided/initiated by the CIP EQUAL projects)

CLIENT

CIP EQUAL Monitoring Committee

MONIT

CIP EQUAL National Support Structure in CZ

NSS

CIP EQUAL National Support Structure in selected EU countries

NSS EU

National Thematic Networks in CZ

NTN

National Thematic Networks in selected EU countries

NTN EU

CIP EQUAL Managing Authority

MA


22


CIP EQUAL Managing Authority in selected EU countries Applicants

3.4

4

MA EU APP

Evaluation methodology

For the findings necessary to formulate conclusions and recommendations, such research and evaluation methods were used so that the selected method would be able to find sources for the answers to the given evaluation questions most effectively. The methods, the detailed description of which we mention below, were aimed at the following target groups: RESEARCH / EVALUATION METHOD Analysis of documents Questionnaire Evaluation visit Evaluation of processes Focus group Continual (ongoing) evaluation Case study Structured interview SWOT

ACRONYM OF THE METHOD ANAL QUE VIS PROC FG CONT CASE INT SWOT

TARGET GROUP No target group All target groups DP, DP EU, CLIENT NSS, NSS EU, MA, MA EU MA, NSS Evaluation team DP, DP EU EC, POLIT, NSS, NSS EU, EXP No target group

Each of the mentioned methods is characterised in details below. It is also described at each method, in which way the respondents were chosen, however, it is valid in general that they were selected according to the representativeness rule by means of quota selection.

3.4.1 Analysis of documents A supporting method is concerned, the results of which served for the preparation of other evaluation methods, as a direct input of the process evaluation. It played a role of a key method in fulfilment of the tasks connected with topics 1 and 6. “Research from a table” is concerned (contrary to the field methods). The list of the documents analysed is mentioned in Annex 8.9 and the findings from the analysis of documents are mentioned then in special chapters.

3.4.2 Questionnaires Two sets of questions came into existence and the questions were identified, which complement each other, verify each other mutually, and above all serve for comparison between the individual groups. The comments to the questionnaire had been made several times; the resulting form of the questions was then translated from English into Czech, Polish, French, Portuguese, Italian, Spanish and Dutch. The questionnaires were distributed in the electronic form only, namely through a web application, which enables safe and comfortable completion of the form and its anonymous sending on-line. The data are stored directly into a database, which increases the efficiency of their further processing significantly. The questionnaire was anonymous, but in order to be able to distinguish the target groups addressed by the questionnaire, two identification questions were mentioned in the introductory part of the questionnaire (country of origin and the type of the target group). The established target groups were addressed by means of an e-mail and an information campaign with accompanying information, which contained the www address, on which the questionnaire can be completed, explained briefly the meaning of the questionnaire and of the whole evaluation, further it contained the name of the contracting authority, an authorizing letter from MoLSA and the contact data for case of inquiries. Letters in the above-mentioned languages were sent to the contacts This group is a secondary one, it is not mentioned at the majority of activities in the tables to the individual topics and tasks as a target group, it was addressed by means of a questionnaire and above all, some recommendations for future management of the aid from the ESF are aimed at it.

4


23


gathered. Short before the expiration of the period for completion of the questionnaire (15 June 2008), also reminders were sent on 8 June 2008, which increased the rate of return of the questionnaire. A number of respondents were sending inquiries both to the questionnaire investigation and to the results of the evaluation. All the questions were answered, namely in the language, in which the inquiry had been sent. A detailed description of this method is mentioned in Chapter 4.2.

3.4.3 Evaluation visits The evaluators chose 70 representatives of final recipients representing at least 35 different development partnerships supported within the specified period of CIP EQUAL CZ, the foreign experts approached four representatives in each country, representing at least two development partnerships supported abroad (primarily those, in which Czech organisations participated, too), and six representatives in each country (including CZ) representing the projects supported from the ESF (especially those in the area of human resources development). Further the representatives of each of the implementation structure bodies (MA, NSS) were addressed in each of the analysed countries. The final selection of persons that were addressed and visited is mentioned in Annex 8.4. Notes were taken from each evaluation visit. These notes were supplemented with the data provided in additional interviews (by telephone). The notes have a uniform structure and the promise of anonymity of those, who provided their expression, is kept, therefore we do not mention the notes from the visits themselves in an annex.

3.4.4 Evaluation of processes Evaluation of processes is a succession of activities aiming at identification, analysis and assessment of processes within the framework of a certain defined body, for example of a company, an organisational unit, a programme, managing structure and the like. Inasmuch as this method is oriented only at exploration of the internal environment, it was used in our case at the evaluation of internal management bodies of CIP EQUAL (i.e. MA and NSS) and further of the parts of the implementation structure directly related (i.e. MONIT).

3.4.5 Focus groups We have adjusted the method of focus groups in this evaluation specifically to the needs; therefore two focus groups were carried out with the representatives of MA and NSS. The sense was to record the substantial experience with the programme management towards the recommendations concerning the 2007–2013 programming period and further to support the findings of the process analysis. Sets of questions for the individual groups and a scenario of the group were created. Then the evaluators asked questions and noted reactions and communications. Then the team of evaluators processed these expressions and made conclusions. With regard to sensitiveness of some expressions, it is not possible to publish these records. The results from the focus groups are transposed into the findings and recommendations in the Third Interim Report of the project Evaluation of CIP EQUAL Transnational Cooperation Principle.

3.4.6 Continual (ongoing) evaluation This method fulfils the evaluation objectives No. 9 and 10 and was an integral part of the work on this project. Its essence is supervision of a human being, who brings new stimuli into the work of the team and at the same time controls the quality of the work, each partial output is communicated with everybody and each piece of knowledge comes back into the team immediately. The evaluation principle consists then in it that the supervisor measures how the team comes closer (or does not come closer) to the original objectives of its work it defined at the beginning. This is carried out by means of evaluation tables, into which the internal evaluator writes how the team understands the individual objectives / sense of its work, then he breaks down these into individual tasks and he monitors in six stages how the individual members identify with the tasks and how they empower each other (empowerment). Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

24


3.4.7 Case studies A case study is a common research tool in social sciences and an evaluation tool. A case study is, in fact, a type of a research strategy because it works with the context of the reality, it is not a purely qualitative analysis and it combines the data analysis and qualitative elements of the research. It is often supplemented with other research methods, which was the case of this evaluation, too. The evaluation team worked with 35 studies of development partnerships in CZ and with more than 20 foreign studies. The studies were based on the analysis of documents, interviews, visits and additional determination. The list of the case studies is mentioned in Annex 8.7. The studies were processed in standard way (structured descriptions of situations and processes elaborated in writing) then an analysis of them and interpretation of the differences and specifics was carried out. The precise structure of the case studies is mentioned in Annex 8.8, it contains in general: description of the situation (number of employees, competences, formation, powers, tradition), description of processes, environment, identification of effective methods of work, identification of barriers, solving conflicts, coherence with the surrounding CIP EQUAL management systems, links to the CIP EQUAL objectives, etc. The aim was to capture above all the well-established ways of partnership formation and development, the areas of its added value, thus the areas of solutions the transnational cooperation contributes to.

3.4.8 Structured interviews This method was used when interviewing persons accessible with difficulty and where a personal visit would not increase the effect significantly and where it was necessary to act quickly (example of task No. 1) and further in additional interviewing of persons already contacted in the past (evaluation visits); therefore we have chosen for the interviews the experts from all the mentioned countries, the representatives of the European Commission, the Monitoring Committee, the National Support Structures, the National Thematic Networks and the representatives of the development partnerships that were not addressed in another way (except for the representatives of the development partnerships visited within the framework of evaluation visits). The evaluator identified the particular representatives on the basis of an analysis of particular persons’ suitability for interviewing from the point of view of representativeness, elimination of duplicities and the highest possible effectiveness of the used method. The list of all persons that were visited or inquired by means of structured interviews is mentioned in Annex 8.4.

3.4.9 SWOT SWOT analysis was applied in the evaluation at two levels: 1) as a supporting analytical method in evaluation of results of the particular activities and 2) as a general matrix of evaluation of potential, results and threats of the actually implemented transnational cooperation within the framework of individual DP from CZ and the selected EU countries. The SWOT analysis was also used successfully for assessment of functioning of the transnational partnership in different cultural environments, which are given by different tradition, experience, social economical and political background. More detailed information on this utilisation of the SWOT analysis is mentioned in the chapter on concrete realization of the evaluation.


25


4. Observations according to the given evaluation tools 4.1

Analysis of documents

The evaluation team worked with a number of information sources, the outline of which is mentioned in Annex 8.9 and also with partially obtained and partially newly created list of contacts, which are mentioned in Annex 8.10 in full. The contact data (e-mails) for addressing potential respondents from the individual target groups were obtained partly from the contracting authority, partly from the CIP EQUAL web portal (to be specific, from the ECDB database) and from the related web portals (e.g. http://www.transnationality.eu/). However, the contact data obtained from the above-mentioned publicly accessible sources were not entirely up-to-date in all cases, therefore the key role was played by the contact data provided directly by the contracting authority. The team used also the documents that were created during the evaluation or obtained from organisations. Further, in particular the ESF Forum belonged to important sources of up-to-date information; in order to obtain more detailed information on the ongoing evaluation of CIP EQUAL in CZ in process, among others, the advantage of participation in the seminar held by the company IREAS, o.p.s., on 23 March 2008 was taken. When studying the documents relevant for the evaluation purposes it was also necessary to cope with the fact that all documents are not available in Czech or English language; moreover, complicated and extensive and difficult documents are often concerned, in which only an expert from the given place is orientated. Among others, also for these reasons the evaluation team consisted of the experts from various countries. It can be stated in general that it results from the fact that the information on the projects are available at three or more places (in the structural funds monitoring system (MSSF) Monit, in the ECDB database, on the EQUAL CZ web, i.e. http://www.equalcr.cz/, as the case may be on the own web of the organisation implementing the project) that it is difficult to keep the information at all places in up-to-date form. In addition to that, the organisations themselves do not always have a possibility to modify the data regarding the project, thus the updating becomes more problematic further. While the sites of the organisations themselves where the given project was mentioned were up-to-date, the structure of these sites and the depth and quality of the information were obviously left completely upon the activity of the given organisations; for this reason the reliability and, in particular, the communicative value of the sites (with regard to the assignment of the evaluation) differed considerably. In case of the other mentioned places where the information on the projects is mentioned, the organisation did not have a direct possibility to update the information, but this was done vicariously (in case of the EQUAL CZ web through MA, in the structural funds monitoring system Monit through NSS and in the ECDB database through the database administrator). The organisations complained that in some cases they had had to ask for updating of the data repeatedly, however, in most of the cases they were not interested in administration of these systems at all. Thus it need not be clear at all to an ordinary user, who would be searching in these systems for the information on the projects, whether the content is up-to-date and who is responsible for it. A list of the projects is admittedly available on the cited EQUAL CZ web, but it is arranged according to the programme priorities, within the framework of which these projects are then hidden behind the name of the institution, which is not a common aspect, according to which the users interested in the projects search for the information. These will be most likely searching according to the name of the project, according to what it is concerned in particular or in which area of intervention it falls in; they needn’t know the name of the institution necessarily in advance. The web is thus structured regardless of the users’ needs, it comes out above all from the point of view of the managing authority. Moreover, it is not updated sufficiently, therefore it is not possible to rely completely on the information mentioned on it. When using the MSSF Monit system, the evaluation team has found out that it does not use the information utilisable for this evaluation (it is focused purely on the monitoring area).


26


On the contrary, the webs of the organisations implementing the projects have been identified as a relatively reliable source of information. However, also in this case we meet with the risk consisting in the fact that the organisations may change their web over time so that the information on the project already implemented will not be available any more (the team met with this situation in several cases of foreign projects). In general, it is possible to state that when carrying out the evaluation, it was difficult to obtain reliable and up-to-date information on the individual projects and in case, when this information was obtained, it was not sure whether a source always accessible was concerned.

4.2

Questionnaire survey

The link to the electronic questionnaire was sent to 1,786 e-mail addresses 5 while 69 of them returned as undelivered (i.e. 1,717 addresses were addressed successfully); 254 received questionnaires represent the response rate 14.8 %. Of this number, 219 questionnaires contained a set of questions focused on the representatives of the development partnerships, clients of the services created within the framework of the EQUAL projects (the target groups of the projects), members of the National Thematic Networks, independent experts and potential applicants; the set contained 21 questions. The remaining 35 questionnaires were filled in by the representatives of MA, NSS, the Payment Authority, the European Commission, the Monitoring Committee and the politicians and strategy makers in the area of HRD and the ESF; the set contained thirteen questions in total. None of the questions – with the exception of the inquiry about the country of the origin and the respondent type with respect to CIP EQUAL – was obligatory. Duplicities were removed from the obtained set of questionnaires, the questionnaires were deleted, in which less than 20 % of answers were filled in, and further corrections were carried out, on the basis of which the number of the answers being analysed reduced further by eight to the resulting 212 questionnaires focused on particular projects or recipients and 34 questionnaires, which were filled in by the management structure members, i.e. to 246 in total. A detailed outline of the work with the questionnaires and the results of the questionnaire investigation are mentioned in Annex 8.3. The answers from the questionnaires show that the most frequent source of inspiration, assistance and information for preparation and implementation of the transnational cooperation is the previous own experience. The experience of the partners from abroad in combination with methodological instructions of the EC and the assistance of the National Support Structure were mentioned as the source of inspiration and support. The quality of the particular support provided was high while this status has not been unchanging, but instead it is indicative of rather positive development of the relations between NSS and the recipients. To the planning of the project itself a question is related, what influence the transnational cooperation has on the length of the project, respectively if it requires higher time investment. The original hypothesis was confirmed that there existed a certain influence for sure, however, it should not be extreme - the respondents most frequently concurred that the transnational cooperation extended the project by one fifth of its length. When answering the question, which stages of the transnational project require more time, the respondents mentioned most frequently the very stage of preparation and then the overall coordination of the transnational co-operation. If the respondents of the questionnaire investigation mentioned that the teams implementing the transnational partnership needed support, than it was above all in the area of search for partners. According to the respondents, transfer of experience and practices, organising seminars, conferences and various other meetings belonged to most frequently implemented activities within the framework of the transnational cooperation. These findings were combined with the results of the inquiry for suitability of the individual activities for the transnational cooperation, to be specific, with the answers to the question: “Which activities are, in your opinion, the most suitable for the transnational cooperation?” with the selection possibility on the scale from 1 (not at all) to 6 (a lot). It is obvious 5

In total on 302 addresses in CZ and 346 in IT, 134 in DE, 98 in UK, 13 in IE, 98 in PL, 219 in FR, 101 in SK, 43 in AT, 109 in NL, 179 in ES, 90 in PT and other 54 in undistinguished way for the English version.


27


from the results that the most frequent activities, in particular the transfer of practices and know-how and holding various expert events, are not at the same time those having the highest credit from the point of view of the managing structures. On the other hand, the mobility of employees and supervisors was evaluated with high credit, its quality was evaluated high by the interviewees, although it does not appear to be a frequent activity. This is an example of an activity, which was not frequent, but not for the reason that it had not been requested, but rather for the reason that it was demanding, its character strengthened rather the quality than the quantity of the performance and in some cases, it had not been planned in advance and it was difficult to work it in the plan in the course of the project. To the question, which activities the project implementing entities did not implement but they had wanted to implement, most often these more demanding activities appeared, which at the same time received high credit of assessment of the importance; in the following order: joint development of new tools, joint experiments in the area of innovative approaches, joint development of methods, joint research, joint recognition of qualifications, short-term attachments, exchanges and study visits. Exactly the exchange and study placements were evaluated by those, who had implemented them, very positively. The respondents mentioned the lack of time and financial means to be the most frequent cause of non-implementation of these activities. The aspect of learning is considered to be indisputably the most beneficial within the framework of the transnational cooperation, in less developed countries learning (transfer) of something, which has already been applied abroad, is more often concerned, in more developed countries joint progress in knowledge and experience in the given area is more often concerned. The team has achieved interesting findings by means of combination of several graphs, namely the frequency of the most frequently implemented activities, activities which weren’t carried out, the activities they would strengthen next time and the activities they would reduce next time. This simulation of an ideal state is carried out on the background of comparison of CZ with the other countries, see the following graph. Combination of the data from graphs 8, 10, 25 and 27 mentioned in Annex 8.3 (the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) Combination of activities performed and not performed together with possibly empesized and restricted activities 250

Total

200

Czech Republic

150

100

50

twinning

capacity building

placements of students or clients

trainings

joint recognition of qualifications or competences

benchmarking

support to networks and alliances

self-assessment

joint training courses

implementation of foreign tools

dissemination of research studies

joint research

mobility for trainers and staff

implementation of foreign practices

negotiation of the partnership

implementation of foreign know-how

seminars

internships and exchanges

development of networks or alliances

study trips

conferences

transfer of tools

coordination meetings

dissemination of best practices

joint development of methods

project management

partnership development

joint development of new tools

project planning

know-how transfer

transfer of practices

0

joint experimentation of innovative approaches

c

As regards the estimation of those, who profit of these benefits most, all respondents concur in the opinion that the partners of the projects profit most in the long-term perspective. In the opinion about the benefit for the users of the products and services created, who should benefit from the transnational cooperation in the CIP EQUAL projects potentially, too, the representatives of the managing structures appear to be more sceptical than the project implementing entities.


28


4.3

Evaluation visits, interviews and case studies

The exact form of the tools the team has used is obvious from the annexes, in which, among others, a structure of notes of an interview and a visit, a case study structure, a scenario of evaluation visits, a list of case studies and a list of the persons, who gave an interview and who were visited, are mentioned. The visits and interviews in the organisations took place in the time, when the projects were close after the closure, as the case may be their formal closure took place and the transnational cooperation has been already closed in the overwhelming majority of cases. However, in the majority of cases the project’s representatives were not yet able to assess the transnational cooperation “from a distance”. It was rather an exception if they were themselves able to take up a more complex evaluating position. It was often difficult for them to detach the aspect of the transnational cooperation from the content (topic) itself of the project. On the other hand, if an interview proceeded with a person, who was in charge of the transnational cooperation exclusively, the ability to refer about the transnational cooperation independently on the project topics was incomparably higher, however the ability of the total evaluation of the transnational cooperation within the framework of the project decreased in due proportion with it. With regard to sufficient lapse of time within the framework of visits and interviews, the selection of partners itself and the stage of preparation of the partnership agreements were best reflected by the projects’ representatives, namely all the more that with the approaching announcement of next calls this stage is becoming topical again. At the same time it is often reflected that the approach of the management structure has changed and has become better and above all the support structure functions in a different way. The representatives of the projects, as a rule, consider as important to pay more attention and energy to selection of the partners. But the project representatives, as a rule, do not have any opinions for the search for the partners established in advance that would be based on more general mapping of regions and their typical topics or national specifics in approaches, legislation etc. From the point of view of contributions of the partnership, one of the repeatedly appreciated contributions was the fact that through the formalised structure of the project’s partners, the given organisation established a number of partial partnerships with those, who participated in the individual meetings of the partnership or used other work tools – their transnational partners’ national partners. This motif appears as highly substantial, it is often mentioned as a significant contribution of the transnational partnership. Transnational formalised network relations sometimes even have come into existence between the organisations, which participated in the work on the project, without including any of the formal partners of the transnational project. The mainstreaming process, dissemination and further utilisation of the project outputs thus need not relate to the original partnership according to TCA. Thus the organisation already chooses the partner so that this would “cover” other potential (transnational) partners, with whom it will then develop a particular cooperation, as good as possible. The representatives of the projects were very little willing and able to talk about problems, which appeared in the transnational partnership. The problems in case of withdrawal of a partner or similar situations, which required substantial modifications of TCA and which were not possible to be concealed within the framework of the interview, belonged to one group. The only one different group of most frequently mentioned problems were the problems with the organisations from some countries – where the local approach and “culture” left the line of common practices and expectations noticeably. This experience cannot always be generalised, but it is possible to find certain regularity in the way how the partners from different countries or from their parts behave.

4.4

Focus groups and evaluation of processes

The focus groups were always designed so that they might balance the findings from the questionnaire investigation and from the evaluation visits and interviews. Above all the visits and interviews were conducted, with some exceptions (interviews with the representatives of the European Commission and CIP EQUAL agencies in the Netherlands, France, Germany, Austria, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom) with the representatives of the development partnerships and the transnational cooperation coordinators. Thus the observations mentioned in the previous chapter are based on this sample very clearly and the very focus groups should bring another view of Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

29


the matter. For this reason two groups were suggested, one with the NSS representatives and one with the MA representatives. A scenario was established for each group, i.e. the questions that were asked during the discussion and the sense of which was to observe how the transnational cooperation management and implementation proceeded, how the monitoring and the evaluation were used, what kind of support was provided to the implementing bodies. A supplement to the focus groups was then the evaluation of processes, in this case above all of the information and communication flows among the mentioned bodies, i.e. the managing authority, PricewaterhouseCoopers and representatives of the development partnerships. Moreover, this picture of the flows becomes somewhat complicated by the fact that, within the framework of the transnational cooperation, it is necessary to negotiate also with the bodies outside the national field, thus with the representatives of the foreign development partnerships and even with the representatives of the foreign managing authorities (e.g. in case of TCA modification) and ministries (e.g. in case of proposals of international coordination of search for partners and gathering information to the transnational cooperation). The focus groups monitored mainly the issues of management and implementation of the transnational cooperation priority axis that is based on the knowledge of the context, in which the programme will be implemented, of the national and sectoral strategies that define priorities for the orientation of projects and activities and high-quality managing authority’s background. The managing authority makes its decisions on the basis of the valid strategic documents and follows the implementation itself by means of standard tools, to which monitoring and evaluation belong. As regards the process of the programme implementation itself, it may use systemic and national projects or specialised agencies according to the possibilities given by the setting of the given programme. Suitable and unsuitable management methods do not exist obviously, what probably matters more are recommended aspects of management, which are essential for successful implementation of the programme; clearly defined objectives and rules, understandable and willing communication with the given groups and system support (facilitation of preparation and implementation of the partnership, central database sources, methodical support) appear as most frequently mentioned. As regards project preparation and implementation, the implementing entities’ requirements for the rules and calls say they should be above all understandable, clear and unchanging till the process closure (except for the modifications necessary for increasing the smoothness and quality of a programme). The present monitoring system meets neither the needs of the programme management nor those of the implementation of the projects. Monitoring can serve, besides its own objectives, also for aggregation for certain areas (the thematic or regional viewpoint suggests itself), programme management (setting priorities) and it can also serve as a tool for control, whether the same products do not come into existence in a parallel manner or whether doubled financing of activities/outputs does not occur. In the first stage, the setting of monitoring indicators is to be reviewed, in the second phase it is then necessary to provide systemic support to the abovementioned services. Evaluation must be planned in such a way that it could react to actual processes and events within the project, thus it must be able to add the evaluation criteria and to relate to the project currently. It is necessary to maintain the flexibility element in the evaluation and at the same time it is necessary for the evaluation to be detached from the monitoring system, if possible, it must not be dependent on it in any case. At the transnational level, transnational monitoring and evaluation activities may be considered, however, it is necessary to clarify their meaning and objectives, mandate, responsibilities and the system of their administration. The other line being followed by means of the focus groups and evaluation of processes was the issue of projects’ sustainability, mainstreaming and further development of the created products. The managing authority considers active participation in dissemination and mainstreaming of the outputs and results of the projects and expects benefits from the point of view of increased impact of projects, ensuring of sustainability of their outputs, and generally improved quality of the projects. For the time being, a strategy for further disposal of the products, clarification of the roles, responsibilities and mandate come into existence. The managing authority could make decisions on the extent of utilisation of the individual outputs already on the basis of the project applications, from which it must be obvious, which outputs will arise, for whom these will be intended and how they will be disposed of after the project closure. Thus the support of the outputs, mainstreaming and dissemination will have a systemic basis, however, within its orientation, it must work with the outputs individually. When making use of the outputs and results of the projects, the managing authority should be engaged mainly at two levels: the international one, when the outputs that are common to several countries, will be concerned, and the national one, within the sense that MA would be a partner for mainstreaming. The extent, to which the role of the managing authority will be active in the utilisation Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

30


of the outputs of the projects, relates not only to its strategy, but also to the fact what mandate, mission and possibilities the managing authority has; thus the human, organisational and financial capacities for proper functioning of such system must exist. The capacities of MA may be strengthened either through an external agency or by strengthening the managing authority's internal capacities.

5. Findings according to the selected topics In this chapter, we mention the findings according to the topics that we have identified as the central ones. De facto, these topics copy the management cycle of the projects, thus they are not formulated according to the tender documentation, but they come out from this assignment at the same time. The outline of the evaluation themes according to the original assignment is mentioned only in the following chapter.

5.1

Preparation of the transnational cooperation

In the countries that were included in the evaluation, various measures concerning facilitation of the process of formation of the transnational partnerships were recommended and somewhere also implemented. For example creation of a special measure or a project at the programme management level (not at the project level) was concerned. Or it was a recommendation of minimum extent of the partnership, a recommendation which countries to focus on when searching for partners (further to the national strategies) or which activities shall be strengthened (it is generally recommended to limit generic activities that miss particular content); somewhere this principle was transposed into formation of a particular physical institution, the mission of which is to support the transnational partnership in the projects in the given programme. This fact was not reflected in the transnational cooperation preparation stage from the Czech part and the Czech partners were not prepared for it, somewhere they could have got in disadvantageous or unequal position in some other way during formation of the partnership. The transnational cooperation preparation should have proceeded in several phases but this did not always succeed due to the time pressure. Within the framework of the evaluation it has proved that the role of DPA was often underestimated, sometimes even the precise TCA was prepared right away (DPA used completely same formulations in the passages on partnership). Even in cases where the approach to the transnational partnership was more or less formal and remained limited to several partial tools (for example to working groups), this approach has changed within the framework of the implementation thanks to the dynamics it was bringing. At the same time it has shown up that a whole number of “types” of partnerships exists associated with the partners’ expectations. Where these expectations had not been clarified mutually well, the cooperation remained more or less formal, for the substantial modifications were not then attainable realistically within the framework of the project already in progress (mutual agreement and then the approval process by more national managing authorities). Various types of expected cooperation may be identified according to the basic theses and expectations formulated at the preparation of DPA, further according to the selected tools of the transnational cooperation and also according to the way how the local partners are engaged in the transnational cooperation. Czech organisations acceded, as a rule, during the search for partners to the groups that had already been forming and in the first stage of the project implementation they behaved, with some exceptions, relatively passively. A reflection of the type “we have had a lucky hand in selection of the partners” often appears. Thus it may be assumed that if they were in a different situation (selection of the partners was not too lucky), they rather did not talk about problematic aspects of the transnational cooperation at all. As regards engagement of the local partners in the transnational cooperation, both models were used within the framework of the partnership preparation. Close interconnection of the project topic with the transnational cooperation may be evaluated positively, too, as the case may be both forms of the transnational cooperation may have their positives, whether on the one a project implemented with national partners, in which the transnational cooperation plays one specific role, or on the other hand a project, which is with its own core and in its focus transnational, is concerned. However, within the Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

31


framework of the interviews it did not always confirm that the type of management corresponded to the type of the project. During the preparation of further projects, the project representatives themselves consider an answer to the question, whether to prefer the already tried partners or whether to search for the new ones, namely also in case when the cooperation was beneficial and fulfilled their expectations – search for new partners means a potential of further significant stimuli and this may be a significant contribution for some types of projects. On the contrary for other projects, the partnership that follows up is a matter of developing of the already existing dynamics. An unambiguous answer to this question does not exist.

5.2

Transnational cooperation administration and management

Overall coordination of the transnational cooperation ensues from the selected managerial model: the transnational cooperation was either managed by one body or (less often) rotary management was concerned. The most frequent managerial model was bound to the partial results. At the beginning of the cooperation it was defined who was responsible for which output or type of the output and the designated partner managed/coordinated creation of the specified output. As a rule, this model was applied to one of the above-mentioned variants in a supplementary way. However, it often seems as if it had prevailed and suppressed the general formalised management model. As regards the participating bodies, it appears that it is substantial in what way the given bodies are engaged in the cooperation, not which legal or organisational form is concerned. Both the projects managed by one strong body and the ones, which were managed according to the rotary approach, proved to be effective and successful, and in the same way the projects had significant outputs, in which the transnational cooperation was concentrated on one or two national partners, and also those, in which all the national partners participated in the implementation of the transnational element of the project. Problems are sometimes caused by the situation, when a different body has the responsibility for the transnational partnership in the given country than the recipient. In some cases this was highly effective, however, it is necessary for the relations and communication between these two bodies to be highly professional. This leads sometimes even to personal unions (one person works half for the recipient and half for the entity responsible for the transnational partnership). Experience of the managing partner, clear objective well distinguished and communicated with the other partners, clear roles and expectations belonged to the factors of success in case of transnational cooperation management by one body. As regards rotary management clearly identified individual stages and their outputs, a well-functioning collective body consisting of the national partners’ representatives, which can solve contingent disputes, have become the most important factors. The national partners, who were not recipients themselves and who are not involved in the coordination and management of the cooperation more closely, perceive it often very vaguely, as if they were concerned in the development partnership purely from the content aspect and rather as an obligatory part of what was substantial = the processes proceeding at the level of the national partnership (and this is then de facto publicly presented in an international context in the form of transnational cooperation). In this respect, cooperation with the institutions, the employees of which cannot be motivated from the project financially (typically Employment Bureaus) appears as the most problematic. It is often not easy to find a person in such institution, who would surmise at least that he/she partakes in implementation of some project at the moment. As a rule, this is a reflection of the fact that the organisations would like to involve the institutional players in the game, but with the exception of some unique cases, this is not realistic without a possibility to remunerate them for their active involvement and their resolve and interest vanish fast. From the viewpoint of the staffing of the transnational cooperation on the part of the development partnership, the personnel stability of the implementing organisation is decisive; above all fluctuation on the positions related to the management of the transnational cooperation may cause complications. This really occurred in a number of projects. Further the stability and the extent of involvement and cooperation of the partners in each of the countries are essential. The point is whether the recipient or another designated partner ensures the transnational element as one “particular” overlap of the project in the given country or whether all partners or at least more Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

32


partners from the given country partake in the transnational cooperation. Both may lead to good results, but the factors of success and failure differ for both types of involvement of the local partners. If the one, who ensures connection between the national and transnational level is one particular body, then the factors of success are his good communication and organisational ability and strong management, further it is then the ability to mediate the inputs from the project’s partners in the given country. In this case it seems that in general the most successful are the partnerships where one particular person stands in the head of the partnership (cases appear even sporadically when this person is not from the organisation, which is the recipient), who performs not only the role of a manager, but also the role of a leader, a drudge. However, this is valid only in case, if he/she persists for the whole project’s period because his/her contingent departure may be fatal for the given partnership. If not only the recipient but more partners from the given country participate in the transnational cooperation actively, the factor of success is the ability of cooperation and division of labour; the recipient’s role is then shifted into a coordination role. In the self-evaluation statements about the experience with management and implementation of the transnational cooperation in the CIP EQUAL projects, the stress on the administration of projects prevails. This represented such burden and was so demanding that the majority of the interviewees agree that at least one or two full-time jobs are necessary to be earmarked purely for the administration. The participants of the evaluation recommend earmarking one special person for the transnational cooperation itself. If the transnational cooperation is really active, then its coordination and work related to it will require one full-time job, too. We do not mention this argumentation as a recommendation for increasing the funds or warning against waste. But two realistic areas of problems result from it: 1) at the persons, who are able to do this work, there is high fluctuation rate, at the same time they are difficult to be substituted – and this is then an actual threat for the project and can affect it significantly negatively; 2) it is not manageable for the implementing organisations to pay from the salary of a “coordinator”/“administrator” of the development partnership their ordinary employees, who will manage the transnational cooperation beyond the framework of their normal work duties (also this finding was a reason for high fluctuation). The evaluation has shown provably that high administrative burden may cause threat to the project, namely not for the reason of high financial intensity, but for the reason of strong dependence of the projects on particular implementing entities, particular persons in the management of the project; this concerns also the transnational cooperation. The issues of eligibility of expenses do not play, according to the findings of the evaluation, a significant role. Its importance is more psychological. In the questionnaire investigation the respondents answered most often to the question, if the project implementing entities and their foreign partners understood the eligible expenditures differently, whether this fact influenced the project implementation, that they had encountered such problems admittedly, but these had not influenced the project implementation, or they had not encountered such problems at all. The situation of the foreign project implementing entities is contrary, these most often mentioned they had not encountered the problems at all, as the case may be that these had not influenced the project implementation. Thus we mean by the psychological level of the problem the fact the Czech implementing entities often “complain” that the conditions for the implementation were set more “kindly” for their foreign partners. However, partially the fact might probably play a significant role here that for the majority of their partners it was not that principal problem if some expenditure connected e.g. with business meetings, workshops or conferences “was not acknowledged” because these organisations have their own reserves, from which they may cover such minor disproportions. More generally, this hypothesis may be formulated that in the implementation of the projects across various countries the stability of companies and organisations, culture in the non-profit sector and long-term experience with the partnership itself play the major role. The differences in development, equipment and all-society support are perceived then for example in such marginalities, to which the host customs, financial possibilities or principles of the management of the partners belong. However, in general there is, according the hitherto findings, a significant difference in the required administrative procedures themselves. Some activities are so difficult “to be planned well” that these sometimes are not worthwhile for the Czech partners and they prefer not to implement them or these activities are taken over by the foreign partners. Also some specific expenses related to the transnational cooperation are problematic (e.g. international phone calls and the like). Thus distortion of some project’s expenses occurs and the organisation then tries to “compensate” for such unclassified costs within the existing structure of costs in a different way. Therefore neither in the Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

33


interviews nor in the questionnaire investigation the precise sums expended for the transnational cooperation were required, but the estimations and relative expressions compared to the original plan of the project budget. A separate problem is the possibility to finance trips for lower staff, who will work with the new products in practise, and for the representatives of the target groups. This is often necessary in order to ensure trial and testing processes; however, this is for the Czech partners, to the contrary from other countries, unfeasible of feasible with difficulties (e.g. it is possible to hide the travelling expenses for a group behind the purchase of services and the like). The representatives of the solving entities construe their contingent failure above all as failure of the administration. However, such perception is understandable only at the evaluation of the initial project stages, while in the implementation and mainstreaming stage it is necessary for the partners to be able to agree not only upon the form and practical form of the project management, but also upon the content of the implementation of the project itself, the methods of work being used, the quality of the outputs, involvement of various groups of people and bodies, etc. At the same time it is necessary to have sufficient space for the work on the project itself for it is not possible to plan innovations in advance, practical solutions come into existence only in the course of the project. Both internal and external factors bring the dynamics into the whole process. The internal factors are in particular the results of the work itself and also the outputs from the interaction among the partners (different cultural, social and legislative starting points, different approaches, traditions and experience). The consequence of the external links of the project, context and background of the project are external sources of change. Decisions must be made on how the outputs will look like practically within the framework of solving the project, which is open in all these respects. For this reason the factors of success cannot relate only to the administrative and managerial level of the projects. The evaluation has showed, that for the understanding to the factors of success it is suitable to differentiate more the component of management and the component of the project implementation itself, namely in all stages of the course of the project (preparation, implementation as a rule in yearly cycles, etc). The second significant structural result of this analysis is that it is suitable to construe the individual types of activities in context of the types of the target groups interested. Then it is easier to choose constellations of elements, which may be determined as the factors playing a significant role towards success of the project.

5.3

Transnational cooperation implementation: activities, outputs

From the point of view of the implementation, the most general contribution of the transnational cooperation assessed by the implementing entities is “experience”“. In spite of high evaluation of the sophisticated outputs and products, the practical experience seems to be assessed, on a long-term basis, as the principal contribution. A change in perception of connexions, of what can be concerned as “normal”, and the like is concerned. Further, it is the inspiration by particular procedures, approaches, finding of models, stimuli. These “basal” added values may not be underestimated. At the same time it does not mean in any case that the participants would not be able to appreciate also other, sophisticated outputs of the transnational partnership. The transnational cooperation is understood as an integral part of the projects – either as an obligatory component part or as something, which belongs to this programme necessarily, but also inherently (i.e. a whole scale of positions is present from “it must be” to “it would not be the same without it”). Therefore it is difficult for many respondents to differentiate during the evaluation the aspect of cooperation with the foreign partners from the content of the project itself. In general, we may state that the transnational cooperation influenced the project activities, implementation and outputs most significantly there, where the successful and mastered projects were concerned – it does not prove it would depend somehow on thematic orientation of the project, on the types of the activities chosen for the transnational cooperation, on type of the project or the type of the bodies, which implemented the project.


34


It is possible to follow several basic cooperation tools, which are characteristic for different project types. The projects, which are based above all on conferences and presentations of work of the national partners in transnational context, are organised and managed in a different way than the projects based on workshops, short-term attachments or intensive work on preparation of a particular product (joint research, development of know-how, of new tools, joint innovation – the management is tighter, the transnational cooperation is not disintegrated to such extent to partial tasks within the question of the individual partners). Each of the mentioned types of cooperation brings different effects. It resulted from the results of the questionnaire investigation that the recipients had classified in particular the transfer of practices and know-how, the development of the partnership, joint development of methods and new tools and the planning and management of the project itself as the key activities for the project’s success. However, the complex results of the evaluation have proved that the activities relating to the transnational cooperation used most often in CZ do not have to belong necessarily to the most suitable ones. The factors of success from the point of view of the project implementation itself may be identified according to the individual tools of implementation and according to the actors, at whom they are aimed. While for example international conferences have as their objective to reach wider public across the target groups and the surrounding of the problem, the professional work meetings work with the internal sources of the project. Sharing the practice involves the local actors, joint development of policies rather the independent experts. From the simplified questionnaire investigation and the evaluation visits and interviews a simplified classification of the activities and the tools of cooperation used according to the reached target groups has resulted: a)

conferences and similar events reaching with its significance the professional public, people from practice;

b)

work meetings and expert teams – intended for particular work and narrowly focused, e.g. on development of some product, only the experts concerned partake or they invite the representatives of grantors, clients;

c)

work meetings comprising sharing of the practice as an integral part – practicians, target groups partake, some short-term attachments, some types of visits and the like belong here.;

d)

individual contacts – personal or mediated;

e)

other (research, short term attachments of study type, etc.).

This shortened classification may serve as a good guidance for managerial decision-making bound to the transnational cooperation, it means decision-making on the extent of its formalisation, forms of contact, division of responsibility, setting communication, harmonising / balancing of the content and chosen forms, etc. In the sense of the factors of success, the individual identified activities may be qualified according to the participating target groups as follows: •

Transfer of practices, tools and know-how: It may relate both to direct practicians (grantors) and the expert employees; the factors of success are good identification of terms and conditions, under which different target groups may be involved in such process, and suitably selected particular procedures that are transferable, comparable, as the case may be at least communicable among the participating parties.

•

Joint development of new tools and methods: Activity focused on expert teams – the factors of success are functionality and equilibrium of the team and agreeing, shared objectives; all issues concerning the framework for the given development need to be solved in advance, namely including an accord on the starting points and values.

•

Joint experiments in the area of innovative approaches: An innovative method that presupposes involvement of experts, intermediate bodies (grantors, consultancy bodies, etc.); the factors of success are good composition of the team, enough stimuli, ability to react to current situations and local environment.

•

Joint research: Expert activity, in which it may be sometimes difficult to determine how the transnational team differentiates from another team, therefore the factor of success within


35


the framework of the projects of this type is sufficient link of the research to the particular project topics, further also comparativeness in the orientation of the research, etc. is concerned. •

Joint training courses and recognition of qualifications and competencies: Educational activity relating to three groups – the training bodies themselves, the bodies creating methodologies and the bodies deciding on accreditation. According to the project type, the criterion of success is suitable involvement of the partners from each participating country in all these groups.

•

Implementation of foreign practices, tools and know-how: More or less a dissemination procedure not requiring more significant multilateral participation, which may, however, have more or less formal character. Further see dissemination of good practices (below).

•

Dissemination of results of research: See joint research (above) and dissemination of the best practices (below)).

•

Dissemination of the best practices: The factor of success is evaluation of transferability and utilisation of the given practice, procedure, new tool. The dissemination may be more formal, presupposing passive takeover of current modules, work procedures, etc. or active, consisting in processes of acquisition of the given practices (in such case it belongs rather to creative, freer, open processes).

•

Self-evaluation: An individual tool that is reportedly frequently used and, in case of sufficient extent of frankness, contributes every kind of cooperation for sure, namely including the transnational one, but by no means it is specific for it.

•

Coordination meetings: The coordination teams work in the composition corresponding to the type of the project management and the type of the activities being implementing and the circle of the participating target groups related to it. It is not possible to determine uniform concrete factors of success for their work.

•

Seminars and trainings: Types of meetings, where one participating party arranges for a programme with work and educational element. It may relate to various target groups, in the same way as in case of the coordination meetings it is not possible to determine uniform particular factors of success.

•

Conferences: Key activities involving more target groups, a wider circle of professional public and, at the same time, influential groups. Balancing of composition and a motivations of the individual target groups, not the total number of participants, are the factors of success.

•

Short-term attachments and exchanges, study visits: One of the most frequent activities, which is evaluated very positively at the same time, and high contribution to quality and success of the project is attributed to it. The activity was most often aimed directly at the employees of the bodies involved in the transnational cooperation, as the case may be at the national partners’ representatives or at the target groups’ representatives (e.g. clients of the services, employers and the like.). The factors of success are suitable choice of the participants and of the venue (programme of the activity), suitable timing, ability to facilitate the relations and contacts established during the activity, ability to assist further development of the acquired skills and experience, ability to interconnect this activity with mainstreaming at the national level and ability to utilise the participants’ skills in other activities of the project. The factors of failure are orientation at the form instead at the content, wrong estimation of motivation and of the participants’ needs and a too strict plan.

•

Benchmarking, development and support of networks or associations; building of capacities; twinning; students’ or clients’ placement and mobility of employees and supervisors: According to the results of the questionnaire investigation, utilisation of these tools was minimal. The evaluation team does not have sufficient amount of documents to be able to deduce qualified conclusions.

In order to determine the key factors of success, it is suitable to classify the projects according to the type of activities and the involved target group. Also the structure (firmer or looser) of the project and its management should correspond to it, too. It is possible to find different factors of success for the Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

36


work of the expert teams and professional seminars focused on development of particular new tools or educational materials than for joint experiments, innovative forms of work, some types of dissemination and implementation. Different background is necessary to be created for various participating groups, to presume different forms of work; each of these types requires different logistics and outputs. One of the variants of structuring being offered that is worth mentioning is “variable” structuring. It may relate to the cooperation itself and perhaps still more to the approach of the national support and managing structure. It is obvious from the statements in the interviews the respondents would, on the one hand, welcome the possibility to influence the cooperation more, to have it more in their hands and, on the other hand, they would appreciate more freedom, creativity, flexibility. Certain dichotomy in this respect is understandable and it would be possible to accommodate it by higher extent of structuring in the initial stages of the project (see the parts dealing with the project preparatory stages above), which would in case the cooperation proves useful, pass into greater freedom and would develop the motif of mutual trust and responsibility of the partners more. This model could be very convenient for involvement of the national support structures, even if it were not easy to set understandable and comparable conditions for it at the beginning. It is then convenient to choose the tools, forms and particular activities of the transnational cooperation according to the content and objectives of the particular partnership and according to the involved target groups generally already in the preparatory stages of the project, as the case may be of the development partnership. The bearer of this know-how in this future comparable projects can be hardly anybody else than the national support and managing structure.

5.4

Sustainability, mainstreaming and wider partnership networks

The issues of sustainability, mainstreaming and wider partnership networks relate above all to: •

further utilisation, ownership and copyright and its succession at the products arisen within the framework of the project – know-how, information and educational materials, CDs and DVDs, tutorial materials, work sheets, promotional materials, brochures, web sites, outputs of research, auxiliary ledgers, the best procedures and practices and the like are concerned, namely including the possibilities for their further development, which as the case may be need not be of non-commercial character any more;

•

dissemination of the outputs and products arisen / tested within the framework of the projects and their implementation in wider context (thematic / resort area, geographical area – regional or nation-wide public policy, legislation); complementing the outputs, grouping and accessibility of the outputs according to the topics, i.e. not only according to the isolated projects; interconnection of the outputs at the corresponding level with the target groups concerned;

•

active work with wider groups of recipients and potential recipients of the outputs from the projects, it means with the groups, which are not and could not have been identified in the project as the “target groups”, but in spite of that they enter the game in some way or other; if this happens, then it is essential for wider links and usability of the project outputs to address them and engage them actively;

•

maintaining of the established partnerships and relations, further utilisation of the acquired contacts, scope of knowledge and self-confidence and their further transfer at the level of links, relations and personal (personality) growth.

With regard to the aspect of the transnational partnership and cooperation in the projects being evaluated, it is necessary to construe these topics as complementary, but not as marginal. In the basic plan, it is necessary for them to be considered and solved already within the framework of the projects. The solving entities bear indisputably the principal responsibility for sustainability of the project’s outputs and also for maintaining of the created relations and links, in spite of the fact that the role of the national support and managing structure (and as the case may be of other bodies) is Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

37


considerable in this respect, in the mainstreaming area in some cases (a least in the sense of coordination) even not substitutable and leading – especially the areas of interdepartmental dissemination and implementation at the level of regional or nation-wide public policy or legislation are concerned. However, this role passes to the order of the day only in the stage of completion of the projects and still more significant after the termination of the given programme or the programming period, when it becomes the main bearer of potential continuity with overlap to all the potential players. Dissemination of the outputs from the project is taken into account, even if they are not always the priority in practice. However, the project solving entities are not completely clear about many aspects of their future, shall the possibility of consequential utilisation, further development of the outputs, their ownership and the like be concerned. If these aspects of dissemination of the outputs and of the further lot of the created / obtained products / values were obvious, clarified and defined (best also in writing) from the beginning, there would be a good cause to believe the outputs from the projects would be of better quality, developed more specifically for the given organisation, the area of effects or the recipients’ target group. Beyond the framework of the project implementation itself, it is suitable to consider all the above mentioned topics and to plan also specifically for the three following stages: 1) Stage of the project closure A whole number of mainstreaming aspects, which overlap the frameworks of the individual projects evidently, whether the creation of the overall climate suitable for putting the outputs of the projects into practice, pressure upon the competent bodies to engage in the mainstreaming process and the like; orientation of the projects towards the outputs relating to the implementation of principal objectives of the concrete policies or formation of the public policies, etc.; or consideration of the outputs of the projects in the European institutions structures or the institutions of the states are concerned. In all the cases mentioned here, it is suitable and often inevitable for the projects to have the support at the relevant level – e.g. at the level of the respective resort ministry, interdepartmental commission, the government. In this case the managing authority is a part of one of the ministries, so it is possible to consider that it could, within the framework of the given ministry create conditions for the implementation and dissemination of the outputs of the projects to have sufficient support at appropriate places and to enjoy adequate attention of the representatives of the institutions and also of the elected bodies. However, it is necessary keep in mind at the same time that the managing authority as such may be identified neither directly with the given state administration body on the one hand nor with the results of one project on the other hand an that the managing authority can affect the political structure only in a limited way, whether at the level of the government (the executive) or of the parliament (legislation). Definitely, it is very difficult to formalise such role. Thus it may be assumed that it will remain above all the matter of the projects themselves (and the entities implementing them), to which extent they expect political and structural (institutional) support in their final stage (it means as a rule when holding conferences at the European level in Brussels with participation of influential persons close to the European Commission or the European Parliament or at the national level) and to which extent they can generate this support by engaging the key players. If this type of mainstreaming is assumed, it is necessary for its strategy to be an integral part of the project, while it is necessary to begin to map the necessary constellation of players and forces well in advance already within the framework of the project activities themselves – of course, in coordination with the managing authority. 2) Stage after the closure of the projects The resort ministry is under pressure to support the dissemination process and dissemination of some products also after closure of the projects. This is understandable with regard to caesuras in the project financing; on the other hand, no body may take over the responsibility instead of the project solving bodies, namely even in case when it does not fulfil obviously its obligation resulting from the project and it is imminent that it is not possible to ensure mainstreaming after the project termination. It is necessary in this mater that no additional costs would arise within the framework of dissemination of the project results and implementation of the outputs.


38


As we have mentioned, it is possible to prevent such situations by correct formulation of the projects, in particular in the matter of the copyright, reproductive rights and other rights with regard to the products, their further innovation and utilisation. It is necessary to ensure that the projects could not be formulated in such way that further dissemination of the created product requires the means and procedures the given applicant is not able to ensure and he neither undertakes to do so. It is necessary to consider such product as incomplete and incapable of independent utilisation – it is necessary to solve similar situations already in the phase of evaluation and selection of the projects. If further activities from the part of the state bodies and institutions in the area of dissemination and mainstreaming were not assumed in the project in advance, the ministry may take over some mainstreaming activities on the basis of the managing authority’s recommendation, but it should always be obvious that doing so it concerns such project as unsuccessful – unable to ensure the terms and conditions, under which the funds had been awarded to it. Different situation is valid in case further interventions from the part of the state bodies in the matter of mainstreaming were expected, agreed and the respective body adopted this responsibility by the approval of the given project. As far as further dissemination, education and dissemination of the outputs are concerned, it is necessary for the entities concerned to make use of the available systems of support being intended for it, whether from the sources of the EU, the state or of the self-governments, from the private or own sources. 3) Stage of maintaining partnership and support to some processes at the transnational level In some cases, after the termination of the project, processes proceed, which require external support and the course of which is essential within the framework of mainstreaming: they follow up with the links and processes established in the projects, in particular at the transnational level, they follow up with the current political events and reflect them, make use of their dynamics and the like. In these documented and chosen cases it is suitable for the managing authority to keep or to create the possibility to use the suitably selected support tools. Above all the support to processes is concerned that could not have been assumed within the framework of the projects and that result from the current situation and the circumstances occurred. It is suitable to search for the form of suitable covering of some mainstreaming activities, which are in compliance with the national strategy and the selected priorities. At the same time it is appropriate to search for a suitable form and to select adequate transnational cooperation tools. In this sense, two basic directions seem as possible, namely cooperation with the respective commissions of the Council or with the groups of the European Parliament members – according to the orientation on the executive or the legislation, in the same way inside the individual countries. As regards the factors of success, if mainstreaming and cooperation with the institutions and individuals beyond the framework of the partnership formalised in the project and essential for the dissemination of the outputs, their implementation in practice, influencing policies and practice and the overall “background of the project” are concerned, the ability to lobby, to acquire relevant contacts, to address key players with the current agenda and to be able to activate them and to involve them in the matter appear as essential. The requirement to cooperate with the target groups, as the case may be also with the intermediate bodies, is related with it, where the factor of success is the ability to obtain fast feedback and to react to the current situation related to the project. The success of the project is often bound with it, how it will succeed to change the approaches of the target groups, how the target group will accept the newly created product, how the intermediary organisations will make use of the new know-how, etc. The ability to be in contact with these groups (and if possible, to involve them in these solutions already in the time of preparation) is therefore also a significant factor of success. Above all from the point of view of the managing authority, complex work with the outputs of the projects – including those arisen from the transnational cooperation (grouping of the results across the topic, in ideal case also across the resorts) – is then absolutely essential in the area of dissemination and mainstreaming. In this sense the responsibility for sensitiveness towards potential usability (and accessibility) of the project outputs for fulfilment of the public policy priorities and for their formulation is not transferable to another player. Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

39


The managing authority should also follow the overlap of the projects (above all of the project outputs). It is obvious the managing authority is not the guarantor of the quality of the outputs, in spite of that it could prevent conceptual chaos in this respect by means by more intensive communication and timely sharing (several projects create thematic or conceptual materials conceived completely differently).

5.5

Monitoring and evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation are two different mechanisms that have different partial goals, orientation and procedures, in spite of that they accord on the global objective to help to increase the quality of the management and implementation of the projects and the programme as a whole. For this reason, they also need to make sense, and the use of these activities must be clear to all the participants. Monitoring is gathering of the knowledge in the structure prepared in advance so that it would have substantial information (communicative) value and it would be possible to aggregate them. Monitoring brings the information on the course of certain activities retroactively, namely in the structure that does not change in the course of the monitoring. Evaluation is a more-layer process containing gathering of knowledge (observation), its systemisation in findings and above all their interpretation with regard to the defined objectives and the expected states, but also with regard to dynamics, unforeseen changes and the resulting state. The evaluation brings the interpretation on how it is possible to understand some modified or unforeseen facts and how it is possible to understand connexions. Thus the evaluation is necessary there where we ask about effectiveness, search for successful and unsuccessful forms, procedures, etc. It is necessary to assist the projects to be able to use these tools suitably for the own quality management and for the project management cycle. A methodical document exists to these tools, which is Guidebook for the Transnational Cooperation of the Community Initiative EQUAL, which may be commented and extended for it is not formulated with regard to the needs of projects (but from the point of view of the programme needs) and it misses a basic outline of evaluation types and purpose of the individual evaluation tools. In addition to that, it is necessary to inform the applicants on the necessity to use monitoring and evaluations already at preparation of the applications since for their suitable inclusion in the plans and implementation of projects it is necessary to calculate also with the appropriate capacities. For this reason, it would be suitable to implement specifically focussed educational and training activities of MA for the purpose of elucidation of the actual significance of monitoring and evaluation, how to assign and implement them (including allocation of appropriate capacities already when drawing up the project’s plan and budget), how to asses their quality (especially in case of tendering external evaluations and management of internal evaluations) and how to use them strategically for the management itself. Monitoring is essential to follow the course and fulfilment the projects’ outputs, but it should serve also for comparison, aggregation for certain areas (thematic or regional point of view is offered), programme management (setting priorities), as the case may be as a tool for control, whether the same products do not arise in parallel or whether doubled financing of activities or outputs does not occur. As regards the evaluations, a scale of various evaluation tools, types of evaluations and also thematic orientation of the evaluations is offered. It is necessary to know these possibilities and to select them suitably with respect to the purpose and expectations the valuation shall fulfil. In the transnational cooperation, it is possible to assess partial project outputs and products arisen and verified in the transnational partnership, when the assessment will provide feedback either still in the course of the transnational cooperation itself or for the consequential projects in the following calls through the managing authorities and consultancy sources. After all, this is the sense of monitoring and evaluation – dissemination of outputs from the programme implementation. Joint monitoring and joint evaluation at the level of several states would be a contribution for success of mainstreaming since the transnational partnerships bear a joint product, a service or a change that is necessary to be promoted at the level where it came into existence, thus at the transnational level, as the case may be to “raise” the outputs verified at the local level to the European level. The transnational cooperation should contribute to better utilisation of the monitoring outputs to more precise and more multilateral evaluation. For this reason MA considers ensuring the part of the monitoring process or drawing up at least some evaluation studies on the basis of a joint activity of Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

40


several member states. This activity must build on a transnational, inter-governmental agreement and specification of an assignment for monitoring or evaluation from the position of the given group of countries. At the same time, the reasoning is possible rather at the level of comparisons (of similarities or on the contrary, of differences), in it how the individual accents in the priorities of the thematic (intervention) areas in the given countries, in the wider context of the European Employment Strategy, are stipulated. With regard to the fact that such setting will most probably exceed the competencies of the ministries, inter-governmental agreements would have to be concerned. At the same time these agreements would have to stipulate the responsibilities for system administration and sharing the costs connected with its development and operation. Individual countries create also monitoring and evaluation plans, e.g. “Northern Ireland European Social Fund Programme 2007 – 2013” mentions in Chapter 4 Evaluation in paragraph 4.24 the evaluation strategy in the first half of the programme: having carried out the substantial part of the project activities to evaluate the contribution (added value) of the programme to the strategic intentions of the EU, the Member State and the region and, in particular the innovative, supranational and interregional activities and horizontal themes. The evaluation strategy of the North Irish ESF programme will be updated for the second half of the programme’s duration in order to take account of the regional socio-economical and political development. In the United Kingdom, the West Wales and the Valleys Convergence Programme - Operational Programme for the ESF mentions in Chapter 3 – Strategy, paragraph 3.131 that the managing authority shall establish an independent Transnational Cooperation Unit to support the programme activities. Then in Chapter 6 in paragraphs 6.40 – 6.42 the planning tool of the managing authority “Strategic Frameworks” is described as an implementation strategy to achieve the strategic objective by means of strategically interconnected project interventions. These frameworks will serve in selection of the projects, they will enable their comparison. Thus the managing authority will be able to identify projects proposing transnational or interregional cooperation already in the stage of submission and selection and to direct them towards achieving of the programme objectives. It will be able to provide them specific assistance also during the implementation and monitor and evaluate them purposefully in cooperation with the Monitoring Committee. The East Wales Regional Competitiveness & Employment Programme for the ESF 2007– 2013 is drawn up accordingly. Both these programmes will thus be implemented, monitored and evaluated with the managing authority’s active participation, without prejudice to the Monitoring Committee’s power and responsibility.

5.6

Management of the CIP EQUAL programmes funded from the ESF

and

other

HRD

Management and implementation of the transnational cooperation priority axis does not arise in vacuum, it follows up with the previous experience in management of similar programmes and it does not definitely assume that it will leave the begun tradition completely. On the contrary, this is obviously the solution to the basic question, the general problem connected with management of any programmes: namely to what extent to set the rules and restrictions in such a way that the exerted endeavour would really reflect in the improved quality of the implemented projects. It appears that obviously the surest answer is the link-up with the traditions, the implementing entities’ expectations and the previous experience, from which this results as a rule. The priority axis management must work necessarily with the context of the Czech environment, thus with the relatively low experience of the project implementing entities in transnational partnerships and (sometimes) with the partnership at all, smaller stability of institutions and weak links between the transnational and national level of the partnership. In the countries that were included in the evaluation, various measures were recommended and somewhere also implemented. For example, creation of a special measure or a project at the programme management level (not at the project level) was concerned, which will facilitate the process of search for the partners and formation of the transnational partnership; in some countries this type of measures is implemented in the form recommendation of minimum extent of the partnership, which countries to focus on when searching for partners (further to the national strategies), which activities shall be strengthened (it is generally recommended to limit generic activities that miss the concrete content); somewhere this principle was transposed into formation of a concrete physical institution, the mission of which is to support transnational partnership in the projects in the given programme. A recommendation to announce gradually successive calls, some of


41


which (or each) will focus specifically of the concrete priority area, geographical territory or the types of activities, seems and an alternative to this model.

6. Description of the course of evaluation according to individual evaluation outputs In order to understand the procedure of the evaluation implementation, it is suitable to give the ongoing outputs, their assignment and in short also the content of the outputs into context, even if it is, in most of the cases, expanded on in other places of this Final Report in different connections. It is in particular because the ongoing outputs from the evaluations were not intended for publishing. The below-mentioned text is supplemented by Annex 8.2 Evaluation topics. The evaluation commenced with considerable delay, the data of handover of the interim reports were slightly postponed but the date of the Final Report handover was not postponed. This has lead to great pressure upon the evaluation time schedule, a whole number of the implementation stages had to overlap each other, the evaluation reports (in particular the Input Report and the First Evaluation Report) were formulated as preliminary in many aspects. Thus the outputs had to be supplemented with as special study called “Study Focused on Support in Preparation of the Calls of OP LZZ Transnational Cooperation Priority Axis”, output No. 4 of the project.

6.1

Topic 1: Part of the study focused on the support in the preparation the first call of Priority axis Transnational Cooperation OP LZZ

Subtopics: Rules for eligibility of expenses, defining the area of intervention from the material orientation of the supported projects, supporting mechanisms on the part of MA and on the recipient’s part and the like. Partial evaluation outputs: 1) Input Report (17 April 2008), output No. 1 of the project 2) “Study Focused on Support in Preparation of the Calls of OP LZZ Transnational Cooperation Priority Axis”, (8 July 2008), output No. 4 of the project. Short summary of the process: The original time schedule of the project assumed that this part would be drawn up as the first one and would be a part of the Input Report. Due to the overall shift in commencement of the evaluation and procedure of successive works, the framework introduction in the First Input Report was supplemented by the document of July 2008. Above all, the first outputs from the questionnaires and realized visits and interviews were used in it. Study of documents and advices of people involved in CIP EQUAL management abroad were used to great extent; background research of the available sources was carried out, namely both of the documents concerning OP LZZ and the given priority axis and also the related documents (in the time of processing the task only a document from France was available), methodologies to transnational cooperation in general and above all the evaluations and good experience (what proved useful, how the transnational cooperation actually proceeds). For the purpose of consideration of the suitable areas of intervention and suitability of selection of the partners, the evaluation team drew up a SWOT analysis based on the experience from the partnership across countries, and summarises thus the specifics of the environment, topics, conditions, cultural and historical tradition, experience and potential for partnership with bodies from CZ. These findings were transposed into relevant recommendations. The Third Interim Report followed up with this process.


42


Short summary of partial outputs (basic findings): a) Preparatory stage The preparatory stage, above all the strategy of selection of partners and preciseness of the planning process has the biggest influence on success of the project. It is necessary to make maximum effective use of the available information and experience for identification of suitable partners, to give sufficient time to negotiating and to plan the course and outputs of the transnational cooperation carefully. In this stage, MA could help with search for contacts and above all of further information on partners, including more detailed information on the situation in the given country with regard to content and orientation of the project. It is important for the whole preparatory period to be used really effectively. The condition of effective utilisation of this period is, at its beginning, the availability of all the necessary documents and functionality of organisational background of the support structure. The recipient should enter the preparatory stage already with completely clarified content and sense of the project, expectations, involvement of partners and the like. b) Involvement of national partners in the transnational cooperation Involvement of the partners and cooperation of the partners in each of the countries are essential. The point is whether the recipient or another designated partner ensures the transnational element as one “concrete” overlap of the project in the given country or if all partners or at least more partners from the given country partake in the transnational cooperation. In addition to this partnership, the project should create mechanisms for involvement of the institutions, target groups and important players outside the formal partnership within the framework of the project. This is essential for dissemination of the outputs, their putting into practice, influencing policies and practice and the overall “project background”. The project implementing entities must receive fast feedbacks and react to current situations of the “project background”, be in contact with these groups and, if possible, involve them in these solutions already in the time of the preparation. c) Managing authority’s role A significant requirement to MA relates to this, namely to assist the projects in mainstreaming, thus to find and hand over suitable contacts, to help with lobbying, to assist in dissemination of outputs, namely both at the national and international level. MA should become a partner to projects, not only an administrator, it should introduce the outputs of the projects to the political scene and lobby for them. A frequent rebuke was the administrative burden; the majority of the respondents agree that at least one or two full-time jobs are necessary to be earmarked purely for the administration. Everyone recommends earmarking of one special person for the transnational cooperation itself. In the selfevaluating statements on the experience in the transnational cooperation management and implementation in the CIP EQUAL projects, the accent on the administration of the projects prevails, the representatives of the solving entities construe their contingent failure above all as failure of the administration. However, in the implementation and mainstreaming stage it is necessary for the partners to be able to agree not only upon the form and practical form of the project management, but also upon the content of the implementation of the project itself, the methods of work being used, quality of the outputs, involvement of various groups of people and bodies, etc. On the other hand, it is necessary to have sufficient space for the work on the project itself for it is not possible to plan innovations in advance, practical solutions come into existence only in the course of the project. If it is possible within the framework of the rules, MA should assist in modifications in plans and financing of the projects at the most, it should become a support, an advisor, take away the administrative burdens of the projects to the maximum possible extent defined by the programme rules.


43


6.2

Topic 2: Part of the study focused on the assessment of Czech DP’s work

Subtopics: The way, in which the transnational cooperation influenced the outputs from the projects most frequently, which documents it came from; what types of supported projects, what activities, types of support and in which stages were successful.

6.3

Topic 3: Part of the study focused on the assessment of the work of DP supported in other EU Member States

Subtopics: The way, in which the transnational cooperation most frequently influenced the outputs of the projects, differences among conditions in the individual states, the outputs that were influenced thanks to the possibility to cooperate with transnational partners, types of support, documents.

6.4

Topic 4: Analysis of the specific aspects and the added value of the ESF projects based on the support of transnational cooperation

Subtopics: Added value of the transnational cooperation and its connexion with higher financial intensity; structure of expenses, eligibility and specific demands.

6.5

Topic 5: Analysis of interesting approaches and specific areas of HRD in other EU countries

Subtopics: Examples of good practice of foreign human resources development programmes, orientation of the projects in the area of human resources development, types of intervention, intermediating of the information to the applicants. Partial evaluation outputs to topics 2 - 5: The First Interim Report (30 June 2008), i.e. output No. 2 of the project, and the Study Focused on Support in Preparation of the Calls of OP LZZ Transnational Cooperation Priority Axis, (8 July 2008), i.e. the special, additionally requested output No. 4, and complete results of the questionnaire investigation mentioned in the Second Interim Report (5 August 2008) Short summary of the process: The notes from the evaluation visits and interviews of the Czech (topic 2) and foreign (topic 3) evaluators, further then the knowledge from the transnational and regional comparison and from the study of documents were used. The questionnaire investigation that took place in all eleven countries involved in the evaluation was then a very substantial source; the team drew the conclusions for processing of topics 2 to 4 from this investigation. Short summary of partial outputs (basic findings): The transnational cooperation was an obligatory part CIP EQUAL and a number of the participating organisations would not have included it in their projects on their own. The investigation has proved that the participating bodies in absolute majority have gradually begun to perceive it as a component part of the programme as a whole. Often, in spite of the initial disbelief and low expectations, they evaluate it as a very valuable and unexpectedly rewarding part. In a wide scale of concrete Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

44


contributions it is possible to find a common denominator: it is widening of the views, or in general “the experience”, widening of the context of thinking, perception, attitudes, behaviour, solutions and further significant knowledge that the problems the given organisations deal with have European dimension and solution. The most significant factors influencing efficiency and success of the transnational cooperation seem to be, according to the results of the evaluation, compliance / sharing the project objectives among partners, selection of the partner and the innovation rate of the concrete project. Above all, thanks to this fact the preparatory and the initial stages of the project, which consequently have the principal impact on the whole implementation, seem essential for the success of the development partnership. In this respect, also the cooperation with the managing authority and the quality of its support is mentioned as the key factors, too. In many respects it was not been possible to trace any considerable difference among the Czech Republic and the other EU countries, the respondents’ reactions to the same questions and themes are similar in many aspects. However, it is possible to trace some differences, namely substantial. These relate above all to the extent of experience in the projects and partnership of the similar type, while it is not possible to state unambiguously that greater experience means higher effectiveness and project contribution at the same time. The experience may play both positive and negative role. Nevertheless it is possible to state already now that the international partnership within the CIP EQUAL framework is appreciated as high in the Czech Republic as in the other participating European countries. Analysis of the specific aspects and of the added value of the ESF projects based on the support of transnational cooperation was elaborated in more details in the First Interim Report and the account of its outputs were taken in this Final Report in particular in concrete recommendations relating to implementation of the projects with transnational aspect. The analysis has arrived at the conclusion that 1) the projects containing the transnational cooperation require longer time at the preparation, which must be planned carefully at the same time whereas this plan should eliminate later modifications of the transnational agreement, however, at the same time it shall be possible to modify the original plan according to the needs that will occur only from the implementation of the project itself; 2) the added value of the transnational cooperation is in particular the possibility to take over, as the case may be explore various approaches to solution of the given problem, which however requires the knowledge of the context in the given countries (whether the transferability of these solutions is possible at all), as the case may be accentuation of the needs of the Czech party, thus an active role of the Czech partners when searching for a solution and its verification in practice (raising agendas, not their takeover), further the added value consists above all in increased knowledge capacities of the project implementing entities, strengthening of the negotiating position in mainstreaming and dissemination of the results and enlarging the partnership networks by European level; and 3) the project implementing entities and the support to implementation of the projects must take account of the differences among the individual EU Member States occurring in the are of eligibility of expenses, language knowledge, terminology and timing of the projects (if the transnational partnership is to be based on concrete projects, then it is very breakable at the moment when these projects do not terminate at the same time). The recommendations mentioned in Chapter 7 come out from these findings, while the issue of sustainability is a specific area: if the transnational cooperation has a project basis, then already at the beginning of planning the aid the account must be taken on how the transnational outputs, as the case may be the transnational overlaps of the projects will be maintained after their termination for most of the organisations as a rule do not have capacities to develop further the transnational cooperation and its results without the project support. For this reason also one of the recommendations aims at considering of a systemic support to transnational mainstreaming from the position of the managing authority. A specific part of the study answered also the question of relevant HRD areas, on which it would be desirable to focus the projects implemented in the form of transnational cooperation in the following programming period. In the time of processing this part of the evaluation only a call from France for projects in transnational cooperation, strategic documents of HRD and related areas from ten EU countries included in this evaluation (see the list of sources in the annex hereto) and evaluation reports concerning this topic from Poland and Austria were available. The evaluation team was coming out from the findings from the evaluation visits, study of documents and expert recommendations. Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

45


While some countries have the orientation of the transnational cooperation in HDR defined according to the appropriate strategic documents thematically (if ever), other countries prefer regional orientation (less frequent case). For this reason the expert team combined both approaches and to do so it used the SWOT method, thus it divided the analysis according to individual countries and specified further the topics, which are recommended for cooperation with the given country. However, the SWOT analysis defined also a wider context, in which these topics come into question for Czech organisations and identified risks connected with it. In any case it is necessary to point out that these topics are secondary ones; really primary is what was broken down in the First Interim Report in more details, thus success in negotiating and planning of the partnership, equilibrium of the partners, understanding and sharing joint objectives and values. The topics we have singled out for the orientation of the HRD projects implemented in the form of transnational cooperation are the following ones: social economy and entrepreneurship (IT, PT), employment services and advanced vocational training (UK, AT, FR), community development, local partnership and wider partnership networks (UK, NL), social area, inclusion and inclusion strategies (NL, DE, FR, UK, ES), research (HU, PL, DE), Public Private Partnership and intersectoral cooperation (DE), industry restructuring (ES), tourist industry (ES), cultural heritage (ES, FR and the like).

6.6

Topic 6: Part of the study focused on the synthesis of the findings from previous parts of the study (part 1)

Subtopics: Factors of success and failure, roles, suitability and unsuitability of supporting tools, forms of announcement of calls, cooperation in monitoring, stage of closure of projects and possible roles in it. Partial evaluation outputs to the first part of topic 6: The Second Interim Report (5 August 2008), output No. 3 of the project Short summary of the process: The report was drawn up as a complex analysis of findings, interpretation of a wider context, it contained preliminary conclusions and possible trajectories and some partial recommendations. Short summary of partial outputs (basic findings): In order to be able to identify the factors of success and failure and to formulate consequent recommendations, the evaluation differentiates the component of management and the component of the project implementation itself, namely in all stages of the course of the project; further it construes the individual types of activities in context of the target groups. In general, it is possible to state that the preparatory stage is essential for success of the project; the investigation has not shown this stage would be short in setting of the conditions and that there would be provable chain of causation of failure of a concrete project with a short preparatory period. However, effective utilisation of this period and quality of support are concerned. The support from the part of managing and support structures plays indisputably an important role in implementation of the projects with transnational participation. It results both from the questionnaire investigation and the interviews that the support is essential at preparation of the projects and further when solving operative problems connected with administration of the projects. Most of the project implementing entities found their partners through the ECDB database and in the implementation they inspired themselves by various EQUAL manuals. The requirement towards MA to become involved in mainstreaming and to help the projects to present their outputs at the national and transnational levels seems as very significant. As regards the financial means intended for the transnational cooperation, the problem does not consist in their amount or availability, but it appears rather then when the project is more open to modifications and innovations and reacts to the requirements arisen only in its course. It results from the evaluation that the high administrative burden may cause threat to the project, namely not for the reason of high financial intensity, but for the reason of strong dependence of the projects on concrete implementing entities, concrete persons in the project’s management; this concerns also the transnational cooperation.


46


We understand the question, in which way it would be possible, from the part of the programme managing authority, to prevent or at least to minimise the found negative factors, at two levels: 1) the concrete steps related to the roles of the managing and support structure, costs for the transnational cooperation, length of the preparatory period, created information tools are concerned, and 2) the point is, which new or innovated tools concerning both the obligatory structure (terms and conditions) and the auxiliary structure for the projects MA can create.

6.7

Topic 6: Part of the study focused on the synthesis of the findings from previous parts of the study (part 2)

Subtopics: Factors of success and failure, roles, suitability and unsuitability of supporting tools, forms of announcement of calls, cooperation in monitoring, stage of closure of projects and possible roles in it. Partial evaluation outputs to the second part of topic 6: The Third Interim Report (19 September), output No. 5 of the project Short summary of the process: The report was drawn up as a complex analysis of focus groups and evaluation of processes, it contained conclusions and recommendations. Short summary of partial outputs (basic findings): This part of the study focused on the recommendations directed into the area of systemic utilisation of the selected outputs and results of the projects financed from the ESF, when it was considered on the one hand when this support should start (from preparation of the projects till the period of projects’ closure), and on the other hand how to implement this support. Both the possibilities of external solution (external agencies) and the means of systemic projects, where both the support of preparation of strong transnational partnerships and mainstreaming of outputs and results of their work may be concerned, were considered. The sense of further utilisation of the projects’ outputs and results consists in it that their quality improves in this way, the parallel development of similar or same products is eliminated and mainstreaming is supported significantly. The role of the managing authority can be seen for example as an administrator of a central platform, which would present individual outputs of the projects classified – besides other criteria – according to the target groups. Since the target groups are given by the respective operational programmes and further by the orientation of the individual projects actually implemented, the question then does not consist in who the outputs should be mediated to, but above all how. The evaluation team’s proposals mentioned for example information campaigns (including TV spots, billboards and other means of traditional advertising), Internet advertising and viral marketing (in general, this is possible to be used for everything, a communication method is concerned), support to thematic networks with bigger accent on expert authority, national, as the case may be thematic competitions, conferences and fairs and further the events specifically focused and made to measure to concrete target groups. As regards the models of financing, common budget sources, revenues, systemic projects, national projects may be used. As regards the cost factors of the project outputs, the Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) may be included in the project applications; as regards the systemic and budget means, then the strategic decisions at the level of ministries are concerned, as the case may be of concrete operational programmes. The rule is valid that the system of support to outputs and results of the projects must be transparent at the most for a selective (not a flat) matter will be obviously concerned. Further, this system will be introduced newly therefore it will be necessary at the beginnings of the implementation to verify, whether the support really achieves the stipulated objectives and quality. Thus the evaluation will proceed by means of common techniques of social and economical analysis – namely already at the selection of the projects, in course of creation of the outputs and also after the termination of the projects and handover of the outputs – on the basis of data obtained through monitoring and specific evaluating procedures - on the basis of the criteria known in advance contained in the operational programmes, in the calls and, as the case may be also in assignments of systemic/national projects. But the evaluation methods could be applied also for the decision-making process itself, which will be necessary before the beginning itself of the mentioned Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

47


activities and which will be at the same time highly determining for setting the indicators of quality/success.

7. Recommendations for the individual stakeholders 7.1

Recommendations for implementing projects

the

entities

submitting

and

7.1.1 Transnational cooperation preparation •

To have an own idea and objectives what I want to achieve by the transnational cooperation in the project;

•

To make maximum use of the preparatory stage, to select partners carefully (with regard to the topic, context in the given country, partners’ motivation, their capacity and the like), to plan together sufficient time for preparation of the partnership agreement, to carry out background research focused on the transnational actors, their outputs and experience, European dimension of solving of the problem;

•

To get acquainted with the situation in the partnership countries and in concrete regions well and to find out, whether the environment there is suitable for the objectives intended;

•

When selecting the partners, to take account of differences (cultural, social, economical, legislative and political).

7.1.2 Transnational cooperation administration and management •

To choose the management model based on the partners’ temper and ability; it is possible to have a freer plan and also a very strict and detailed plan;

•

To choose in the way of involvement of the national partners in the transnational cooperation in advance.

7.1.3 Activities, added value •

To focus on the activities bringing high added value, not to repeat activities without a change and not to implement generic activities;

•

To study good experience, to learn from the experience from the previous projects;

•

To follow the project’s objectives in the activities;

•

To be ready to make use of changes and surprises in order to strengthen the project’s innovativeness.

7.1.4 Sustainability, mainstreaming and wider partnership networks •

To interconnect the transnational level with the national level, to enable transfer of relevant experience and knowledge in both directions;

•

To arrange for a wide partnership network supporting the project activities, not to rely on one strong partner and/or a project limited in time;

•

To insert sustainability, continuance of the activities started, development of the created products, communication within the wide partnership network and mainstreaming into the project plan already since the beginning, to commence these activities in time, not only in the end of the project.


48


7.1.5 Monitoring and evaluation • • • • •

To define the own indicators of measurement of progress and success; To incorporate monitoring and evaluation activities in the plan, time schedule and budget of the project; Not to be afraid to acknowledge a mistake, to have instruments for correction, modification, to incorporate the results of the evaluations in the project cycle management; To make use of evaluation and monitoring for improvement of the management of the project quality and its results; On the basis of ongoing evaluation, to carry out programme corrections that will increase its effectiveness.

7.2

Recommendations for MA and NSS

7.2.1 Role within the framework of the programme and relations to other actors •

The rules of management, implementation and the formulation of the calls itself and of all the other supporting documents should be understandable, consistent and they should not change in course of the proceeding, as the case may be modifications are recommended only in cases where they do not complicate the programme implementation and implementation of the projects themselves.

•

With regard to the fact that from the essence of the transnational cooperation contact with partners from other countries results, the programme management should, to the maximum possible extent, harmonise the rules so that these might not collide directly with the rules in other countries, this relates above all to eligibility of expenses and conditions of partnership (partnership agreements).

•

It would be convenient to facilitate the process of concluding partnership agreements and further, to create conditions for contingent modifications of contractual relations among the partners.

•

The role of the managing authority, as the case may be of other supporting bodies must be defined clearly and presented to the aid recipients; it should be always obvious, to whom, when and with what the entities interested in information may turn in a certain stage of the project implementation (from the preparation of the partnership as far as to the closure of the projects and further utilisation of their outputs).

•

The programme management should create multi-channel communication for the recipients’ groups, the used communication tools should be understandable, the forms should be acceptable, and communication should correspond to needs and possibilities of the given groups.

•

It is necessary to keep always in mind the main programme’s objectives, and thus to search for the ways how to improve the quality of the projects and to decrease the administrative burden of the entities implementing them, to eliminate instrumental and purposeful projects and misuse of the aid; for this purpose it is possible to consider e.g. simplification in reporting, introducing lump expenses, making the monitoring system more transparent and drawing up the so called black lists.

7.2.2 Formulation of expected outputs and results of the transnational cooperation •

The calls should be announced in the manner that would provide sufficient time not only for the drawing up of projects, but also for the evaluation of a call as such (from this reason, the version of announcement of more calls gradually and differently oriented/modified seems as more convenient).


49


•

Support from the part of the managing authority must be available for the applicant, especially when searching for partners and finalising the partnership agreements. However, besides that it is necessary not to forget about the possible overlaps of the projects into other programmes thanks to the transnational aspect of the projects, therefore it seems as convenient to prepare common documentation to the application - this has already been introduced in the Rural Development Operational Programme (the Leader axis and pre-established local action groups – LAGs - as applicants), where also the projects of the CIP EQUAL type may be. The calls should not contradict the terms and conditions contained in the operational programmes and Community initiatives.

7.2.3 Preparation of the partnership agreements •

The assistance for the applicants must be available, of high quality and understandable during the whole period when a TCA is being negotiated and established. Besides that, it is of course necessary to have available good methodological aids for preparation of the applications, welldrafted calls, consultancy assistance from the part of the managing authorities. As regards the transnational cooperation, it is necessary to accentuate specifically the process of a partnership preparation and the importance of the partnership agreement, as the case may be, of a covenant on how and under what terms and conditions a partnership will operate.

•

For this reason, it is necessary to have up-to-date information available, among others, about potential partners, as well as methodological tools for correct selection of the partner and the negotiation of the terms and conditions for the partnership. It is recommend to strengthen the information support to the applicants even before applications are started being prepared to avoid any duplications (e.g. proposing the procedures that have already been implemented, creating the tools that have already been implemented, realising similar projects concurrently, etc.) and noncooperating among projects having similar objectives. This relates especially to Internet portals where it is possible to search for thematically similar projects, projects from the same geographic area, partners´ projects, etc.

7.2.4 Transnational cooperation administration and management •

We recommend to simplify management and administration to the maximum extent, to consolidate the rules, to eliminate redundant things, not to change rules during the implementation stage, to consolidate the structure of applications, to unify the monitoring process and to use it more.

•

First of all, to announce a time schedule for calls with brief information on their thematic orientation and extent. Then, to announce gradually successive calls, some of which (or each) will focus specifically of the concrete priority area, geographical territory or the types of activities (for the detailed specification, see the Third Interim Report).

•

Not to announce all calls at the same time as this would create considerable pressure on MA from the point of view of the methodological and consulting assistance to the applicants, in case of gradual announcement of the calls, MA will have enough time to develop specific methodologies and, at the same time, applicants will get a clearer idea about where to direct their interests if need be, which of the calls to prepare for, because they will know the thematic plan of the calls.

•

We do not recommend making any radical changes in the current structure, we rather recommend to consider outsourcing those parts of the works that are related to administration and financing of projects and to maintain strategic and content decision-making.

7.2.5 Sustainability, mainstreaming and wider partnership networks •

We propose to establish a national or transnational portal with information on the projects and their outputs, which would bring unprejudiced, reliable and up-to-date information.

•

Further we propose to establish a register of organisations, which defalcated the financial means from the ESF (the so called black list). The rules for this register may be taken over for example


50


from the European Commission that sets up the conditions, under which an organisation may be excluded from the possibility to obtain public funds redistributed by the Commission, namely either for ever (in case of very serious wrongful acts) or for the period of five years (in case of minor wrongful acts). •

We propose to clarify contingent role the managing authority may play in mainstreaming already in the stage of preparation and implementation of the projects and to solve all the elements of dissemination and mainstreaming in time within the framework of the projects.

•

One of the aspects of sustainability is also the issue of maintaining and development of the knowhow developed by the organisations, the bearers of which are concrete employees. If the project termination means loss of these people, it is partially also the loss of the created know-how. The activities aiming at further development of the created know-how should thus take account also of the concrete people, who are its bearers: the managing authority should be able to include them in consequential programmes (lobbying at national and European level, seminars and the like).

7.2.6 Monitoring and evaluation •

It is necessary to help the projects to be able to use the monitoring and evaluation tools for their own quality management and the project cycle management.

•

It is necessary to modify the methodological aids, to focus the educational and training activities of MA on this area for purpose of elucidation of the actual significance of monitoring and evaluation, how to order and implement them (including allocation of appropriate capacities already when drawing up the project’s plan and budget), how to assess their quality (especially in case of ordering external evaluations and management of internal evaluations) and how to use them well for the management itself.

•

Monitoring should serve also for comparisons, aggregation for certain areas (the thematic or regional viewpoint suggests itself), programme management (setting priorities), as the case may be as a tool for control, whether the same products do not come into existence in a parallel manner or if doubled financing of activities or outputs does not occur. In the first stage, it is necessary to review the setting of monitoring indicators so that their fulfilment would really reflect the reality and could thus serve for further decision-making at the level of the project and of the programme. The project and above all the programme level should have the possibility to interfere with the monitoring system setting in such a way that it would serve really for the above-mentioned purposes. In the second stage it is necessary to consider systemic solution of the monitoring in such a way that it would offer the necessary aggregations, comparisons and following of duplicities/similarities in projects.

•

As regards the evaluations, both a scale of various evaluation tools, types of evaluations and also thematic orientation of the evaluations is offered. It is necessary to know these possibilities and to select them suitably with the respect to the purpose and expectations the evaluation shall fulfil. At the project level, it is recommended to work with ongoing evaluation in sophisticated way, at the programme level it proved useful to combine more types of evaluations that may be, moreover, classified according to thematic areas.

•

Contingent transnational solving of monitoring and evaluation must be built on transnational cooperation at the level of the managing authorities and specification of the assignment for monitoring/evaluation from the position of the given group of countries, namely at the level of comparisons (of similarities or, on the contrary, of differences) in it how the individual accents are defined in the priorities of the thematic (intervention) areas in the given countries, in a wider context of the European Employment Strategy. Setting of such cooperation must come out from agreements that will define competencies of the individual actors, responsibility for system administration and sharing costs connected with its development and operation.

•

It is necessary to draw up an assignment for a transnational information system and to negotiate competencies, to create a concrete draft of functionalities and system administration and of course, to negotiate consent of the countries concerned. It is necessary


51


to compare in advance the documents in various countries dealing with defining of the individual material priority axes of the ESF programmes and to create the assignment on this basis. •

The managing authority should have the possibility to identify projects proposing transnational or interregional cooperation already in the stage of submission and selection and to direct them towards achieving of the programme objectives. It will be able to provide them specific assistance also during implementation and to monitor and to evaluate them purposefully in cooperation with the Monitoring Committee.

7.2.7 Conclusion to the recommendations for the managing authority Within the framework of the evaluation carried out and, in particular with regard to the character of the evaluation questions two topics have been opened, which rule out with its character that the recommendations of the evaluation might result from the evaluation but it may provide a description and structuring of these topics for contingent political decisions. First of all, an overall problem related to “project financing” of significant part of the bodies that are the recipients of the programmes (among others CIP EQUAL) is concerned. Nobody casts doubts that after the termination of the projects oriented at transnational cooperation it is suitable to make further use of such outputs or results that are in compliance with strategy of the given body, which considers their utilisation. Formally, the responsibility of the body is indisputably concerned that has created these tools and that started the implementation and mainstreaming processes within the framework of the project, but the question, what the roles of the other interested bodies are, is legitimate. The situation becomes complicated by the actual state of considerable part of the organisations being the project solving entities: if an announcement of another call does not follow immediately after the projects’ termination, and thus a possibility to ensure financing for the organisation, the capacity of most of the recipient decreases significantly; this threatens dissemination, dissemination of products, sustainability of the transnational partnership in the very area of the mainstreaming processes, frequently directed to the EU bodies. An unclear expectation follows up with it that it is the managing authority that should select, which products and outputs from the projects, which processes will be supported also after the termination of the projects; an obvious expectation exists here that a body should exist supporting by means of an aid from the ESF such outputs and processes that are in compliance with the respective strategies. The present situation, when considerable vagueness in the expectations exists and the role and the capacity of the managing authority has not been clarified in this sense either, contributes to not very favourable overall atmosphere. The fact, how defined and how active the managing authority’s role in utilisation of the projects’ outputs will be, relates not only to its strategy, but also to the fact what mandate, what mission and possibilities the managing authority will have. The managing authority should seek and try to define its role at two levels: at the transnational level where the outputs common to several countries will be concerned (here these activities could correlate with contingent pre-negotiating of cooperation with the selected EU countries), and at the national level in the sense that MA would be a partner (but not the only one) for mainstreaming at such outputs that indisputably have a country-wide or at least a supra-regional character. It is necessary to search for tools on how to use effects and mechanisms that are inaccessible for the solving entities for the solving entities without this managing authority’s support. However, it is necessary to see to it that creation of any mainstreaming and dissemination tools would not decrease the project implementing entities’ responsibility for sustainability of the project outputs.

7.3

Recommendations for the mainstreaming partners

•

We recommend to follow the outputs and recommendations of the evaluations focused on the given area already in the course of the projects;

•

it is necessary to single out the outputs from the projects suitable for significant mainstreaming processes already in the course of preparation and implementation;


52


•

it is necessary to make use of the functioning platforms for mainstreaming that are inaccessible for the organisations themselves;

•

however, in doing so it is not possible to lift the responsibility for sustainability of the outputs from the project solving entities.


53


8. Annexes (volume 2) 8.1

Terms of Reference (original document; in Czech language)

8.2

Evaluation Topics 1-6

8.3

Questionnaire Survey

8.4

List of people covered by Visits and Interviews

8.5

Evaluation Visits Scenario

8.6

Template for Evaluation Visits and Interviews

8.7

List of Case Studies

8.8

Template for Case Studies

8.9

Structured list of Relevant Sources

8.10

Contact Data

8.11

Settlement of Comments


54


8.1 Terms of Reference (original document in Czech language) 32 separately numbered pages


55

ZADÁVACÍ DOKUMENTACE PRO PŘEDKLADATELE NABÍDEK (Terms of Reference)

NÁZEV ZAKÁZKY Evaluace principu mezinárodní spolupráce Programu Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL

Datum: 15. října 2008

1

Obsah zadávací dokumentace 1. Základní informace _______________________________________________________________________________3 1.1. Název projektu: ______________________________________________________________________________________ 3 1.2. Způsob zadání zakázky:________________________________________________________________________________ 3 1.3. Předpokládaná hodnota předmětu veřejné zakázky: __________________________________________________________ 3 1.4. Zadavatel: __________________________________________________________________________________________ 3 1.5. Odpovědný útvar: ____________________________________________________________________________________ 3 1.6. Kontakt:____________________________________________________________________________________________ 3 1.7. Harmonogram zakázky _______________________________________________________________________________ 44 2. Kontext, zaměření a cíle evaluace principu mezinárodní spolupráce Programu Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL ________55 3. Evaluační témata, úkoly a otázky ___________________________________________________________________11 4. Požadované výstupy a jejich uživatelé _____________________________________________________________2424 4.1. Požadované výstupy a termíny jejich předložení ŘO CIP EQUAL. ______________________________________________ 2424 4.2. Hlavní uživatelé výstupů ____________________________________________________________________________ 2626 5. Pokyny pro zpracování nabídky __________________________________________________________________2626 5.1. Základní pokyny ___________________________________________________________________________________ 266 5.2. Členění nabídky ____________________________________________________________________________________ 288 Identifikace uchazeče ______________________________________________________________________________________ 28 Doklady prokazující kvalifikační předpoklady uchazeče_____________________________________________________________ 28 6. Hodnocení nabídek _____________________________________________________________________________300 6.1. Kritérium 1. – celková kvalita nabídky ___________________________________________________________________ 300 6.2. Kritérium 2. Hodnocení ceny _________________________________________________________________________ 311 6.3. Ekonomicky nejvýhodnější nabídka ______________________________________________________________________ 32 7. Obchodní a platební podmínky ____________________________________________________________________322 8. Přílohy ______________________________________________________________________________________322

2

1. Základní informace 1.1. Název projektu: Evaluace principu mezinárodní spolupráce Programu Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL

1.2. Způsob zadání zakázky: Zjednodušené podlimitní výběrové řízení na služby dle § 25 zákona č. 137/2006 Sb., o veřejných zakázkách, ve znění pozdějších předpisů (dále jen „zákon")

1.3. Předpokládaná hodnota předmětu veřejné zakázky: 3.200.000 Kč bez DPH

1.4. Zadavatel: Instituce: Česká republika Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí Adresa: Na Poříčním právu 1, 128 01 Praha 2

1.5. Odpovědný útvar: Odbor: odbor řízení pomoci z Evropského sociálního fondu Odpovědná ředitelka: PhDr. Iva Šolcová

1.6. Kontakt: Ing. Filip Kučera email:[email protected] Pevná linka: +420 226 206 864

3

1.7. Harmonogram zakázky ·

Odeslání písemné výzvy k podání nabídek ve zjednodušeném podlimitním řízení, publikace na webu zadavatele

·

7. listopadu 2007

·

Konec lhůty pro podání nabídek

·

29. listopadu 2007 v 10:00 hod.

·

Otevírání obálek s nabídkami

·

29. listopadu 2007 ve 13:00 hod. v zasedací místnosti Kartouzské ulici č.p. 4, Praha 5

·

Rozhodnutí o výběru nejvhodnější nabídky

·

1. polovina prosince 2007 (předpokládaný termín)

·

Předpokládaná doba realizace předmětu plnění

·

prosinec 2007 – listopad 2008.

· ·

Ukončení realizace předmětu plnění

Po předání všech požadovaných výstupů a podepsání akceptačních protokolů. Nejpozději však do 30. listopadu 2008.

4

2. Kontext, zaměření a cíle evaluace principu mezinárodní spolupráce Programu Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL 2.1.

Základní údaje o Programu Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL

Program Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL (dále jen CIP EQUAL) je program spolufinancovaný v zemích EU z prostředků Evropského sociálního fondu (ESF) a zaměřený na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce při vývoji a prosazování nových prostředků boje se všemi formami diskriminace a nerovností na trhu práce. Česká republika se zapojila již do realizace prvního kola této iniciativy, a to v roce 2001. První kolo této iniciativy bylo však na území ČR financováno z prostředků předvstupní pomoci Phare a nikoli z prostředků ESF. Projekty podporované v rámci prvního kola jsou v ČR již několik let uzavřené. Průběh realizace, ani výsledky mezinárodní spolupráce realizované v rámci prvního kola nejsou předmětem této veřejné zakázky. Druhé kolo Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL bylo ve všech zemích EU (kromě Bulharska a Rumunska) vyhlášeno v roce 2004 a i v ČR je již spolufinancováno prostředky ESF. Celkem je na druhé kolo Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL v ČR alokováno 43 973 880 EUR, přičemž příspěvek ESF činí 32 100 929 EUR (tj. 73 % všech prostředků vynaložených v ČR na tento program). Působnost tohoto programu na území ČR není regionálně omezena, neboť CIP EQUAL podporuje jak projekty realizované na území hl. m. Prahy, tak i projekty realizované v ostatních regionech ČR. Přesné rozdělení finančních prostředků na jednotlivé priority a opatření tohoto programu, včetně jejich podrobného zaměření je uvedeno v Programovém dodatku CIP EQUAL (viz www.equalcr.cz). Řídícím orgánem CIP EQUAL ČR je Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí ČR (MPSV ČR). Do vývoje a prosazování nových nástrojů boje s diskriminací a nerovnostmi na trhu práce se vždy zapojuje více organizací, sdružených do tzv. „rozvojových partnerství" (RP). Tato rozvojová partnerství jsou konečnými příjemci finančních prostředků CIP EQUAL. Smyslem podpory rozvojových partnerství je zajištění vzájemné spolupráce různých typů organizací při hledání řešení existujících problémů na trhu práce. Do podporovaných rozvojových partnerství se zapojily jak orgány státní správy či samosprávy, tak i podnikatelské subjekty, zájmová sdružení, rozpočtové a příspěvkové organizace (ROPO), nestátní neziskové organizace apod. Z hlediska svého zaměření podporuje CIP EQUAL vývoj a prosazování nových přístupů k řešení nerovností a diskriminace v práci a v přístupu k zaměstnání na základě mezinárodní spolupráce, která je zároveň jedním z klíčových principů této iniciativy. Každý podporovaný projekt, resp. každé podporované RP musí při své činnosti spolupracovat při vytváření a testování nově vyvíjených produktů, systémových či kontextových řešení s dalšími RP podporovanými z obdobného programu v jiných členských státech EU.

5

Konkrétními oblastmi podpory (neboli tzv. tématickými oblastmi) CIP EQUAL v ČR jsou: · · · · · · · · ·

zlepšování přístupu a návratu na trh práce pro osoby obtížně integrovatelné, překonávání rasismu a xenofobie na trhu práce zlepšování podmínek a nástrojů pro rozvoj podnikání osob ze znevýhodněných skupin posilování sociální ekonomiky třetího sektoru zejména komunitních služeb se zaměřením na zvyšování kvality pracovních míst podpora celoživotního učení a postupů umožňujících zaměstnání osob ze znevýhodněných a diskriminovaných skupin na trhu práce podpora adaptability podniků a zaměstnanců na strukturální změny a na využívání informačních a dalších nových technologií slaďování rodinného a pracovního života, rozvoj flexibilnějších a účinnějších forem organizace práce a podpůrných služeb snižování rozdílů v uplatňování žen a mužů na trhu práce pomoc žadatelům o azyl v přístupu na trhu práce

Podrobné informace o zaměření i složení jednotlivých RP podporovaných CIP EQUAL v ČR jsou k dispozici na webových stránkách CIP EQUAL ČR (www.equalcr.cz) nebo na webových stránkách Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL Evropské komise ( http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/index_en.cfm).

2.2.

Princip mezinárodní spolupráce a jeho hodnocení

CIP EQUAL se od ostatních ESF programů realizovaných v průběhu programového období 20002006 (resp. v podmínkách nově vstoupivších států EU v průběhu zkráceného programového období 20042006) liší nejen svým velmi specifickým cílem zdůrazňujícím inovativnost vyvíjených aktivit a jejich mezinárodní rozměr, ale také existencí několika klíčových principů, na jejichž průběžném naplňování ve všech fázích realizace jednotlivých podporovaných projektů je založen. Těmito principy jsou: · · · · · ·

Tématický přístup; Partnerství; Společné rozhodování („empowerment“); Mezinárodní spolupráce; Inovativnost; Mainstreaming.

6

Zvláštní pozornost je navíc v průběhu realizace tohoto programu věnována také horizontálnímu tématu rovných příležitostí žen a mužů, které lze v kontextu existence principů CIP EQUAL také chápat jako jeden z nich. Uplatňování principu mezinárodní spolupráce jednotlivými RP v rámci Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL navazuje již na zkušenosti získané na základě implementace předchozích Iniciativ Společenství ADAPT a EMPLOYMENT. Na základě hodnocení výsledků těchto iniciativ Společenství bylo totiž prokázáno, že mezinárodní spolupráce představuje významný prvek napomáhající nalezení inovativního řešení dané problematiky. Jednotlivé aktivity, které lze při naplňování principu mezinárodní spolupráce rozvíjet v rámci CIP EQUAL, lze rozdělit podle cílů a zaměření mezinárodní spolupráce mezi jednotlivá RP, hlavní partnery RP, projektové koordinátory či účastníky jednotlivých aktivit. V souladu se společnou klasifikací zaměření mezinárodní spolupráce lze určit pět základních modelů této spolupráce: · · · · ·

vzájemná výměna informací a zkušeností – porozumění návrhům, strategiím a aktivitám mezinárodních partnerů; paralelní vývoj inovativních přístupů – odzkoušení inovativních přístupů v odlišných podmínkách jednotlivých zapojených členských zemí EU; uplatnění vlastních vyvinutých metod a nástrojů v jiné zemi, uplatnění jinde vyvinutých metod a nástrojů v ČR – přijetí jinde odzkoušených přístupů a jejich uplatnění v rámci ČR; společný vývoj výstupu či systému – rozdělení jednotlivých činností zaměřených na dosažení společných cílů; organizované předávání zkušeností – umožnění projít obdobným procesem školení a dalšími aktivitami, jakými procházejí osoby v zemi zapojené do mezinárodní spolupráce s konkrétním českým RP pro vlastní školené osoby, školitele, hlavní představitele projektů a další osoby.

Každé RP si samo již v průběhu tzv. Akce 1 (fáze projektu, kdy dochází k upevňování RP na národní, resp. regionální úrovni a k navazování mezinárodní spolupráce s RP podporovanými v jiných členských státech EU) stanovuje vhodnou formu mezinárodní spolupráce pro svůj projekt a také roli jednotlivých partnerů, koordinátora či ostatních účastníků projektových aktivit při realizaci mezinárodních aktivit. Na úrovni jednotlivých RP je princip mezinárodní spolupráce v této iniciativě zajištěn prostřednictvím smluv o mezinárodní spolupráci (TCA), které spolu uzavírají RP z různých členských (resp. i z třetích zemí). Podrobné pokyny a praktické rady a tipy, jak naplnit princip mezinárodní spolupráce při práci RP, lze nalézt v příručce Evropská komise vydané k mezinárodní spolupráci realizované v rámci Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL (česká verze příručky viz www.equalcr.cz). Na princip mezinárodní spolupráce, ačkoli jde o povinný aspekt všech podporovaných projektů z CIP EQUAL, se nejen ze strany odpovědných orgánů (řídícího orgánu či národní podpůrné struktury), ale i ze strany podporovaných RP nahlíží jako na významnou příležitost zkvalitnění realizace jednotlivých projektů, neboť možnost mezinárodní spolupráce přináší podporovaným RP mnoho výhod.

7

Mezi tyto výhody, které princip mezinárodní spolupráce jednotlivým RP přináší, patří například: · · ·

získání lepšího vhledu do příčin jednotlivých forem diskriminace a nerovností na trhu práce a tedy i do příčin sociálního vyloučení některých skupin obyvatel; upevnění či zkvalitnění strategií a kroků plánovaných ve vlastních projektech díky získaným zkušenostem z jiných členských států EU; zpřístupnění spolupráce na celoevropské úrovni zajištěné prostřednictvím zapojení do evropských tématických sítí a návazné získání možností další spolupráce s evropskými partnery.

Princip mezinárodní spolupráce představuje (resp. může představovat) pro práci jednotlivých RP významnou přidanou hodnotu, a proto legislativa ES stanovující podmínky a pravidla čerpání strukturální pomoci pro nové programové období 20072013 umožňuje jeho využití ve všech programech financovaných z Evropského sociálního fondu. Potenciál využití mezinárodní spolupráce v realizovaných projektech se tedy v průběhu nového programového období může ještě výrazně zvýšit. Otázkou ale zůstává, jakým způsobem co nejvhodněji nastavit podmínky pro žadatele, resp. potenciální příjemce pomoci z Evropského sociálního fondu v oblasti mezinárodní spolupráce, jakým způsobem jim usnadnit nalezení vhodných mezinárodních partnerů, zajistit potřebnou technickou a administrativní podporu s realizací mezinárodních aktivit nutně související, a pomoci využít potenciálu, který mezinárodní spolupráce při realizaci projektů z tohoto fondu financovaných představuje. Získání těchto, ale i dalších důležitých odpovědí a doporučení v oblasti mezinárodní spolupráce je předmětem této veřejné zakázky, která nejen hodnotí dosavadní zkušenosti s principem mezinárodní spolupráce v rámci CIP EQUAL ČR a porovnává je se zkušenostmi jiných členských států EU, ale také analyzuje faktory či předpoklady vedoucí k úspěšnému naplnění tohoto principu.

2.2.

Zaměření, cíle a očekávané výsledky hodnocení principu mezinárodní spolupráce

Tato veřejná zakázka je zaměřena výhradně na zhodnocení principu mezinárodní spolupráce CIP EQUAL a na formulaci doporučení v této oblasti využitelných nejen v rámci probíhající realizace CIP EQUAL, ale zejména v průběhu nového programového období 20072013, kdy bude možné princip mezinárodní spolupráce podporovat ještě v daleko širší míře, než tomu bylo v průběhu zkráceného programového období 20042006. Hodnocení prováděné v rámci této zakázky proto musí nejen důkladně analyzovat skutečnou podobu, potenciál, výsledky či naopak ohrožení realizované mezinárodní spolupráce RP z ČR či jiných zemí podporované v rámci CIP EQUAL, ale také analyzovat vhodné způsoby naplňování tohoto principu v širším kontextu a formulovat konkrétní praktická doporučení využitelná v průběhu nového programového období nejen při uplatňování tohoto principu formou jeho horizontální podpory ve všech prioritních osách programů financovaných z Evropského sociálního fondu, ale zejména formou samostatné prioritní osy Operačního programu Lidské zdroje a zaměstnanost (OP LZZ).

8

Cílem této zakázky je proto získat detailní informace o provádění, výstupech a dopadech principu mezinárodní spolupráce CIP EQUAL v ČR a dalších evropských zemích a také o širších zkušenostech s podporou mezinárodní spolupráce v jiných programech. Zakázka proto umožní získat řídícímu orgánu CIP EQUAL informace o tomto principu a praktických zkušenostech s jeho uplatňováním v širším kontextu a navíc prostřednictvím analýz zaměřených na zajímavé postupy a zkušenosti v oblasti rozvoje lidských zdrojů ve vybraných evropských zemích umožní i vytipovat oblasti, v nichž by bylo v průběhu nového programového období 20072013 vhodné podporovat projekty ESF v ČR právě na základě uplatnění tohoto principu. Takto zaměřené hodnocení principu mezinárodní spolupráce CIP EQUAL navazuje na cíle hodnocení CIP EQUAL stanovené Evropskou komisí ve svém Sdělení „Communication from the Commission establishing the guidelines for the second round of the Community Initiative EQUAL, COM (2003) 840, kterými jsou zejména: · · · · · · · ·

Podpořit řádný průběh implementace a řízení CIP EQUAL; Posoudit vhodnost zvolených strategií, budoucí možnosti a počáteční vlivy CIP EQUAL; Identifikovat a posoudit přidanou hodnotu CIP EQUAL k existujícím nástrojům a politikám na trhu práce; Přispět k identifikaci, prověření a prosazování vhodných praktik při provádění politiky začleňování a boje proti diskriminaci a nerovnostmi na trhu práce; Posoudit, do jaké míry Iniciativa Společenství EQUAL uspěla při začlenění svých výsledků do národních politik a akcí a do mainstreamových programů Evropského sociálního fondu; Usnadnit proces učení mezi všemi národními zainteresovanými subjekty; Přispět k utváření expertních kapacit; Umožnit využití nabytých poznatků do dalšího programového období.

Prováděné hodnocení musí vycházet nejen z vlastních srovnávacích, procesních či dalších analýz, případových studií, terénního šetření atd., ale musí také vycházet z dílčích výstupů a závěrů hodnocení, které byly již v rámci CIP EQUAL zpracovány a jejichž výstupy a závěry se problematiky mezinárodní spolupráce také dotýkají. Konkrétně se jedná o výstupy a závěry z prvních dvou etap průběžného hodnocení CIP EQUAL, které jsou k dispozici již v době vyhlašování této veřejné zakázky, a dále o průběžné výstupy a závěry třetí etapy průběžného hodnocení CIP EQUAL, které bude realizováno paralelně s touto veřejnou zakázkou. Závěrečné zprávy z první a druhé etapy průběžného hodnocení CIP EQUAL jsou k dispozici na webových stránkách www.equalcr.cz a průběžné zprávy z třetí etapy průběžného hodnocení CIP EQUAL budou k dispozici na http://forum.esfcr.cz. Od řešitelů této zakázky se proto očekává nejen velmi aktivní spolupráce s pracovníky řídícího orgánu CIP EQUAL, resp. dalších zainteresovaných subjektů (viz dále), ale také se zpracovateli třetí etapy průběžného hodnocení, neboť i průběžné výsledky tohoto hodnocení mohou řešitelům této zakázky zprostředkovat zajímavé postřehy a podněty pro jejich vlastní další práci.

9

Dále se předpokládá velmi intenzivní spolupráce s mezinárodní sítí hodnotitelů iniciativy EQUAL založenou Českou republikou za finanční podpory Evropské komise jakožto online platformy pro nepřetržitou, kontinuální a intenzivní výměnu zkušeností, metodologie a výsledků z hodnocení v roce 2007 a 2008 s cílem podpořit porovnatelnost evaluačních výsledků této iniciativy na úrovni EU. Se závěry a výstupy zpracovatelů předchozích hodnocení CIP EQUAL či účastníky mezinárodní sítě hodnotitelů iniciativy EQUAL nemusí pochopitelně řešitelé této zakázky vždy plně souhlasit, předpokládá se však, že budou s jejich výstupy a závěry velmi dobře seznámeni a že na ně budou schopni při své vlastní analytické práci navazovat.

10

3. Evaluační témata, úkoly a otázky Téma

Úkoly

Popis / Evaluační kritéria

Evaluační otázky

Expertní studie zaměřená na analýzu mezinárodní spolupráce 1. Část studie 1.1. Zpracování návrhu Návrh způsobu Jakým způsobem je vhodné zaměřená na možného vyhlášení zajištění a vymezit pravidla pro způsobilost podporu při první výzvy Prioritní osy implementace výdajů v rámci této výzvy? přípravě první mezinárodní spolupráce první výzvy Jakým způsobem je vhodné výzvy Prioritní OP LZZ. prioritní osy vymezit oblasti podpory pro tuto osy mezinárodní výzvu (jak z hlediska věcného mezinárodní spolupráce OP zaměření podporovaných spolupráce OP LZZ. projektů, tak i z hlediska LZZ podporovaných podob realizované mezinárodní spolupráce)? Jaká délka realizace projektů podporovaných na základě první výzvy v oblasti mezinárodní spolupráce je vhodná (roční, dvouleté či ještě delší projekty) a proč? Jaké podpůrné mechanismy je nutné pro výzvu vytvořit z hlediska řízení jednotlivých projektů založených na mezinárodní spolupráci z hlediska příjemce a z hlediska ŘO?

Požadované výstupy

Termín požadovaných výstupů (ve finální verzi)

Praktická doporučení do tří týdnů od ohledně způsobilosti uzavření výdajů, vhodné délky smlouvy realizace projektů a nezbytných podpůrných mechanismů určených pro projekty i ŘO. (Doporučení formulovaná v této části zakázky mohou být v kontextu dalších informací získaných při plnění dalších evaluačních úkolů dále dopracována a upravena v rámci výstupů vztahujících se k vhodným způsobům implementace Prioritní osy mezinárodní

11

2. Část studie zaměřená na hodnocení práce českých RP

2. 1. Zmapování významných či zajímavých výstupů projektů CIP EQUAL na území ČR z hlediska uplatnění mezinárodní spolupráce.

Případové studie k alespoň 35 RP podporovaných v rámci CIP EQUAL ČR.

Je možné najít mezi podporovanými projekty CIP EQUAL ČR některé, jejichž výstupy byly dosaženy právě prostřednictvím mezinárodní spolupráce (jejichž příprava a vývoj byly na mezinárodní spolupráci zcela založeny)? Je možné mezi podporovanými projekty CIP EQUAL ČR najít některé, jejichž výstupy byly významně ovlivněny díky možnosti spolupracovat s mezinárodními partnery? Jakým způsobem nejčastěji mezinárodní spolupráce ovlivnila výstupy podporovaných projektů?

spolupráce OP LZZ v průběhu roku 2008). Praktická doporučení Květen 2008 a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti. Přehled dokumentů, z nichž RP v průběhu přípravy a realizace svých projektů vycházela a zhodnocení jejich relevance.

Jakým způsobem RP postupovala při mezinárodní spolupráci v průběhu realizace projektu – v rámci jakých aktivit bylo mezinárodní spolupráce nejčastěji využíváno? Je možné určit zaměření aktivit založených na mezinárodní spolupráci, jejichž výskyt byl pro úspěšnou realizaci projektu klíčový? Je naopak možné určit zaměření

12

aktivit založených na mezinárodní spolupráci, u nichž se jejich přímý přínos pro projekt a jeho výstupy prokázat nepodařilo? Jaký typ zvláštní podpory ze strany řídícího orgánu či NPS byl nutný při vytváření projektových výstupů založených na mezinárodní spolupráci? Které konkrétní typy této podpory byly požadovány přímo ze strany RP? (Byla tato podpora ze strany ŘO, resp. NPS poskytnuta?) Byly zjištěny některé typy podpory, které by při realizaci svých projektů RP v oblasti mezinárodní spolupráce uvítala ze strany řídícího orgánu, resp. národní podpůrné struktury? Ve které fázi přípravy, resp. realizace svých projektů by tuto podporu RP nejčastěji uvítala? Z jakých dokumentů RP v průběhu přípravy a realizace svých projektů vycházela v oblasti mezinárodní spolupráce (příručky, metodiky atd.). Jakých předchozích zkušeností partneři zapojení do jednotlivých RP nejčastěji využívali při přípravě a realizaci svých aktivit

13

zaměřených na mezinárodní spolupráci? 3. Část studie zaměřená na hodnocení práce RP podporovaných v jiných členských státech EU

3. 1. Zmapování významných či zajímavých výstupů projektů CIP EQUAL mimo území ČR z hlediska uplatnění mezinárodní spolupráce (důraz je nutné klást zejm. na zmapování RP, která spolupracovala na základě TCA s českými RP).

Výskyt významných či zajímavých výstupů a jejich relevance; minimálně 20 případových studií zahraničních RP. (Nabídka musí obsahovat informace o tom, na které jiné státy EU se tato analýza zaměří a zdůvodnění výběru).

Je možné najít mezi podporovanými projekty CIP EQUAL v jiných členských zemích EU některé, jejichž výstupy byly dosaženy právě prostřednictvím mezinárodní spolupráce (jejichž příprava byla na mezinárodní spolupráci zcela založena)?

Praktická doporučení Květen 2008 a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti.

Je možné najít mezi těmito zjištěnými RP některé, jejichž výstupy byly dosaženy právě prostřednictvím mezinárodní spolupráce s RP z ČR? Je možné mezi podporovanými projekty CIP EQUAL jiných členských států EU najít některé, jejichž výstupy byly významně ovlivněny díky možnosti spolupracovat s mezinárodními partnery? Jakým způsobem nejčastěji mezinárodní spolupráce ovlivnila výstupy podporovaných projektů? Jakým způsobem RP postupovala při mezinárodní spolupráci v průběhu realizace projektu – v rámci jakých aktivit bylo mezinárodní spolupráce nejčastěji využíváno?

14

Byly mezi typy aktivit a výdajů realizovaných ve zkoumaných případech v rámci mezinárodní spolupráce zjištěny významné rozdíly vyplývající z rozsahu aktivit a výdajů, které byly v jednotlivých členských státech považovány za způsobilé? Vedly zjištěné rozdíly v rozsahu způsobilosti výdajů k snazší nebo naopak obtížnější realizaci jednotlivých projektů? Je možné určit zaměření aktivit založených na mezinárodní spolupráci, jejichž výskyt byl pro úspěšnou realizaci projektu klíčový? Je naopak možné určit zaměření aktivit založených na mezinárodní spolupráci, u nichž se jejich přímý přínos pro projekt a jeho výstupy prokázat nepodařilo? Bylo nutné při vytváření projektových výstupů založených na mezinárodní spolupráci zajistit RP nějaký typ zvláštní podpory ze strany řídícího orgánu či národní podpůrné struktury? Byly zjištěny některé typy podpory, které by při realizaci svých projektů RP v oblasti

15

mezinárodní spolupráce uvítala ze strany řídícího orgánu, resp. národní podpůrné struktury? Ve které fázi přípravy, resp. realizace svých projektů by tuto podporu RP nejčastěji uvítala? Z jakými dokumenty RP v průběhu přípravy a realizace svých projektů vycházela v oblasti mezinárodní spolupráce (příručky, guidy atd.). Jakých předchozích zkušeností partneři zapojení do jednotlivých RP nejčastěji využívali při přípravě a realizaci svých aktivit zaměřených na mezinárodní spolupráci? 4. Analýza specifických aspektů a přidané hodnoty projektů ESF založených na podpoře mezinárodní spolupráce

4. 1. Analýza „přidané hodnoty“ projektů ESF realizovaných ČR i jinými členskými státy EU a zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce v porovnání s projekty, které jsou čistě národní.

Výskyt přidané hodnoty a její relevance. Alespoň 3 případové studie ke každému analyzovanému státu. (V nabídce je nutné uvést, které ostatní státy EU budou v rámci zakázky analyzovány, a tento výběr zdůvodnit).

Byla zjištěna nějaká přidaná hodnota projektů ESF financovaných v ČR i v jiných státech EU za účelem podpory mezinárodní spolupráce oproti obdobně zaměřeným projektům, které prvek mezinárodní spolupráce neobsahovaly? V čem tato přidaná hodnota spočívá? Odpovídá míra této zjištěné přidané hodnoty vyšší finanční, časové a administrativní náročnosti projektů zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce v případě, že tato


16

vyšší náročnost byla u těchto projektů zjištěna? 4. 2. Analýza jednotlivých specifických aspektů projektů ESF zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce.

Výskyt aspektů projektů zaměřených na mezinárodní spolupráci a jejich relevance

Které z aspektů projektů ESF zaměřených na oblast mezinárodní spolupráce jsou v porovnání s ostatními typy projektů ESF specifické? Jaké zkušenosti s projekty zaměřenými na mezinárodní spolupráci je vhodné využít i při realizaci programů ESF tento typ spolupráce podporujících? Jak se liší struktura výdajů takto zaměřených výdajů od jejich struktury u ostatních ESF projektů?


O jaký typ výdajů realizovaných v projektech zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce by bylo vhodné rozšířit pravidla pro způsobilé výdaje ESF v ČR? O jaký typ výdajů realizovaných v projektech zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce, které se u těchto projektů často objevují, ačkoli jejich výskyt či jejich výše neodpovídají cílům těchto projektů, by bylo vhodné naopak pravidla způsobilých výdajů zúžit? Které činnosti spojené s administrací takto zaměřených

17

projektů jsou výrazně časově, odborně či finančně náročnější než obdobné činností realizované u ostatních projektů financovaných z ESF? 5. Analýza zajímavých přístupů a konkrétních oblastí RLZ v dalších zemích EU

5. 1. Zmapování Relevance zajímavých přístupů v oblasti RLZ v jednotlivých členských státech EU s cílem vytipovat oblasti, na které by bylo žádoucí v příštím programovém období zaměřit projekty realizované formou mezinárodní spolupráce, a umožnit tak získání zahraničního knowhow pro další možné využití v ČR.

Které konkrétní oblasti RLZ podporované ESF programy v jednotlivých členských státech EU jsou nejvíce relevantní z hlediska potřebnosti rozvoje dané oblasti RLZ i v ČR?

5. 2. Analýza relevance Relevance oblastí RLZ, v nichž ostatní členské státy EU budou podporovat mezinárodní spolupráci z ESF v novém programovém období, včetně vytipování, které z pro ně relevantních oblastí by bylo z pohledu ČR nejpřínosnější řešit právě při mezinárodní spoluprací s ČR.

Které z oblastí RLZ, na něž se v rámci samostatné prioritní osy podporující mezinárodní spolupráci zaměřují ostatní členské státy EU, jsou nejvíce relevantní z hlediska potřebnosti rozvoje dané oblasti RLZ i v ČR? Které z oblastí RLZ, u nichž je možné podporovat mezinárodní spolupráci formou způsobilých výdajů v rámci prioritních os mimo mez. spolupráci v ostatních členských státech EU, jsou nejvíce relevantní

Které členské státy disponují zvláště zajímavými příklady dobré praxe v oblasti RLZ nad rámec oblastí podpory financovaných z ESF?



18

z hlediska potřebnosti rozvoje dané oblasti RLZ i v ČR? Jaký typ projektů by bylo nejvhodnější v rámci takto vytipovaných oblastí s těmito členskými státy podporovat? Jaký typ subjektů by bylo z hlediska možného dopadu podpořené mezinárodní spolupráce ve vytipovaných oblastech nejvhodnější při realizaci takto zaměřených projektů podporovat? Jakým způsobem by bylo vhodné výsledky provedené analýzy zprostředkovat potenciálním žadatelům? 6. Část studie zaměřená na syntézu poznatků z předchozích částí studie

6. 1. Identifikace Výskyt faktorů a Je možno určit nějaké faktory, faktorů a předpokladů předpokladů jejichž výskyt při řízení a vedoucích k úspěšným realizaci projektu, napomáhá a efektivním projektům úspěšné realizaci těchto zaměřeným na podporu projektů? mezinárodní Byla realizace takto zaměřených spolupráce. projektů pozitivně ovlivněna existencí některých podpůrných nástrojů a dokumentů zprostředkovaných ze strany řídícího orgánu? 6. 2. Identifikace Výskyt faktorů a Je možno určit nějaké faktory, faktorů vedoucích u předpokladů jejichž výskyt při řízení a projektů zaměřených na realizaci projektu, způsobuje mezinárodní spolupráci neúspěch při realizaci těchto k neúspěchu (např. projektů?

Praktická doporučení Červenec 2008 a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti.

Praktická doporučení a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené

Červenec 2008

19

určení minimální výše administrativních nákladů projektů, určení minimální doby přípravy projektů apod.).

Lze prokázat negativní vliv nedostatečně vysokých administrativních, resp. jiných nákladů projektu na průběh realizace a výsledky realizovaného projektu?

na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti.

Lze prokázat negativní vliv nedostatečně dlouhého období určeného na přípravu takto zaměřených projektů na jejich průběh a výsledky? Jakým způsobem by bylo možné zjištěným negativním faktorům ze strany řídícího orgánu programu předejít či je alespoň minimalizovat? 6. 3. Zpracování návrhu zahrnujícího různé možnosti řízení a implementace prioritní osy mezinárodní spolupráce OP LZZ, a to na základě našich i zahraničních zkušeností.

Návrh způsobu řízení a implementace prioritní osy mezinárodní spolupráce OP LZZ.

Praktická doporučení Září 2008 a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní Jaké návrhy na řízení a spolupráci v novém implementaci této prioritní osy programovém období by naopak na základě zjištěných i dále v budoucnosti zkušeností vhodné nebyly? – zahrnující zejména Jakým způsobem by bylo a alternativní návrhy naopak nebylo vhodné řízení a podporovat jednotlivé projekty implementace priority (formou grantových schémat, či její části zaměřené národních či systémových na podporu projektů)? mezinárodní Jakým způsobem by bylo vhodné spolupráce v oblasti a naopak i nevhodné vyhlašovat RLZ. Jaké alternativní návrhy řízení a implementace prioritní osy mezinárodní spolupráce by byly na základě zjištěných zkušeností vhodné?

20

výzvy k předkládání projektů (s ohledem na časovou náročnost jejich zpracování zahrnující i minimální délku období pro zpracování žádostí o finanční prostředky z této priority)? Existuje nějaký typ informací, který by žadatelům usnadnil zpracování žádostí o finanční prostředky z této prioritní osy a který např. v průběhu realizace CIP EQUAL neměli k dispozici? Jaký typ specifické podpory musí být projektovým realizátorům poskytován během realizace projektů? 6. 4. Zpracování návrhu zajištění monitorování a evaluace mezinárodní spolupráce podporované nejen v rámci priority mezinárodní spolupráce OP LZZ, ale i jako součást ostatních priorit OP LZZ a dalších ESF programů.

Návrh způsobu zajištění monitorování a evaluace projektů ESF zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce.

Jaké alternativní návrhy zajištění monitorování a evaluace mezinárodní spolupráce podporované z ESF by byly vhodné pro využití v ČR v průběhu programového období 20072013? Bylo by možné a vhodné zajistit část monitorovacího procesu či zpracování alespoň některých hodnotících studií na základě společné aktivity několika členských států? Jaké jsou předpoklady pro využití této možnosti? U kterých částí monitorovacího procesu by to bylo vhodné?

Praktická doporučení Září 2008 a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti, včetně doporučení a tipů použitelných v Evaluačním plánu 2007+ či plánu evaluačních aktivit založených na mezinárodní spolupráci.

21

Existují části monitorovacího procesu, u nichž by to bylo naopak nevhodné? 6. 5. Zpracování návrhu zajištění monitorování a evaluace mezinárodní spolupráce podporované v rámci ERDF programů na základě křížového financování.

Návrh způsobu zajištění monitorování a evaluace projektů ERDF zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce.

Jaké alternativní návrhy zajištění monitorování a evaluace mezinárodní spolupráce podporované programy ERDF na základě možnosti křížového financování by byly vhodné pro využití v ČR v průběhu programového období 2007 2013?

6. 6. Zpracování návrhu, jak by mělo být dále nakládáno s výstupy a výsledky projektů zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce financované z ESF.

Návrh způsobu nakládání s výstupy a výsledky projektů ESF zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní spolupráce.

Jaký typ výstupů či výsledků projektů ESF zaměřených na mezinárodní spolupráci by bylo vhodné využívat i po skončení realizace jednotlivých projektů?

Praktická doporučení Září 2008 a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti.

Praktická doporučení Září 2008 a tipy pro odpovědné orgány za řízení programů ESF zaměřených na podporu mezinárodní Jakým způsobem by bylo vhodné spolupráce ze strany řídících orgánů z hlediska, jak dále programů ESF podporujících se vzniklými výsledky projekty založené na a výstupy projektů mezinárodní spolupráci pracovat dále pracovat. s výstupy, resp. výsledky projektů po skončení jejich realizace? Jakým organizacím, resp. cílovým skupinám by měly být tyto výstupy a výsledky zprostředkovány? Jaké médium či jaký způsob tohoto zprostředkování by bylo nejvhodnější využít? Liší se nějak vhodné médium či způsob

22

zvolený pro tento přenos v případě různých typů cílových organizací či cílových skupin? Jaký celkový objem finančních prostředků by bylo vhodné na zajištění dalšího využívání vzniklých výstupů a výsledků projektů určit? Jakým způsobem by bylo vhodné využité způsoby přenosu vzniklých výstupů a výstupů i objem na tuto činnost vynaložených prostředků hodnotit?

23

4. Požadované výstupy a jejich uživatelé 4.1. Požadované výstupy a termíny jejich předložení ŘO CIP EQUAL. POŽADOVANÉ VÝSTUPY

TERMÍN

1. Vstupní zpráva

Ve zprávě bude již podrobně popsán harmonogram realizace projektu, metodologie řešení projektu a informační zdroje. Dále v této zprávě budou jmenovitě určeni všichni zapojení experti do řešení jednotlivých částí této veřejné zakázky a podrobné stanovení dílčích návrh do tří týdnů od termínů evaluačních šetření stanovených ze strany zpracovatele uzavření smlouvy; hodnocení. Obsah této zprávy musí vycházet z metodologie řešení ČJ konečná verze nejpozději projektu uvedeného v nabídce, musí ho však také již mnohem podrobněji do 14 dní od doručení specifikovat a aktualizovat nabídku. připomínek Druhou částí vstupní zprávy budou výsledky provedených analýz a doporučení týkající se úkolu navrhnout vhodný způsob vyhlášení a implementace první výzvy Prioritní osy mezinárodní spolupráce OP LZZ uvedeného v kapitole 3 této zakázky.

2. První průběžná zpráva

3. Druhá průběžná zpráva

DETAIL

Zpráva bude obsahovat podrobné informace o řešení těch evaluačních úkolů uvedených v předchozí kapitole této zadávací dokumentace, u návrh nejpozději do nichž je jako termín finálních výstupů uveden květen 2008. U těchto 15. dubna 2008; konečná úkolů je třeba ve zprávě uvádět podrobnou metodologii řešení verze nejpozději do 1 jednotlivých úkolů, podrobný postup a výsledky prováděného šetření a měsíce od doručení doporučení ze zjištěných a analyzovaných dat vyplývající pro kvalitní a připomínek hladkou implementaci principu mezinárodní spolupráce v programech financovaných z ESF. Zpráva bude obsahovat podrobné informace o řešení těch evaluačních návrh nejpozději do úkolů uvedených v předchozí kapitole této zadávací dokumentace, u 15. června 2008; konečná nichž je jako termín finálních výstupů uveden červenec 2008. U těchto verze nejpozději do 1 úkolů je třeba ve zprávě uvádět podrobnou metodologii řešení měsíce od doručení jednotlivých úkolů, podrobný postup a výsledky prováděného šetření a připomínek doporučení ze zjištěných a analyzovaných dat vyplývající pro kvalitní a

JAZYK

AJ + ČJ

AJ + ČJ

24

hladkou implementaci principu mezinárodní spolupráce v programech financovaných z ESF. Zpráva bude obsahovat podrobné informace o řešení těch evaluačních úkolů uvedených v předchozí kapitole této zadávací dokumentace, u návrh nejpozději do nichž je jako termín finálních výstupů uveden září 2008. U těchto úkolů 15. srpna 2008; konečná je třeba ve zprávě uvádět podrobnou metodologii řešení jednotlivých ČJ + 4. Třetí průběžná zpráva verze nejpozději do 1 úkolů, podrobný postup a výsledky prováděného šetření a doporučení ze AJ měsíce od doručení zjištěných a analyzovaných dat vyplývající pro kvalitní a hladkou připomínek implementaci principu mezinárodní spolupráce v programech financovaných z ESF. Návrh závěrečné zprávy bude již obsahovat údaje předkládané ve vstupní zprávě a všech třech zprávách průběžných zpracovávaných v průběhu řešení projektu. Zpráva musí být zpracovaná způsobem, který umožní získání veškerých dílčích výstupů, výsledků a doporučení formulovaných 5. Návrh závěrečné evaluační nejpozději do 15. října ČJ + v průběhu řešené zakázky. Zároveň bude zpráva obsahovat veškeré zprávy 2008 AJ procesní, systémové či srovnávací analýzy a případové studie v rámci zakázky ze strany řešitelského týmu zpracované. Dále bude zpráva obsahovat executive summary o max. 20 stranách shrnující hlavní závěry a doporučení provedené evaluace. Závěrečná evaluační zpráva bude ve své finální verzi zahrnovat přehled vypořádání připomínek řídícího orgánu, PS pro evaluace programů ESF a 6. Závěrečná evaluační nejpozději do 15. listopadu AJ + Monitorovacího výboru CIP EQUAL, resp. dalších subjektů zapojených do zpráva 2008 ČJ připomínkových řízení a také zohlednění vypořádání jednotlivých připomínek přímo v textu zprávy. 7. Závěrečný diseminační Zpracovatel zorganizuje po dohodě se zadavatelem závěrečný ČJ + dle dohody seminář diseminační seminář pro členy pracovních / zainteresovaných skupin AJ 8. Prezentace postupu Po dohodě se zadavatelem dle potřeby uskuteční zpracovatel prezentace projektu Monitorovacím AJ + dle dohody postupu projektu členům PS pro evaluaci či jiným zainteresovaným výborům, PS pro evaluaci, ČJ subjektům či skupinám osob atd. Evropské komisi atd. 9. Průběžná online Zpracovatel zodpoví dotazy pracovníkům ŘO týkající se realizace této průběžně ČJ konzultace se zástupcem evaluace, a to způsobem zvoleným ze strany pracovníků ŘO zadavatele

25

Pozn. U anglických překladů jednotlivých zpráv se předpokládá jejich předložení pouze u jejich konečných verzí, a to nejpozději do 30 dnů po přijetí konečných verzí v českém jazyce ze strany řídícího orgánu.

4.2. Hlavní uživatelé výstupů Výsledky prováděného hodnocení principu mezinárodní spolupráce CIP EQUAL a doporučení formulovaná v jeho rámci musí být využitelné pro: · · · ·

· · · ·

Řídící orgán a národní podpůrnou strukturu při průběžném zlepšování implementace CIP EQUAL a při zajišťování validace a šíření dobré praxe dosažené v oblasti mezinárodní spolupráce; Řídící orgány, resp. jiné odpovědné orgány zapojené do řízení ostatních programů financovaných z ESF v průběhu nového programového období 20072013 z hlediska využití, zajištění a výsledků mezinárodní spolupráce v ESF projektech; Další orgány odpovědné za přípravu a realizaci jiných programů založených na principu mezinárodní spolupráce v budoucnosti; Monitorovací výbor CIP EQUAL složený ze zástupců hlavních zainteresovaných subjektů působících na poli politik zaměstnanosti, trhu práce, sociálního začleňování apod., zástupců regionálních orgánů, nevládních organizací atd. při plnění úlohy sledování a hodnocení efektivity a kvality implementace tohoto programu; Rozvojová partnerství při spolupráci se svými mezinárodními partnery a při hodnocení a prokazování dosažené dobré praxe v této oblasti; Národní tématické sítě a síť evaluačních expertů EQUAL; Pracovní skupinu pro evaluace ESF programů zřízenou společně Monitorovacím výborem CIP EQUAL a Monitorovacími výbory OP RLZ a JPD 3; Další zainteresované skupiny a veřejnost, zejména žadatele a potenciální příjemce finanční podpory z programů financovaných z ESF v průběhu nového programového období 20072013.

5. Pokyny pro zpracování nabídky 5.1. Základní pokyny 1. Uchazeč musí být právním subjektem, s nímž lze uzavřít smlouvu na požadované činnosti a musí mít dostatečné organizační, administrativní a technické zázemí pro jejich realizaci.

26

2. V případě, že uchazeč, hodlá k plnění předmětu veřejné zakázky použít subdodavatele, identifikuje tohoto subdodavatele v nabídce obchodní firmou nebo názvem společnosti, adresou sídla, právní formou, statutárním orgánem, identifikačním číslem, byloli přiděleno. Jdeli o zahraniční právnickou osobu, městem registrace a číslem registrace a institucí, kde byla společnost zaregistrována, statutárním orgánem. Jdeli o fyzickou osobu bydlištěm či místem podnikání, identifikačním číslem, byloli přiděleno, příp. osobou oprávněnou jednat za tuto fyzickou osobu. 3. Uchazeč dále v nabídce identifikuje části veřejné zakázky, které hodlá plnit tímto dodavatelem. Kvalifikační předpoklady (viz požadovaná Část III. nabídky) nemůže prokázat za uchazeče subdodavatel. Tato podmínka je zadavatelem označena jako absolutní. 4. Nabídka bude napsána v češtině nebo v angličtině. Nabídka v jiném jazyce EU může být předložena za podmínky, že bude přeložena do češtiny nebo angličtiny a ověřený překlad nabídky bude přiložen. 5. Variantní řešení nabídky nebude akceptováno. 6. Nabídka nebude obsahovat přepisy a opravy, které by mohly zadavatele uvést v omyl. 7. Nabídka bude předložena v jednom originále a čtyřech kopiích (kopie označeny) v písemné formě, v českém nebo anglickém jazyce. V nabídce musí být vložen digitální nosič s nabídkou (CDROM). 8. Nabídka bude podána v souladu s ustanovením § 69 zákona na adrese pro podání nabídek uvedené zadavatelem v oznámení o zahájení zadávacího řízení či výzvě. Nabídka musí být označená názvem veřejné zakázky a výrazným nápisem "NEOTVÍRAT nabídka". 9. Všechny strany nabídky budou očíslovány vzestupnou číselnou řadou a části nabídky budou svázány v jeden celek v pořadí ČÁST I, ČÁST II a ČÁST III, PŘÍLOHY. Takto svázaný dokument a přiložená elektronická verze nabídky na CDROM budou tvořit celkovou nabídku. Budeli nabídka postrádat některou z požadovaných částí nebo dokumentů, může být vyřazena z dalšího hodnocení hodnotící komisí. 10. Nabídky budou předloženy nejpozději do vypršení lhůty pro podání nabídek na adrese pro podání nabídek uvedené zadavatelem v oznámení o zahájení zadávacího řízení či výzvě. Jako doklad dodržení lhůty pro podání nabídky bude považován datum a čas uvedený na razítku nebo podacím lístku doručovací služby při podání nabídky uchazečem doručovací službě. 11. Délka zadávací lhůty zadávací lhůta, po kterou jsou uchazeči vázání svou nabídkou je do 31. 1. 2008 Zadávací lhůta začíná běžet okamžikem skončení lhůty pro podání nabídek a končí dnem doručení oznámení zadavatele o výběru nejvhodnější nabídky. Zadávací lhůta se prodlužuje uchazečům, s nimiž může zadavatel v souladu s tímto zákonem uzavřít smlouvu, až do doby uzavření smlouvy podle § 82 odst. 3 nebo do zrušení zadávacího řízení.

27

5.2. Členění nabídky Nabídka musí být strukturována a řazena následujícím způsobem:

ČÁST I. Identifikace uchazeče 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Obchodní firma; Sídlo; Kontaktní adresa; IČ, DIČ; Telefon; Elektronická adresa, případně fax; Jméno statutární zástupce;

Doklady prokazující kvalifikační předpoklady uchazeče Zadavatel požaduje prokázání splnění základních a profesních kvalifikačních předpokladů dodavatele v následujícím rozsahu: Zadavatel požaduje prokázání splnění základních a profesních kvalifikačních předpokladů. Podrobná specifikace požadavků je obsažena v kvalifikační dokumentaci, která je přílohou č. 2 zadávací dokumentace. Vymezení požadavků zadavatele na prokázání technických kvalifikačních předpokladů. Zadavatel požaduje prokázání splnění technických kvalifikačních předpokladů. Podrobná specifikace požadavků je obsažena v kvalifikační dokumentaci, která je přílohou č. 2 zadávací dokumentace.

ČÁST II. Představení uchazeče 1. Charakteristika společnosti/skupiny. 2. Představení členek/členů týmu s přiloženým strukturovaným životopisem každé členky/člena a zapojením v týmu a s podrobným uvedením role každého zapojeného člena/členky v týmu. U každého člena týmu navíc požadujeme uvádět počet hodin věnovaných realizaci této zakázky. Strukturovaný životopis každého člena/členky týmu musí také obsahovat přehled znalostí cizích jazyků (hodnotící škála jazykových schopností čtení, psaní, mluvení 15, kdy 5

28

je nejvyšší stupeň) doplněný o poznámku, zda byly ze strany jednotlivých členů týmu skládány v minulosti mezinárodní či státní zkoušky z těchto jazyků. 3. Odkazy na výstupy dosud realizovaných projektů na webu. Popis, jak uchazeč hodlá naplnit podmínky zadání, přičemž může šířeji rozvést popis způsobu realizace jednotlivých úkolů 1. Popis, jak bude realizován úkol a aktivity v každé tématické oblasti (úkoly a aktivity budou číselně indexovány) 2. Představení, zapojení a role členů týmu 3. Popis průběžných a finálních výstupů z úkolů a aktivit (uchazeč může některé oblasti rozšířit či doplnit, přičemž popíše, proč považuje své rozšíření či doplnění za vhodné. Zároveň uchazeč může z vlastní iniciativy navrhnout doplnění či rozšíření evaluačních otázek uvedených ke každému tématu v této zadávací dokumentaci. Zúžení evaluačních otázek není možné) 4. Harmonogram aktivit 5. Seznam použité literatury, materiálů, dokumentů a dalších informačních pramenů, které hodlá uchazeč využít.

ČÁST III. Finanční nabídka 1. Nabídková cena bude uvedena v CZK. 2. Nabídková cena bude uvedena v členění: nabídková cena bez daně z přidané hodnoty (DPH), samostatně DPH a nabídková cena včetně DPH. 3. Nabídková cena bude rozdělena do pěti částí odpovídajících pracnosti jednotlivých odevzdávaných výstupů – vstupní zprávy, průběžné zprávy a závěrečné zprávy. 4. Zadavatel nepřipouští překročení nabídkové ceny.

PŘÍLOHY 1. Toto zadání 2. Podepsaný návrh smlouvy osobou oprávněnou jednat jménem uchazeče

29

6. Hodnocení nabídek Základním kritériem hodnocení je ekonomická výhodnost nabídky. Ekonomická výhodnost nabídky bude posuzována na základě vážených kritérií kvality a ceny a dílčích indikátorů. Kritéria pro hodnocení nabídek: Kritérium 1 Celková kvalita nabídky ........................................................... váha 70 % · Indikátor 1 Vhodnost navrhovaných aktivit, metod a výstupů · Indikátor 2 Inovativnost nabídky Kritérium 2 Hodnocení ceny ……………………………………………………...…….... váha 30 %

6.1. Kritérium 1. – celková kvalita nabídky Kvalita nabídky se bude posuzovat dle dílčích kvalitativních indikátorů, přičemž hodnotící škála je následující: 1 až 5 body = zcela neuspokojivé, 6 až 10 bodů = spíše neuspokojivé, 11 až 15 bodů = dostatečné, 16 až 20 bodů = velmi dobré, 21 až 25 bodů = vynikající. Hodnotící otázky jsou orientační a slouží pro lepší srovnatelnost hodnocení mezi členkami / členy hodnotící komise. V daném kvalitativním kritériu získá nabídka bodovou hodnotu, která vznikne tak, že celková suma získaných bodů indikátorů hodnocené nabídky bude poměřena s nejlepší nabídkou a vynásobena váhou daného kritéria dle vzorce: (Hodnocená nabídka / Nejlepší nabídka) X 70 = Vážená hodnota Kritéria 1.

30

Kde hodnocenou nabídkou je součet bodů hodnocené nabídky kvalitativních indikátorů; nejlepší nabídka je nabídka, která dosáhla v hodnocení daných indikátorů nejvyššího počtu bodů; 70 je váha Kritéria 1.

Indikátory kvality Indikátor 1. Vhodnost navrhovaných aktivit, metod a výstupů (relevance ve vztahu k tématům a úkolům) (125) Např.: · Umožňují navržené aktivity získat dostatečně podrobné informace pro formulaci vhodných a praktických doporučení v dané oblasti? · Jak vhodně jsou zvoleny evaluačního nástroje vzhledem k zaměření evaluace? Kritérium 1. Celková · Odpovídá detailnost předpokládaných výstupů požadavkům zadání? kvalita nabídky (váha 70 %) Indikátor 2. Inovativnost nabídky (125) Např.: · Rozšiřuje nabídka vhodným a relevantním způsobem požadované evaluační otázky? · Jsou v nabídce navrhované analýzy prováděné u RP jiných členských států dostatečně zdůvodněny z hlediska důvodu pro výběr právě těchto členských států k provádění těchto analýz? · Nakolik navrhované analyzované členské státy berou v úvahu geografický kontext EU, reprezentativitu výběru národních států?

6.2. Kritérium 2. Hodnocení ceny Cenové hodnocení nabídek proběhne tak, že hodnocená nabídka získá bodovou hodnotu na základě vzorce: (Nejnižší cena / Hodnocená cena) X 30 = vážená hodnota Kritéria 2. Kde hodnocenou cenou je cena hodnocené nabídky bez DPH; nejnižší cena je nejnižší cena nabídky bez DPH a 30 je váha Kritéria 2.

31

6.3. Ekonomicky nejvýhodnější nabídka Na základě součtu kreditu za kvalitativní kritéria a cenu (Kritérium 1. + Kritérium 2.) u jednotlivých nabídek hodnotící komise stanoví pořadí úspěšnosti jednotlivých nabídek tak, že jako nejúspěšnější bude vyhodnocena nabídka, která získá po součtu nejvyšší kredit.

7. Obchodní a platební podmínky 1. Součástí zadávacích podmínek je předloha smlouvy (viz Příloha č. 1 zadávací dokumentace). Uchazeč v uvedené předloze smlouvy doplní chybějící údaje a doplněnou předlohu smlouvy, označí ji jako návrh, podepíše a vloží do nabídky. Návrh smlouvy musí po obsahové stránce odpovídat údajům uvedeným v zadávacích podmínkách a obsahu nabídky uchazeče. Návrh smlouvy je závazný, uchazeč pouze doplní požadované údaje. V případě, že návrh smlouvy nebude odpovídat zadávacím podmínkám a ostatním částem nabídky uchazeče, bude tato skutečnost důvodem pro vyřazení nabídky a vyloučení uchazeče ze zadávacího řízení. 2. Uchazeč o VZ musí v návrhu smlouvy akceptovat vedle požadavků zadavatele v této zadávací dokumentaci rovněž ustanovení zákona, obchodního zákoníku a dalších právních předpisů, které se vztahují k plnění této veřejné zakázky. 3. V případě zjištěného rozdílu mezi požadavky uvedenými v zadávací dokumentaci a v nabídce ve smyslu zúžení předmětu plnění je evaluátor povinen postupovat při realizaci zakázky dle požadavků uvedených přímo v zadávací dokumentaci, a nikoli v dané části své nabídky.

8. Přílohy Příloha č. 1 Předloha smlouvy Příloha č. 2 – Kvalifikační dokumentace

32


8.2 Evaluation Topics 1-6 Topic 1: Part of the study focusing on the support in the preparation the first call of Priority axis Transnational Co-operation OP LZZ TASKS

Drafting a possible announce ment of the first call Priority axis Transnati

DESCRIPTI ON 6 / EVALUATI ON CRITERIA Draft of the manner of ensuring and implementa tion of the first call Priority axis Transnation

EVALUATION QUESTIONS

RELATION SHIP WITH EVALUATI ON OBJECTIVE S7

EXPERTS

EVALUATION METHODS USED

TARGE T GROUP S9

OUTPUTS REQUIRED 10

DEADLINE FOR OUTPUTS REQUIRED

How to determine the rules for eligible expenditures in the scope of this call?

8, 15, 18, 21, 1, 5

AP (4)

ANAL, INT, VISIT

DP, MA, NSS, EXP

Practical recommendations on eligible expenditures, a suitable length of the implementation of projects and the necessary mechanisms of support defined for the projects as well as MA.

In three weeks after concluding the contract, the final version to be sent within 14 days after receipt of the observations

8

AS (4)

How to define areas of support for this call in terms of the factual focus of the projects supported?

BB (8)

How to define areas of support for this call in terms of supported forms of implemented transnational co-operation?

PJ (68)

EF (4) JK (17)

The tasks required and the evaluation questions are referred to here only. Activities leading to their fulfilment are described in detail in the timetable of works, including their timing and logical relationship. 7 The evaluation has ten general and eleven specific objectives which have been referred to and numbered above. Although the fulfilment of the individual tasks is almost always related to all the general objectives (objectives 1, 6, 9 and 10 in particular), the numbers of these objectives are referred to, which are primarily fulfilled by the implementation of the task at issue. 8 Given the fact that experts referred to in this offer work in a team, the list of persons would be irrelevant here since it would almost always have to comprise all the persons. However, the team operates in such a way that one or the maximum of two persons are in charge of a given task, the others contributing to the solution either by providing comments on the outputs and helping with the analysis, or by participating directly in some of the evaluation methods (for example the focus group is always led by at least two persons, the interviews and evaluation visits will be performed by 6 evaluators etc.). The number of work hours of the person at issue is referred to here to differentiate the extent of individual team members’ involvement. Work hours spent on methodical preparation, data analysis, team meetings, observations and producing the outputs has been added to the total number of hours cited in the budget. 9 Key target groups are referred to in target groups, i.e. those providing the most significant materials for further analyses and findings in terms of quantity as well as quality. Given that the majority of evaluation tools operate across the target groups and that the questionnaire will be used as a flat-rate support for other evaluation techniques, materials for each individual evaluation step are conceived de facto on the results of the examination of more groups than just those referred to. However, only those groups primarily focused by the fulfilment of the task at issue are referred to for better comprehensibility. For the most part, the order of target groups is referred to based on its importance; this aspect is not always relevant and that is why we do not expand on this issue. 10 All the outputs will be in English and Czech, the majority of intermediate products will also be processed in English and Czech in view of the transnational structure of the team of evaluators. The working language inside the team will be English. 6


56


onal Cooperation OP LZZ.

al Cooperation OP LZZ.

Which length of the implementation of the projects supported on the basis of the first call in the area of transnational co-operation is suitable and why?

ML (6)

Which mechanisms of support on the side of MA and on the since of the recipient is it necessary to establish for the call in terms of managing individual projects based on transnational co-operation?

JOŠ (51)

NB.: In view of the time determined for establishing this output, it is impossible to carry out certain necessary evaluation and analytic methods; that is why this output will be finalised in the course of the evaluation.

VM (51) JP (4)

Topic 2: Part of the study focusing on the evaluation of Czech DP’s work TASKS

DESCRIPTIO N/ EVALUATION CRITERIA


RELATIO NSHIP WITH EVALUAT ION OBJECTI VES

EXPERTS

EVALUAT ION METHOD S USED

TARGET GROUPS

OUTPUTS REQUIRED


Mapping of significan t or interestin g outputs of CIP EQUAL projects on the territory of CZ in terms of applying transnati onal cooperation .

Case studies of at least 35 DP supported in the framework of CIP EQUAL CZ.

In which projects supported by CIP EQUAL in CZ were the outputs attained by means of transnational co-operation (the preparation and development of which were completely based on transnational cooperation)?

11, 13, 14, 16, 17, 20, 21, 1, 2, 6, 7,

AP (2)

FS, VISIT, INT, CASE, ANAL, PROC, DOT

DP, MA, NSS, KLIENT, MONIT, PP (in

Practical recommenda tions and tips for the management of programmes supporting projects focusing on transnational co-operation in the new programme period and in the future.

May 2008


In which projects supported by CIP EQUAL in CZ were these outputs significantly influenced by the opportunity to co-operate with transnational partners?

AS (2) BB (10) EF (2) PJ (130) JK (119)

In what way did transnational co-operation most often influence the outputs of the projects supported?

ML (6) VM (32)

In what way did DP proceed in transnational co-operation in the course of the implementation of the project – in the framework of which activities was transnational co-operation most frequently used?

LS (88) JAŠ (176)

Is it possible to define the focus of activities based on transnational co-operation the occurrence of which was key to the successful implementation of the project?

JP (88) JOŠ (119)

On the contrary, is it possible to determine the focus of activities based on transnational co-operation in which a direct benefit for the

57

order to provide a compariso n with CZ and to achieve higher quality of outputs. Comparabl e references , findings from the EU

Overview of documents on which DP


countries cited will be used; that is why activities from topics 2 and 3 take place parallel to each other, see the timetable)

project and the outputs have not been proven? What type of special support from the MA or NSS was necessary for the creation of project outputs based on transnational co-operation? Which specific types of this support were required directly by DP? (Was support from MA or NSS provided?) Were some types of support ascertained which DP would welcome from MA or NSS in the implementation of DP’s projects in the area of transnational co-operation? In what stage of the preparation or the implementation of its projects would DP welcome this support most frequently? What documents did DP base their activities on during the preparation and implementation of its projects on in the area of transnational co-operation (manuals, methodologies etc.)?

was based in the course of the preparation and implementati on of its projects and the assessment of their relevance.

Which previous experience did the partners involved in the individual DP use most frequently in the preparation and implementation of their activities focusing on transnational co-operation?

Topic 3: Part of the study focusing on the assessment of the work of DP supported in other EU Member States EU TASKS

DESCRIPTI ON / EVALUATI ON CRITERIA


RELATI ONSHI P WITH EVALU ATION OBJEC TIVES

EXPERTS


TARGET GROUPS

OUTPUTS REQUIRE D

DEADLIN E FOR OUTPUTS REQUIRE D

Mapping of significant or interesting outputs of CIP EQUAL projects on the territory of CZ in

Occurrence of significant or interesting outputs and their relevance; 20 case studies of

Is it possible to find among the projects supported by CIP EQUAL in other EU Member States some the outputs of which were attained by transnational cooperation (their preparation was based solely on transnat.coop.)?

11, 13, 14, 16, 20, 21, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7,

AP (134)

FS, VISIT, INT, CASE, ANAL, PROC, DOT

DP EU, MA EU, PP EU, NSS EU, NTS EU

Practical recommen dations and tips for the managem ent of programm es

May 2008


Is it possible to find among these DP’s findings some the outputs of which were attained by transnational co-operation with DP from CZ?

AS (134) BB (160) EF (134) PJ (40)

Is it possible to find among the projects supported by CIP EQUAL in other EU Member States some the outputs of which were significantly influenced by the opportunity to co-operate with international partners?

JK (17)

58

(Evaluatio n activities and analysis take place


terms of applying transnation al cooperation (those DP have been selected which cooperated on the basis of TCA with Czech DP).

international DP (2 in

each selected EU country plus special studies above 20 as the case may be).

In what way did transnational co-operation most often influence the outputs of the projects supported?

ML (152)

In what way did DP proceed in transnational co-operation in the course of the implementation of the project – in the framework of which activities was transnational co-operation used most often?

LS (10)

Among the types of activities and expenditures implemented in the cases examined in the framework of transnational co-operation, were significant differences ascertained stemming from the extent of activities and expenditures which were considered qualified in the individual Member States?

JP (10)

VM (10) JAŠ (10) JOŠ (17)

Did the ascertained differences in the extent of expenditure qualification lead to an easier or, on the contrary, a more difficult implementation of the individual projects? Is it possible to define the focus of activities based on transnational cooperation the occurrence of which was key to the successful implementation of the project? On the contrary, is it possible to determine the focus of activities based on transnational co-operation in which a direct benefit for the project and the outputs have not been proven? In the course of establishing the project outputs based on transnational cooperation, was it necessary to ensure for DP a special type of support from MA or NSS? Were some types of support ascertained which DP would welcome from MA or NSS in the implementation of DP’s projects in the area of transnational cooperation? In what stage of the preparation or the implementation of its projects would DP welcome this support most frequently? What documents did DP base their activities on during the preparation and implementation of its projects on in the area of transnational co-operation? Which previous experience did the partners involved in the individual DP use most frequently in the preparation and implementation of their activities focusing on transnational co-operation?


59

parallel to topic 3, a compariso n with CZ will be used particularl y with regard to the fact that the outputs are supposed to serve primarily for Czech institutions , for details see the timetable)

supporting projects focusing on transnatio nal cooperation in the new programm e period and in the future.


Topic 4: Analysis of specific aspects and the added value of ESF projects based on the support of transnational co-operation TASKS



RELATION SHIP WITH EVALUATI ON OBJECTIVE S

EXPERTS


TARGET GROUPS

OUTPUTS REQUIRED

DEADLIN E FOR OUTPUTS REQUIRE D

4.1. Analysis of “added value” of ESF projects implemente d in CZ as well as by other EU Member States and focusing on the support of transnation al cooperationin comparison with projects which are purely national.

4.1 Occurrence of the added value and its relevance

4.1. Was an added value ascertained of ESF projects financed in CZ as well as in other EU countries for the purpose of the support of transnational co-operation as opposed to projects with a similar focus which did not contain the element of translational co-operation?

11, 13, 14, 16, 20, 21, 1, 2, 5, 6, 7

AP (65)

FS, VISIT, INT, CASE, PROC, DOT, SWOT

DP, DP EU, MA, MA EU, KLIENT, POLIT, EK

Practical recommendation s and tips for the management of programmes supporting projects focusing on transnational co-operation in the new programme period and in the future.

May 2008 (Applies to both tasks)

(3 case studies in each analysed country, that is 30 studies). 4.2. Occurrence of aspects of projects focusing on transnational co-operation and their relevance

4.2. Analysis of the individual


What does the added value lie in?

(Applies to both tasks)

Does the extent of the added value correspond with higher demands in terms of finance, time and administration of projects focusing on the support of transnational co-operation – if higher demands of these projects were ascertained?

AS (65) BB (99) EF (73) PJ (98) JK (100) ML (92) VM (16) LS (25) JAŠ (93)

4.2. Which of the aspects of ESF projects focusing on the area of transnational co-operation specific compared with other types of ESF projects?

JP (16) JOŠ (129)

Which experience with projects focusing on transnational cooperation is suitable to be applied in the implementation of ESF programmes supporting this type of co-operation?


How does the structure of expenditures of projects with this focus differ from the structure in other ESF projects? Which type of expenditures implemented in projects focusing on the support of transnational co-operation should be added to the rules determining eligible ESF expenditures in CZ? On the contrary, which type of expenditures implemented in projects focusing on the support of transnational co-operation, which appear frequently in these projects although their occurrence or extent does not correspond with the goals of

60


(Applies to both tasks; findings from EU countries will be compared with the findings from CZ)



specific aspects of ESF projects focusing on the support of transnation al cooperation.

these projects, should be taken out of to the rules determining eligible expenditures? Which activities linked with the administration of these project with this focus are far more demanding in terms of time, expertise and finance than similar activities implemented in other projects financed from ESF?

Topic 5: Analysis of interesting approaches and specific areas of HRD in other EU countries TASKS

DESCRIPTI ON / EVALUATI ON CRITERIA



EXPERTS


TARGET GROUPS

OUTPUTS REQUIRED


5.1. Mapping interesting approaches in the area of HRD in individual EU Member States with the aim to identify those areas on which it would be desirable to focus projects implemented in the form of transnational co-operation in the next programme period and thus to make it possible to acquire know-how from abroad for future possible use in CZ.

Relevance

5.1.Which specific areas of HRD supported by ESF programmes in the individual EU Member States are the most relevant from the point of view of the necessity to develop the HRD area at issue in CZ?

8, 12, 13, 18, 4, 6

AP (95) BB (129)

DP, DP EU, KLIENT, POLIT, EK, NSS EU



Practical recommendation s and tips for the management of programmes supporting projects focusing on transnational co-operation in the new programme period and in the future.

May 2008


ANAL, CASE, SWOT, FS, INT

5.2. Analysis of the



Which Member States have at their disposal particularly interesting examples of good practice in the area of HRD beyond the framework of the areas of support financed from ESF? 5.2. Which areas of HRD which other Member States focus on in the framework of an autonomous priority axis supporting transnational co-operation are the most relevant from the point of view of the necessity to develop the HRD area at issue in CZ? Which areas of HRD, in which it is possible to

AS (95) EF (103) PJ (78) JK (80) ML (122) LS (5) JAŠ (73) JOŠ (109) (Applies to both

61




relevance of HRD areas which other EU Member States will support transnational cooperation from ESF in the new programme period, including the identification, which of the areas relevant to them it would be most beneficial to focus on in transnational cooperation with CZ.

support transnational co-operation in the form of qualifies expenditures in the framework of priority axes outside transnational cooperation in the other EU Member States, are the most relevant from the point of view of the necessity to develop the HRD area at issue in CZ?

tasks)

Which type of projects would it be most convenient to support in the framework of these identified areas with these Member States? From the point of view of possible impact of supported transnational co-operation in identified areas, which type of entities would it be most convenient to support in the implementation of projects with this focus? In what way would it be suitable to mediate the results of the analysis conducted to potential applicants?

Topic 6: Part of the study focusing on the synthesis of the findings from previous parts of the study TASKS




EXPERTS

EVALUAT ION METHOD S

TA R GR.

OUTPUTS REQUIRED

DEA DLIN E

6.1. Identification of factors and assumptions leading to successful and effective projects focusing on the support of transnational co-

6.1., 6.2. The occurrence of factors and assumptions

6.1. Is it possible to establish some factors the occurrence of which helps the successful implementation of these projects in the management and implementation of the project?

21, 20,19, 12, 18, 13, 15, 17, 10, 1, 9, 8, 6

AP (14)

SWOT, ANAL, INT, FS, DOT, PROC, CASE

EXP MA, MA EU, DP, DP EU, MO NIT ,

Practical recommendations and tips for the management of programmes supporting projects focusing on transnational cooperation in the new programme period

07/08 (tasks 1 and 2)

(tasks 1 and 2) 6.3. Proposal concerning the manner of


Was the implementation of project with this focus positively impacted by the existence of some supporting tools and documents mediated by MA? 6.2. Is it possible to establish some factors the occurrence of which causes the implementation of these projects to fail in the

AS (14) BB (61) EF (14) PJ (144)

(Applies to all tasks)

62

JK (50) ML (18)


09/08 (tasks 3-6)


operation. 6.2. Identification of factors leading to failure in projects focusing on transnational co-operation. 6.3. Drafting a proposal including various possibilities of the management and implementation of the priority axis transnational cooperation OP LZZ, on the basis of our experience as well as experience acquired abroad.

6.4. Drafting a proposal on ensuring the monitoring and evaluation of transnational cooperation supported not only in the framework of the priority transnational cooperation OP LZZ, but also as part of the other priorities OP LZZ and other

managing and implementing priority axes transnational co-operation OP LZZ. (task 3)

management and implementation of the project?

VM (20)

Is it possible to prove the negative influence of insufficiently high administrative or other expenditures of the project on the course of the project’s implementation and the results of the project implemented?

LS (30)

Is it possible to prove the negative influence of an insufficiently long period of time established for the preparation of projects with this focus on their course and results?

JOŠ (37)

6.4. Drafting a proposal on ensuring the monitoring and evaluation of ESF projects focusing on the support of transnational co-operation. (task 4)

In what way would it be possible to prevent or at least minimise the ascertained negative factors on behalf of MA?

6.5. Drafting a proposal on ensuring the monitoring and evaluation of ERDF projects focusing on the support of transnational co-operation. (task 5) 6.6. Drafting a proposal on to how to handle the outputs and results of ESF projects focusing on the


JAŠ (37) JP (20)


NSS , NSS EU, ŽA D, POL IT, EK (Ap plie s to all tas ks)

6.3. Which alternative proposals for managing and implementing the priority axis transnational co-operation would be suitable on the basis of the experience ascertained? On the contrary, which proposals for managing and implementing this priority axis would not be suitable on the basis of the experience ascertained? In what way would it be and would it not be suitable to support the individual projects (in the form of grant schemes, national or systemic projects)? In what way would it be appropriate and inappropriate to announce call for submitting projects (with regard to the fact that in term of time, it is demanding to process them, which involves the minimal length of the period for processing applications for financial resources from this priority)?

and in the future. (tasks 1, 2 and 5) Practical recommendations and tips for the management of programmes supporting projects focusing on transnational cooperation in the new programme period and in the future – involving especially alternative proposals of the management and implementation of the priority or of its parts focusing on transnational cooperation in the area of HRD. (task 3) Practical recommendations and tips for the management of programmes supporting projects focusing on transnational cooperation in the new programme period and in the future, including recommendations and tips applicable to Evaluation Plan 2007+ a plan of

Is there a certain type of information which would make it easier for applicants to process the application for financial resources from this priority and which they did not have at their disposal for example in the course of the implementation of CIP EQUAL? What type of specific support is it necessary to the entity implementing the project with during the implementation of the project? 6.4. Which alternative proposals for ensuring the monitoring and evaluation of transnational co-operation supported from ESF would it be suitable to apply in CZ in the 2007-2013 programme period?

63


ESF programme. 6.5. Drafting a proposal on ensuring the monitoring and evaluation of transnational cooperation supported not only in the framework of ERDF programmes on the basis of crossfinancing.

support of transnational co-operation. (task 6)

6.6. Drafting a proposal on to how to handle the outputs and results of projects focusing on the support of transnational cooperation financed from ESF.

Would it be possible and appropriate to ensure part of the monitoring process or the processing of at least some assessment studies on the grounds of a common activity of several Member States?

evaluation activities based on transnational cooperation.

What are the requirements for the application of this possibility?

Practical recommendations and tips for the management of programmes supporting projects focusing on transnational cooperation in the new programme period and in the future (task 4)

In which parts of the monitoring process would be suitable? Are there any parts of the monitoring process in which it would be inappropriate? 6.5. Which alternative proposals ensuring the monitoring and evaluation of transnational co-operation supported by ERDF programmes on the basis of the possibility of cross-financing would it be appropriate to apply in CZ in the course of the 2007-2013 programme period? 6.6. Which type of outputs or results of ESF project focusing on transnational co-operation would it be appropriate to use after the end of the implementation of the individual projects?

Practical recommendations and tips for authorities responsible for the management of ESF programmes focusing on the support of transnational cooperation from the point of view of how to work further with the results and outputs of the project attained. (task 6)

In what way would it be appropriate for the managing authorities of ESF programmes supporting projects based on transnational cooperation to work with the outputs or results of projects after the end of their implementation? Which organisations or target groups should be these outputs and results mediated for? Which medium or which way of such mediation would it be most suitable to use? Does the appropriate medium or the way selected for this transmission differ in the case of various types of target organisations or target groups? Which total volume of financial resources would it be appropriate to determine to ensure further application of the attained outputs and results of projects? In what way would it be appropriate to evaluate the applied manners of transmitting the attained outputs or results and the volume of financial resources used for this activity?


64


8.3 Questionnaire Survey

THE SUMMARY OF THE OUTCOMES FROM THE QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY There have been created two sets of questions and identified those questions that complement and verify one another, and especially serve for the comparing among individual groups. The questionnaire was commented on several times and the final version of the questions was subsequently translated from English to Czech, Polish, French, Portuguese, Italian, Spanish and Dutch. The questionnaires were distributed solely in their electronic version through a web application which enables a form to be filled in a safe and comfortable manner and sent off on-line and anonymously. Data are directly downloaded to a database, which considerably increases the efficiency of their further processing. The questionnaire is anonymous, however, two identification questions were asked in the preamble to the questionnaire (the country of origin and the type of a target group) so as the target groups addressed by means of the questionnaire might be differentiated. Furthermore, the identified target groups were addressed by means of e-mail and through an information campaign with an accompanying information message containing the website address where the questionnaire might be filled in, briefly explained the purpose of the questionnaire and the whole evaluation, and also contained the name of the commissioning entity, the authorizing letter written by MoLSA, and the contact data in case there should arise any questions to be asked. The contact data (e-mail addresses) for the addressing of potential respondents from individual target groups were obtained partly from the commissioning entity, partly from the website of CIP EQUAL (specifically from the database of ECDB) and from other related websites (e.g. http://www.transnationality.eu/). However, the contact data obtained from the above mentioned publicly accessible sources were not valid in all the cases therefore the data provided directly by the commissioning entity played an essential role. Letters written in the above specified languages were sent to the collected contact addresses. Shortly before the time limit (15 June 2008) set for the questionnaire to be filled in expired, notices had been distributed on 8 June 2008 which increased the returnability of the questionnaire. A number of respondents sent in questions concerning both the investigations by means of questionnaires and the results of the evaluation. All the questions were answered in the same language as was the language of the question sent in. The link to the electronic questionnaire was distributed to 1,786 e-mail addresses 11, while 69 of these were returned as undeliverable (i.e. there were 1,717 addresses addressed successfully); the 254 obtained questionnaires represent 14.8 % returnability. Out of these, 219 questionnaires contained the set of questions targeting representatives of Development Partnerships, clients of the services created under EQUAL projects (target groups of the projects), members of National Thematic Networks, independent experts and potential applicants; the set contained 21 questions and is only referred to as “projects” hereinafter. The remaining 35 questionnaires were filled in by representatives of MA, NSS, the Payment Authority, the European Commission, the Monitoring Committee and politicians and policy-makers in the areas of HRD and ESF; the set contained thirteen questions in total and is only referred to as “managing structures” hereinafter. None of the questions – except for the questions concerning the country of origin and the type of the respondent with respect to CIP EQUAL – was compulsory. The reason for asking the two compulsory questions is that they served to identify the questionnaire as regards the country and the target group. As regards the target group identification and the differentiation between the sets of questions, the following breakdown was used:

To 302 addresses in CR in total and 346 in IT, 134 in DE, 98 in UK, 13 in IE, 98 in PL, 219 in FR, 101 in SK, 43 in AT, 109 in NL, 179 in ES, 90 in PT and 54 more without any differentiation for the English version. 11


65


The question wording: How would you define your relationship to the Community Initiative

Programme EQUAL? QUESTION SET 12

TARGET GROUP

1

Independent expert

2

Politician / Decision Maker

2

Representative of the Managing Authority

2

Representative of the National Supporting Structure

2

ESF or HRD policy maker

2

Representative of the European Commission

1

Representative of the Development Partnership

1

Ultimate beneficiary of services provided/initiated by CIP EQUAL projects

2

Member of the Monitoring Committee

1

Member of the National Thematic Network

2

Member of the payment authority / payment unit

1

Applicant or a person interested in getting involved in EQUAL project

The received questionnaires were reviewed as follows: • •

•

The check for any double counting was done according to the date and time of the form sending, and subsequently according to answers (especially the open ones) – identified double counting (one in each set, two in total) were eliminated; In the cases when less than 20 % of questions were filled in in the questionnaire (i.e. less than three out of eleven = the set of questions for the managing structures, or less than five out of nineteen = the set of questions for projects), the obtained answers were not used and the respective questionnaire was deleted from the database of results; this was applied 0 times altogether in the case of managing structures and 6 times in the case of projects (out of which two were completely empty questionnaires, two with two answers and two with three answers); There was carried out the check of answers to open questions of the “other:” type: o In the case an answer was filled in, but the “other” possibility was not ticked off and it was a multiple-possibilities-choice – the “other” possibility was ticked off; o In the case an answer was filled in, but the “other” possibility was not ticked off and it was a choice of one possibility only and none of the possibilities was ticked off - the “other” possibility was ticked off; o In the case an answer was filled in, but the “other” possibility was not ticked off and it was a choice of one possibility only and another of the possibilities had already been ticked off – the answer obtained under the “other” column was not used (it was deleted).

After the above mentioned adaptations have been done, the number of analysed answers furthermore decreased by eight ones to the final 212 questionnaires aimed at specific projects or recipients, and 34 questionnaires filled in by members of managing structures, i.e. to 246 in total. All the above mentioned corrections were a necessary step towards the homogenization of obtained data, not having any negative influence neither on the answers nor on the results of the investigations by means of questionnaires.

12

The term projects covers set of questions no.1 and the term managing structures covers set of questions no.2.


66


Graph 1: Structure of all processed questionnaires according to the respondent’s type with respect to CIP EQUAL (in total 246 questionnaires) Structure of all processed questionnaires according to the respondent’s type with respect to CIP EQUAL Representative of the Development Partnership; 179

Member of the payment authority / payment unit; 0

Representative of the European Commission; 0

Member of the National Thematic Network; 14

ESF or HRD policy maker; 1

Ultimate beneficiary of services provided/initiated by CIP EQUAL projects; 8

Politician / Decision Maker; 2

Independent expert; 6 Member of the Monitoring Committee; 5 Representative of the National Supporting Structure; 8

Applicant or a person interested in getting involved in EQUAL project; 5

Representative of the Managing Authority; 18

Graph 2: Structure of all processed questionnaires from set of questions no.1 (projects) according to the respondent’s country of origin (in total 212 questionnaires; the respondents from the Czech Republic represent ca. 21 %)

45

Countries [projects]

45

40 35

31

30

29

25

22 19

20

16

15

15

14 11

10 5

5

2

3


other

Austria

France

Italy

Slovakia

Germany

United Kingdom

Spain

The Netherlands

Poland

Portugal

Czech Republic

0

67


Graph 3: Structure of all processed questionnaires from set of questions no.2 (managing structures) according to the respondent’s country of origin (in total 34 questionnaires; the respondents from the Czech Republic represent ca. 23,5 %)

Countries [managing structures]

11

11

10 9 8

8

7 6 5 3 2

2 1

1

1

1

The Netherlands

Spain

Germany

Portugal

France

Poland

Austria

United Kingdom

Czech Republic

0

0

0

other

2

2

Slovakia

3

3

Italy

4

THE RETURNABILITY OF QUESTIONNAIRES As it has been already stated herein above, in total, there were received 254 questionnaires, while there were 1,717 e-mail addresses addressed successfully; thus, the returnability of questionnaires is 14.8 %. The questionnaire was distributed on-line in the following language versions: Czech, English, Italian, French, Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese, and Polish. Although the team took a decision (despite the original offer that was counting only on the Czech and English versions) to translate the questionnaire to the languages of all eleven countries where the investigations were effected (or rather ten because in case of Slovakia good knowledge of Czech was expected), the step did not positively lead to increased returnability. Availability of a particular language version thus has no direct causal connection with the returnability of questionnaires, in our case this is true especially as regards France and Italy, where the returnability is far below the average, contrary to the high returnability achieved in the case of addresses targeted with the invitation to participate written in English despite probably addressing persons of various nationalities – those were generic domains (e.g. .com, .org, etc), and especially representatives of CIP EQUAL managing structures and representatives of the European Commission (under the “other country” section in the graph). Graph 4 shows that Portugal, Poland, the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, the United Kingdom and undifferentiated countries are above the average returnability, while all the other countries are below the average. The dark blue column marks the number of filled in questionnaires, and the rest of the column the number of addressed addresses per respective country. The red points mark the questionnaire returnability per respective country. Hereto, we add the following methodological note: while the number of the addressed shows the numbers of e-mail addresses with the proper national domain (e.g. the number of addresses ending with .de means the number of addresses addressed in Germany); the filled-in questionnaires were differentiated by countries, not by home domains because the questionnaires were anonymous, and so the country that a respondent stated at the beginning of the questionnaire. Theoretically, it is therefore possible that a respondent from Brussels stated Germany as the country of origin, but having been addressed by the English version of the letter as Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

68


one of the “undifferentiated”, he or she could fill in the questionnaire in English. The first Interim Report contained an extensive set of addresses targeted with the invitation to fill in the questionnaire. This set makes it evident that the country of e-mail address origin and the country of a respondent’s origin correspond in most cases. Thus, we consider the above mentioned example to be an unlikely, yet theoretically possible exception. Graph 4: The number of e-mail addresses addressed as regards the filled-in questionnaires The number of e-mail addresses addressed as regards the filled-in questionnaires 400

(counties with appropriate language version in green)

40,00%

36,67%

350

addressed

filled-in questionnaires in total

returnability

35,00%

31,63%

300

30,00%

25,93%

250

25,00%

21,10% 17,55%

200

20,00%

17,12% 13,86%

150

11,94%

11,63%

15,00%

11,17%

100

10,00% 3,20%

50

3,18%

ly Ita

Fr an ce

Sp ai n

a Au st ri

an y G er m

ov ak ia Sl

Th e

ot he r

Ne th er la nd Cz s ec h Re pu bl Un ic ite d Ki ng do m

0,00%

Po la nd

Po rtu ga l

0

5,00%


69


Results of the investigations by means of questionnaires – question set no. 1: “projects” In total, there were analysed 212 questionnaires targeting representatives of development partnerships, clients of services created under EQUAL projects (target groups of the projects), members of National Thematic Networks, independent experts and potential applicants, out of which 44 were from the Czech Republic (about 21%).

Graph 5: Answer to the question: “How did you get inspired for transnational cooperation? “ (more answers could be selected; the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

How did you get inspired for transnational cooperation? [projects] 120

111

100

Total

Czech Republic

80 65

60 39

40 20

36

32 15

12 3

29

7

25 5

25 4

20 4

16 4

16 4

5

11 3

6

9 2

1 1


other

none of them

use of membership in professional associations

evaluation of projects

from my studies

use of membership in professional networks

experience of a colleague

reading methodological guides

monitoring of projects

continuing cooperation

experience acquired at a professional event

use of existing partnerships

transnational projects of our partners

previous experience with own transnational projects

0

70


Graph 6: Answer to the question: “Which sources did you use the most for planning and implementing your transnational cooperation activities?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

Which sources did you use the most for planning and implementing your transnational cooperation activities? [projects] 140

134

120

Total

113

Czech Republic

100 81

80 58

60

55

40

31 24

23

20

27

20

18

2

4

EC papers and reports

6

advice of other implementing teams

12 3


other

advice of more experienced colleagues

advice given during profesional events

advice of the Managing Authority

EC guides

previous experience

0

71


Graph 7: Answer to the question: “How important were criteria listed below for choosing your project partners for transnational cooperation?“ (the respondents could choose from the scale from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very much so); the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

How important were criteria listed below for choosing your project partners for transnational cooperation? [projects] 6,00 from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very m uch so)

Average in Total

5,00

Average for Czech Republic

4,00

3,00

2,00

1,00


organization was partner of partners

size of organization

written references

recommendations from others

previous experience with organization

personal links

geographical location

type of organization

relevance for the project

0,00

72

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. trainings


other

twinning


joint recognition of qualifications or

capacity building


Total



140

benchmarking


joint research


joint experimentation of innovative


self-assessment


dissemination of results of research



transfer of tools

study trips


project planning

seminars



project management


conferences

know-how transfer



Graph 8: Answer to the question: “Which transnational cooperation-related activities did you perform most frequently?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of all respondents descending

Which transnational cooperation-related activities did you perform most frequently? [projects]

160

Czech Republic

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

73

conferences

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. other

twinning



benchmarking



Total


capacity building


140


trainings

joint research








self-assessment

transfer of tools


project planning

project management




study trips

seminars


know-how transfer


Graph 9: Answer to the question: “Which transnational cooperation-related activities did you perform most frequently?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of respondents from Czech Republic descending

Which transnational cooperation-related activities did you perform most frequently? [projects]

160

Czech Republic

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

74





seminars

self-assessment


conferences

Total




50

project management

twinning

trainings

know-how transfer

project planning


capacity building


study trips



transfer of tools




benchmarking




joint research




Graph 10: Answer to the question: “Which activities in transnational cooperation did you want to perform but eventually you did not?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of all respondents descending

Which activities in transnational cooperation did you want to perform but eventually you did not? [projects]

60

Czech Republic

40

30

20

10

0

75




seminars

self-assessment

conferences


project management

Total

trainings

know-how transfer


50



project planning



transfer of tools

joint research

twinning

capacity building


study trips




benchmarking









Graph 11: Answer to the question: “Which activities in transnational cooperation did you want to perform but eventually you did not?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of respondents from Czech Republic descending

Which activities in transnational cooperation did you want to perform but eventually you did not? [projects]

60

Czech Republic

40

30

20

10

0

76


Graph 12: Answer to the question: “What reasons affected the most your impossibility to participate /to organize further transnational activities of your interest?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

What reasons affected the most your impossibility to participate/to organize further transnational activities of your interest? [projects] 60

58

50

Total

48

Czech Republic

40

30

28

20

18

18 14 11

10

7

7 3 0

0 lack of budget

lack of time


1

low priority of lack of interest missing these from partners support from activities CIP EQUAL during planning

6 2

lack of cooperation w ithin the partnership

6 1

6 0

changes in communication project barrier w ithin planning the partnership

other

77


Graph 13: Answer to the question: “Which aspects of transnational cooperation were in your view the most beneficial ones to your project?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

Which aspects of transnational cooperation were in your view the most beneficial ones to your project? [projects] 70 61

Total

60 50

Czech Republic

46

40 33

30 20

8 2

2


wider dissemination of project results

adaptation of approaches of partners based on our experiences

analysis of lessons learnt

adaptation of our approach based on experiences of other

finding of common solutions to common problems

knowledge of best practices adopted by other

0

6 0

2

0

1

0

1

1

0

none

6

others

10

better structuring of internal procedures

9

16

better organization of administrative work

10

17

15

a more robust approach to monitoring and evaluating our achievements

20

78


As a result of our question concerning the period of duration of respondents´ projects (question: “What was the duration of your project? (in months)”) we got the average length of 30.2 months (the average of all respondents), or 32.6 months for the respondents from the Czech Republic.

Graph 14: Answer to the question: “In your view and in comparison with projects without foreign partners, does the implementation of a project with foreign partners imply a longer duration?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – not ordered by frequency

Does the implementation of a project with foreign partners imply a longer duration? [projects] 140

135

Total

120 100

Czech Republic

92

80 68

63

60

51 43

40

31 17

20

10

15 8

5

0 no impacts on duration


it requires up to 20% more time

up to 40%

up to 60%

up to 80%

more

79


Graph 15: Answer to the question: “In case that a project with transnational partnership implies a longer duration in comparison with projects that do not possess a transnational dimension, what are the phases of the transnational project requiring the allocation of more time?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

140

In case that a project with transnational partnership implies a longer duration in comparison with projects that do not possess a transnational dimension, what are the phases of the transnational project requiring the allocation of more time? [projects]

135

120 100

Total

92

Czech Republic

80 68

63

60

51 43

40

31 17

20

15

10

8

5

10 1

0 preparatory work

overall coordination

implementation

definition of rules and procedures

monitoring and evaluation

drawing of conclusions

other

As a result of our question concerning the efficiency of the funds spent on transnational cooperation (question: “How much the additional resources needed by the transnational dimension of your project (in terms of money, time and energy) were paid off in terms of a higher quality of your project?”) we got the average figure of 3.9 (the average of all respondents) or 4.2 for the respondents from the Czech Republic on the scale from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very much so).


80


Graph 16: Answer to the question: “Based on your experience, is there a need for further support to implementing teams of transnational partnerships?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

Based on your experience, is there a need for further support to implementing teams of transnational partnerships? [projects] 160

152 Total

140

Czech Republic

120 100 80 58

60 34

40 20

9

0

Yes


No

81


Graph 17: Additional question to Graph no.16 - “If you answered yes, in which fields do you consider that further support is needed?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of all respondents descending

In which fields do you consider that further support is needed? [projects] 80 Total

70

Czech Republic

60 50 40 30 20 10


other

comments to outcomes

comments to planning

assessment

participation on negotiations

papers and reports

participation at other project activities

participation at meetings

templates (agreements, reports etc.)

links to regional social partners

explanations (rules, eligibility etc.)

advisory services

contacts

links to regional decision makers

guidance and methods

lobbying aimed at implementaion of policies and tools into reality

search for partners

0

82


Graph 18: Additional question to Graph no.16 - “If you answered yes, in which fields do you consider that further support is needed?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of respondents from Czech Republic descending

In which fields do you consider that further support is needed? [projects] 80 Total

70

Czech Republic

60 50 40 30 20 10


other

comments to planning


assessment






contacts

papers and reports


advisory services



search for partners


0

83


Graph 19: Answer to the question: “How often during the implementation of your project did you need support from the Managing Authority?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – not ordered by frequency

How often during the implementation of your project did you need support from the Managing Authority? [projects] 160

150

140 Total

120

Czech Republic

100 80 60 40

34

33

25

20

9 1

0

0

several times per week


0

several times per month

more rarely

never

84


Graph 20: Answer to the question: “How do you assess the quality of the responses you received [from the CIP EQUAL Managing Authority] in terms of their usefulness to solve your problems?“ (the respondents could choose from the scale from 1 (totally useless) to 6 (fully useful); the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned; the average for all respondents equals 4, for respondents from Czech Republic 4,3)

How do you assess the quality of the responses you received in terms of their usefulness to solve your problems? [projects] 80 from 1 (totally useless) to 6 (fully useful)

70

67

Total

60

Czech Republic 49

50 40 30

25 22

20

17

17

14

13

10

5 2

0 1


4

0

2

3

4

5

6

85


Graph 21: Answer to the question: “During planning and implementation of your project you might have used several tools, which are listed below. For each of them, please indicate the frequency of their use.“ (the respondents could choose from the scale from 1 (never) to 6 (very often); the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

Frequency of use during planning and implementation of project [projects] 6 from 1 (never) to 6 (very often)

Total average

5


4

3

2

1


twinning experiences

direct support from the Managing Authority

study trips

participation to discussion for a / mailing lists

research papers, surveys, analytical studies

monitoring, external evaluation

self-assessment

handbooks and guidelines

participation to workshops, conferences etc

internal consultations with partners

0

86


Graph 22: Answer to the question:”During planning and implementation of your project you might have used several tools, which are listed below. For each tool, please indicate also their value in terms of providing you with useful indications and suggestions.“ (the respondents could choose from the scale from 1 (none) to 6 (the highest); the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

Value in terms of providing you with useful indications and suggestions during planning and implementation of project [projects] 6 from 1 (none) to 6 (the highest)

Total average

5


4

3

2

1


twinning experiences

direct support from the Managing Authority

participation to discussion for a / mailing lists

research papers, surveys, analytical studies

self-assessment

monitoring, external evaluation

study trips

handbooks and guidelines

internal consultations with partners

participation to workshops, conferences etc

0

87


Graph 23: Answer to the question: “Who in your view benefits from transnational cooperation the most (in the long-term perspective)?“ (one answer could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

Who benefits from transnational cooperation the most [projects] 120 107

Total

100

Czech Republic

80

60

55

40 26

20

28

13 8 4

8 1

1

0 project partners


ultimate beneficiaries

project management

social partners

none of them

4 0

managing authority

88


Graph 24: Answer to the question: “In case you and your international partners had/are having a different understanding about the costs that are eligible for funding, did this fact have any impact on the implementation of the project?“ (one answer could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

120

In case you and your international partners had/are having a different understanding about the costs that are eligible for funding, did this fact have any impact on the implementation of the project? [projects] 107

Total

100

Czech Republic

80 65

60

40 25

20

23

13 6 2

1

0 No, we did not experience such problems

Yes, we experienced such problems but they did not affect the project implementation


Yes, it caused delays in completion of some related activities

Yes, it caused the dropping of some related activities

4

2

2

0

Yes, it caused the Yes, it had a temporary negative impact on interruption of our relations some related activities

89

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. trainings

other

twinning


self-assessment



Total

capacity building

benchmarking


90

seminars



conferences






joint research




study trips

project management

transfer of tools





know-how transfer

project planning



Graph 25: Answer to the question: “If you would re-implement the same project again, which activities related to transnational cooperation would you emphasize more?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) - ordered by frequency of answers of all respondents descending

If you would re-implement the same project again, which activities related to transnational cooperation would you emphasize more? [projects]

100

Czech Republic

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

90


benchmarking

twinning

self-assessment



trainings

Total

capacity building



90



joint research



conferences


seminars






project management


study trips

transfer of tools


project planning



know-how transfer



Graph 26: Answer to the question: “If you would re-implement the same project again, which activities related to transnational cooperation would you emphasize more?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of respondents from Czech Republic descending

If you would re-implement the same project again, which activities related to transnational cooperation would you emphasize more? [projects]

100

Czech Republic

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

91

joint research

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. coordination meetings





transfer of tools


Total


project planning


20


study trips

know-how transfer



project management

capacity building

self-assessment

trainings





twinning

seminars



other


conferences

25


benchmarking


Graph 27: Answer to the question: “If you would re-implement the same project again, which activities related to transnational cooperation would you emphasize more? “ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) - ordered by frequency of answers of all respondents descending

If you would re-implement the same project again, which activities related to transnational cooperation would you drop out or significantly restrict? [projects] Czech Republic

15

10

5

0

92

joint research

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. coordination meetings


transfer of tools


project planning

study trips

Total

know-how transfer


20

project management

trainings


seminars

conferences











twinning

capacity building

self-assessment


other



25


benchmarking


Graph 28: Answer to the question: “If you would re-implement the same project again, which activities related to transnational cooperation would you drop out or significantly restrict?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of respondents from Czech Republic descending

If you would re-implement the same project again, which activities related to transnational cooperation would you drop out or significantly restrict? [projects] Czech Republic

15

10

5

0

93


Results of the questionnaire survey – question set no. 2: “managing structures” In total, there were analysed 34 questionnaires filled in by representatives of MA, NSS, the Payment Authority, the European Commission, the Monitoring Committee and politicians and policy-makers in the fields of HRD and ESF, out of which eight were from the Czech Republic (about 23.5 %).

Graph 29: Answer to the question: “How did you learn about transnational cooperation principles?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

16

How did you learn about transnational cooperation principles? [managing structures]

15

15

14 12

Total

11

10

9

Czech Republic

9 8

8

8 6

5

4

3 2

2

2

1 0


from my studies

experience of a colleague

evaluation of projects

reading methodological guides

previous experience with own transnational projects

monitoring of projects

at seminars

0

0

0

other:

1

not applicable

2

2

94

3,00

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. joint research

4,50

4,00

3,50 Average for Czech Republic

other:


self-assessment

project management

trainings

twinning




capacity building

Total average


5,00

project planning

seminars


benchmarking


conferences


study trips


5,50










transfer of tools


know-how transfer


Graph 30: Answer to the question: “What activities are in your view the most appropriate for transnational cooperation?“ (the respondents could choose from the scale from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very much so); the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of all respondents descending

What activities are in your view the most appropriate for transnational cooperation? [managing structures] from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very much so)

95

3,00

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. capacity building

other:

project management

project planning

trainings


self-assessment

seminars

Total average




5,00


conferences





twinning


benchmarking


transfer of tools




study trips

joint research




know-how transfer




Graph 31: Answer to the question: “What activities are in your view the most appropriate for transnational cooperation?“ (the respondents could choose from the scale from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very much so); the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned) – ordered by frequency of answers of respondents from Czech Republic descending

What activities are in your view the most appropriate for transnational cooperation? [managing structures]

5,50 from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very much so)


4,50

4,00

3,50

96


Graph 32: Answer to the question: “Who in your view benefits from transnational cooperation the most (in the long-term perspective)?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

20

Who benefits from transnational cooperation the most? [managing structures]

19

Total

15

Czech Republic

10

6

5

4 3

3 2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0 project partners



project management

social partners

managing authority

none of them

97


Graph 33: Answer to the question: “In your view and in comparison with projects without foreign partners, does the implementation of a project with foreign partners imply a longer duration?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

12

In your view and in comparison with projects without foreign partners, does the implementation of a project with foreign partners imply a longer duration? [managing structures] 11

10

8

Total

9

7

Czech Republic

7

6

4

2

3 2

2 1 0




up to 40%

up to 60%

0

up to 80%

0

0

more

98


Graph 34: Answer to the question: “In case that a project with transnational partnership implies a longer duration in comparison with projects that do not possess a transnational dimension, what are the phases of the transnational project requiring the allocation of more time?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

25

In case that a project with transnat. partnership implies a longer duration in comparison with projects that do not possess a transnational dimension,what are the phases of the transnat. project requiring the allocation of more time? [managing structures] 21 20

20

Total

Czech Republic

16

15 11 9

10

5

6

5 3

3

3 1

1

0 preparatory work




monitoring and implementation evaluation


2 0

other

99


higher efficiency in the use of resources

Total

increase of the efficiency of ESF implementation at the local, regional and national level

25

higher efficiency and quality of project management and implementation

high quality of project outputs

increase of the impact of projects

capacity building within the participating organizations and authorities at the regional and national level

basis for transnational comparisons

establishment of networks of stakeholders

improvements in policies and strategies aimed at eliminating inequalities on the labour market

new contacts

increase of knowledge and experience in the field

dissemination of good practice


Graph 35: Answer to the question: “What did you expect from transnational cooperation before the implementation of the programme started?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

What did you expect from transnational cooperation before the implementation of the programme started? [managing structures]

30

Czech Republic

20

15

10

5

0

100


Graph 36: Answer to the question: “In which terms did the implementation of a transnational cooperation scheme surprise you the most?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

In which terms did the implementation of a transnational cooperation scheme surprise you the most? [managing structures] 8

Total

Czech Republic

lack of beneficiaries‘ interest in transnational cooperation

6

low amount of support requested by beneficiaries

7

5 4 3 2 1


other

low quality of project outcomes

low quality of project management

high amount of support requested by beneficiaries

high quality of project outcomes

high quality of project management

high beneficiaries‘ interest in transnational cooperation

0

101


Graph 37: Answer to the question: “Did your participation to transnational cooperation management within CIP EQUAL have impacts on your own professional development/career?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

25

Did your participation to transnational cooperation management within CIP EQUAL have impacts on your own professional development/career? [managing structures] 23 Total

20

Czech Republic

15

10 6

6

5

4 1

0

Yes, positive impacts


No impacts at all

0

0

Yes, negative impacts

1

not applicable

102


Graph 38: Answer to the question: “Which requests related to transnational cooperation did you receive from implementing teams the most frequently?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

Which requests related to transnational cooperation did you receive from implementing teams the most frequently? [managing structures] 20 18 16 Total

14

Czech Republic

12 10 8 6 4 2


other

assessment







changes in timeplan


changes in budget

papers and reports

changes in project activities


advisory services


contacts

search for partners


0

103

know-how transfer

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. conferences

other:

seminars


twinning

trainings


Total



16

self-assessment




capacity building


project management

benchmarking

study trips





transfer of tools

joint research




18




project planning



Graph 39: Answer to the question: “Is there something related to the support of the transnational cooperation principle you would emphasize more in the next call for proposals?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents and also for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

What would you emphasize more in the next call for proposals? [managing structures] Czech Republic

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

104


Results of the questionnaire survey – data synthesis

Graph 40: Comparison of most often implemented activities with regard to the evaluation of suitability from the part of the members of the managing structures (the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from Czech Republic are mentioned; data for evaluation of suitability for all respondents from the ranks of the managing structures and only for Czech Republic are mentioned) - ordered by average suitability of all respondents from managing structures descending

Comparison of most often implemented activities with regard to the evaluation of suitability from the part of the members of the managing structures 200

Total

Czech Republic

Total suitabilty (6=maximum)

6,00

Suitability for Czech republic (6=maximum)

180 5,00

160 140

4,00

120 100

3,00

80 2,00

60 40

1,00



self-assessment

project management

twinning

trainings





project planning

capacity building

seminars



conferences

benchmarking


study trips

joint research







0,00 joint development of methods


transfer of tools


know-how transfer


0


20

105


Graph 41: Comparison of most often implemented activities with regard to the evaluation of suitability from the part of the members of the managing structures (the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from Czech Republic are mentioned; data for evaluation of suitability for all respondents from the ranks of the managing structures and only for Czech Republic are mentioned) - ordered by average suitability of respondents from managing structures from Czech Republic descending

Comparison of most often implemented activities with regard to the evaluation of suitability from the part of the members of the managing structures Total

200

Czech Republic



6,00

180 5,00

160 140

4,00

120 3,00

100 80

2,00

60 40

1,00


project management

trainings

project planning


seminars

self-assessment



capacity building



conferences




twinning


benchmarking


transfer of tools




study trips


joint research


0,00 joint development of new tools

know-how transfer



0


20

106


Graph 42: Comparison of most often implemented activities with regard to the evaluation of suitability from the part of the members of the managing structures (the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from Czech Republic are mentioned; data for evaluation of suitability for all respondents from the ranks of the managing structures and only for Czech Republic are mentioned) - ordered by frequency of activities usage

Comparison of most often implemented activities with regard to the evaluation of suitability from the part of the members of the managing structures 200

Total

Czech Republic


6,00


180 5,00

160 140

4,00

120 100

3,00

80 2,00

60 40

1,00


twinning


capacity building





trainings


benchmarking


joint research


0,00 implementation of foreign know-how

self-assessment




transfer of tools


study trips


seminars

project planning



project management

conferences


know-how transfer


0


c

20

107

0

Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. benchmarking

trainings

twinning


capacity building


Total


200

self-assessment





joint research





seminars


study trips

conferences

transfer of tools






project management


project planning

know-how transfer



Combining the data from Graphs 8 (activities performed most frequently), 10 (activities not performed), 25 (activities to be more emphasized) and 27 (activities to be restricted) we receive the view simulating “an ideal state“:

Graph 43: Combination of data from Graphs 8, 10, 25 and 27 (the data for all respondents and for the respondents only from the Czech Republic are mentioned)

Combination of activities performed and not performed together with possibly empesized and restricted activities

250

Czech Republic

150

100

50 c

108


Graph 44: Answer to the question: “Who in your view benefits from transnational cooperation the most (in the long-term perspective)?“ (one answer could be selected; the data for all respondents from projects and from managing structures are mentioned)

110

107

Who benefits from transnational cooperation the most? 100

90

80

Czech Republic [projects]

70

30

20

19

10

Total [managing structures] Total [projects]

28

Czech Republic [projects]; 4

40

55


50


60

Czech Republic [managing structures]

6 3

8

8 3

4

2

1

0 project partners



project management

social partners

managing authority

none of them

109


Graph 45: Answer to the question: “In your view and in comparison with projects without foreign partners, does the implementation of a project with foreign partners imply a longer duration?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents from projects and from managing structures are mentioned) – not ordered by frequency

150 140

135

In your view and in comparison with projects without foreign partners, does the implementation of a project with foreign partners imply a longer duration?

130 120 110 100

60 50 40 30 20 10

11

7


Total [projects]

Total [managing structures]

68 63


70


80

92 Czech Republic [projects]; 31

90


9

51 43

7 0




up to 40%

up to 60%

up to 80%

0 more

110


Graph 46: Answer to the question: “In case that a project with transnational partnership implies a longer duration in comparison with projects that do not possess a transnational dimension, what are the phases of the transnational project requiring the allocation of more time?“ (more options could be selected at the same time; the data for all respondents from projects and from managing structures are mentioned)

150 140 130

135

In case that a project with transnational partnership implies a longer duration in comparison with projects that do not possess a transnational dimension, what are the phases of the transnational project requiring the allocation of more time?

120 110 100 92



Total [projects]

Total [managing structures]

90 80 68

70

63

60 51 50

43

40 30 21 20

20

16

11

9

10

6

10 2

0 preparatory work



implementation


monitoring and evaluation


other

111


8.4 List of visited and interviewed contacts Name Dirk Meyer Christian Henner-Fehr Klaus Schuch Roland Hanak Alexandra Jarchanová Doleželová Andrea Šafaříková Bohumila Miškovská Hana Volfová Helena Hlabicová Jan Rychlík Jan Vavrečka Jana Chržová Jana Kostohryzová Jana Mráziková Jarmila Šagátová Jiří Zezulák Jitka Palková Josef Stiborský Kamila Andrýsková Kateřina Baladová Lenka Tvrdková Leoš Vích Lubomír Kuzník Lucie Brančíková Ludmila Bobysudová Magda Piroutková Michal Zálešák Milena Pešoutová Miroslava Pilátová Mona Nechvátalová Monika Ladmanová Radka Erbanová Radka Soukalová Tomáš Chmelař Tomáš Sokolovský Veronika Krečová Veronika Půrová Vladislav Lipus Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

Zentrum für Soziale Innovation Projekt manager Zentrum für Soziale Innovation previously responsible for EQUAL in the Ministry of Economics and Labour Gender Studies, o.p.s.

AT AT AT AT

Visit[N]/ Interview[R] N N N N

CZ

N

SONS Národní rada zdravotně postižených ČR Krásná Lípa Jihočeská hospodářská komora ÚP Semily TROAS, s.r.o. Český svaz žen (ČSŽ) Jihočeská rozvojová o.p.s. APM ČR o.s. KAZUIST,spol. s r.o. Obchodní a hospodářská komora Uherské Hradiště Hospodářská komora okresu Přerov SONS Vzdělávací společnost EDOST, s.r.o. Most ke vzdělání Krásná Lípa Rytmus Sdružení Romů Severní Moravy Svaz českých a moravských výrobních družstev Organizace pro pomoc uprchlíkům APM ČR o.s. LANGMaster Group Střední škola technická, Velebudice LANGMaster Group Moravská asociace podnikatelek a manažerek Otevřená společnost, o.p.s. Sdružení pro péči o duševně nemocné Fokus Praha o.s. České Švýcarsko Člověk hledá člověka, o.s. Centrum vizualizace a interaktivity vzdělávání Ostrava s.r.o. Sdružení Romů Severní Moravy Národní rada zdravotně postižených ČR Slezská diakonie

CZ CZ

N N

CZ CZ CZ CZ CZ CZ CZ CZ CZ

N N N R N N N N N

CZ

N

CZ CZ

N N

CZ CZ CZ CZ CZ

N N N N N

CZ

N

CZ CZ CZ

N N N

CZ CZ

N N

CZ CZ

N N

CZ CZ CZ

N N N

CZ CZ

N N

CZ

N

Organization

Country

112


Wail Khazal Zdeněk Karásek Alain Chevance Jean Pierre Cousquer Laetitia Charissoux Marcel Moriceau Michel Porta Pascal Cabaret Patricia Soussem Thyerry Debud Alison Bruton Andrew Dean Iain Willox Keren Jones Linda Butcher Liz Logan Madeleine Starr Maggie Gardener Margaret Davies Naz Malik Nicola Smith Will Thompson Antonello Gennaro Bert d'Arragon Denise Lentini Elisabetta Cani Francesco Spinetti Chiara Mellini Karin Mohr Marco Mietto Micaela Schincaglia Nicola Busi Paola Frezza Anne van Otterloo Annelies van der Horst Bert Schuilingh Brenda Gietema Claudia Doek Else Kuiper Greetje Dikkers H.J. van Asperen


IQ Roma servis DPIC-ViP s.r.o. Ostrava ARACT Bretagne Institut Breton d’Education Permanente Boutiques de Gestion CLPS Confédération générale de Sociétés Coopératives de production Ass.Rég.Formation Continue Bâtiment et Travaux - Bretagne ARACT Bretagne ARACT Bretagne Kirklees Metropolitan Council Economic Development Service Marchmont Observatory, University of Exeter Welsh Development Agency SEEDA Off the Streets & Into Work Glasgow City Council Carers UK University of Wales All Wales Ethnic Minority Association UHI Milennium Institute Inverness EQUAL GB Managing Authority and Closure Coordination Health Local Administration of Reggio nell’Emilia Provincial Administration of Pistoia Ageform Provincial Administration of Reggio nell’Emilia Provincial Administration of Pistoia Independent expert Cesre Cesre Independent expert Cides Municipal Administration Prato Kunstenaars en Co University of Maastricht ROC ID College Agency of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment Coevorden (municipality) Brekend Vatwerk Stichting ROC Drenthe Stichting Aangepaste Werkvormen O.Z.L. Der Sjtiel

CZ CZ FR FR

N N N N

FR FR FR

N N N

FR

N

FR FR GB

N N R

GB

N

GB GB GB GB GB GB GB GB

R N N R N R R R

GB GB

R R

IT

N

IT

N

IT IT

N N

IT

N

IT IT IT IT IT IT NL NL NL NL

N N N N N N R R N R

NL NL NL NL

R R R R

113


Irma van der Veen

Dienst Justitiële Inrichtingen (Ministry of Justice , Agency “Prisons” , sector “Youth”)

NL

N

Klaas Kuin Lambert van Leeuwen Louis Geelhoed

ROC ID College Stichting Edukint Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment Teamleader EQUAL of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment Centrum voor Dienstverlening (CvD) GOA Noord NV REWIN West Brabant Gewest Eemland Dienst Justitiële Inrichtingen Gemeente (municipality) Hengelo Ośrodek Praw Człowieka Director of Regional Labour Office in Krakow Żorska Izba Gospodarcza, Żory Fundacja Instytut Rozwoju Regionalnego Dom Maklerski Penetrator Instytut Spraw Publicznych Grupa Antares, Warszawa Board Member, the governor of Lodz Region Uniwersytet Warszawski, Instytut Polityki Społecznej Regional Policy Advisor, IBnGR, Gdansk Instytut MiSTiA WSB Regionalny Osrodek Polityki Społecznej Uniwersytet Warszawski, Instytut Polityki Społecznej Krajowa Izba Gospodarcza WDpF Nowolipki Fundacja Partnerstwo dla Środowiska Evaluation Expert, Qbase Stowarzyszenie Doradców Europejskich Former head of the Prime Minister Council, policy advisor Áno pre život – nezisková organizácia poskytujúca všeobecne prospešné služby Proma.s.r.o. Aspekt Dafne

NL NL NL

N R R

NL

R

NL

N

NL NL NL NL NL PL PL

R N R R R N N

PL PL

R R

PL PL PL PL

N R R N

PL

R

PL

N

PL PL PL

N R R

PL

R

PL PL PL

R R N

PL PL

N R

PL

N

SK

N

SK SK SK

N R N

Margo Kerkhof Maurice Nuijten Paul de Haas Peter Princen Silvio Milia Trudy Hoeymakers Willy van Diepen Aleksandra Kacperska Andrzej Martynuska Aneta Bagińska Anna Zebrak Bartłomiej Kindler Danuta Pławecka Dariusz Motyl manager Elżbieta Hibner Ewa Leś Jan Szomburg Jr. Joanna Zwolińska Kinga Pawłowska Magdalena Zawodna Magdalenia Kocik Mieczysław Bąk Mirosław Czyżewski Olga Gałek Sławomir Wysocki Sylwia Tałach Waldemar Rataj Anna Verešová Ing Miroslava Bukovanová Jana Cviková Kristina Jakubcová


114


8.5

Evaluation Visits Scenario

I. PREPARATION FOR THE EVALUATION VISIT/INTERVIEW 1.

The first contact with the organization (e-mail, phone call), set up the date and time of the meeting/interview, attach supporting letter from MoLSA, ask for materials (see below) Evaluator has to analyze documents BEFORE the visit/interview – basic info in ECDB and national CIP EQUAL databases, project website, materials sent by project coordinator, monitoring reports, etc. (see the list of sources prepared by Linda!!!) Introduce yourself, who you are, why you are there, what is the intention of the visit/interview, make the person/s feel comfortable, make sure they understand you are not going to evaluate their work/institution but TC only Ask for permission to record your interview, in case the person disagrees, always respect it, possible model is also to stop recording whenever the person asks for it, do not record in a case you do not need it, recording usually makes people more aware of what they are saying ;-) write INTERNAL report (only for our team purposes), in which you specify when did you make the interview, with whom, short summary of the interview, summarize your findings, observations and recommendations for us as a team (such as “next time ask for XY, lets focus on …, we need to make sure that we cover XY” etc. – we are going to SHARE our reports) Keep in mind objectives of the evaluation of TC principle Keep in mind each of selected project will become the case study, so we need to write down case studies in the proposed structure (by Aleksander) Let us know any comments, concerns, suggestions!

2.

3. 4.

5.

6. 7. 8.

FUNDAMENTAL STRUCTURE OF QUESTIONING ACCORDING TO GOALS: 1) Management authority, practice, specific experiences Basic question outline: • • •

How they communicated What issues they dealt with What issues and specific things were not resolved to satisfy project implementing partners

2) Development Partnership Content Procedure: • •

Beginning with the formulation of expectations from the DP as stated in the national DPA (this agreement should contain description, what added value should the DP bring or generate); Please, ask some questions concerning the understanding of terminology, jargon. It seems that it makes some troubles, for instance different understanding of migration, empowerment etc. were identified in other evaluations as problematic. Did it cause any troubles to them specifically in TC?


115


• • • • • • •

Reasons of failure of TC (if relevant). Poorly formulated operational objectives, missing risk assessment, unclear logic of intervention? (These are the general reasons of failure of EQUAL projects, does it correlate with failure of TC?) Map the role of the partners within the TC, there is always one partner marked as the one responsible for TC, ask about its role and roles of others, how others contributed, helped, what was the real portion of partners involved in TC? Allowing DP implementing partner themselves to structure the course of the project according to milestones and important events, influences, problem solving, decisions Allowing DP representative themselves to describe what added value they perceive in relations to their a) partners, b) target groups, c) products Allowing DP representatives themselves to interpret the most important DP outcomes as they came across in the (mandatory) internal or external evaluation (monitoring processes) Allowing DP representatives themselves to formulate what they see as the added value of the DP in terms of implementation and mainstreaming Asking complementary questions built on or following up from the questionnaire findings.

3) DP Management Questions in this area of focus shall concentrate on three management models according to the type of the DP leadership/management (leader, rotating leaderships, being lead by another partner). SCENARIO Step 1 Following the introduction of evaluation goals (not related to questions directly linked to evaluation of a specific project or its implementing party), evaluation opens with the initial idea of the transnational development partnership (hereiafter DP). Upon this, the evaluation comes back to the original DPA and goal formulated therein. For purposes of this evaluation, copy of appropriate passage from the DPA will suffice. Step 2 Developing on Step 1; should communication not run smoothly, evaluation may apply questions to stimulate own interpretation of individual points; what is most valid at this point is when the DP implementing partner structure the process, milestones, added value – in their own words. In terms of evaluation documentation of the project, copy of appropriate passages will suffice for purposes of this evaluation. Step 3 Complementary and follow up questions to Step 2 Step 4 Questions related to thematic area 3 – DP management (according to the type concerning the given DP representative)


116


Step 5 Questions related to thematic area 1 – processes related to changes in the project, action of the management authority, unresolved issues and problems, timeline context etc. Step 6 Complementary and follow up questions to the whole of the interview

COMMENTARY The interview should be conducted in a natural manner, going with the flow – we first ask about expectations, then establish an understanding/consensus that the evaluation is not focused on the project as a whole, but on one of its segments only – the DP and issues related thereto. Implementing partners have the opportunity to structure the theme themselves (issues, problem areas), nonetheless, they have to be defined clearly enough and the evaluator must prevent drifting from the theme too far. Complementary questions have been designed for thematic area 2 (DP content) which will allow to overcome the “dead-end roads” in the interview. To conclude the segment of questions dealing with thematic area 2, complementary questions have been designed and may be varied according to the previous flow/content of the interview (those that have been answered in the course of the interview will be skipped). Difficult – structured themes concerning thematic areas 1 and 3 are addressed at the end of the interview, for they may require higher level of trust and communication ease, it is however necessary to ensure that this segment of the interview is not conduced under time pressure.

Note to the draft: Detailed list of stimulation and complementary questions will be designed once we reach a consensus as to the content of this draft.


117


8.6

Template for Evaluation Visits and Interviews

EVALUATION INTERVIEWS/VISITS „Evaluation of CIP EQUAL transnational co-operation principle“ Expert name

Your name

Organization and person/s visited/interviewed Date, time, location of visit Project Title Project number Project website Project Duration Project Coordinator & contacts TC Partners Ultimate beneficiaries & contacts Total Budget Budget for TC Project Objectives Location Short Synopsis & Context Main points for evaluation • Management authority, practice, specific experiences • Development Partnership Content • Development Partnership management • Recommendations • Additional sources of information, notes Contacts arising Comments / Follow-up


Countries involved, organization, agreements If possible, provide some contacts, info who are the clients of the project outcomes; If irrelevant leave empty Estimate in % is enough (reality! not the original plan from the project proposal, add some comments if the original budget increased/decreased and why) Short list Where the TC activities of the project took place, i.e. city, region, etc., where they local, regional…?

Short summary of the main findings Please follow the scenario developed by Honza & Josef Please follow the scenario developed by Honza & Josef Please follow the scenario developed by Honza & Josef Please follow the scenario developed by Honza & Josef

Your comments for the team, next visits/interviews, etc.

118


8.7

List of Case Studies

Czech Republic Visit[N]

Interview[R]

Name of Organization

Contact

Project number

Topic [num.]

Name of Project

TCA [num.]

TCA

URL

N

Slezská diakonie

kancelář EQUAL, Viaduktová 8, 737 01 Český Těšín

CZ-21

ASSISTANCE

1A

N

RYTMUS

Bruselská 16, 120 00 Praha 2

CZ-22

Podporované zaměstnávání pro sociálně odpovědné firmy

1A

3799

MODE

www.equal.rytmus.org

N

Vzdělávací společnost EDOST, s.r.o.

Cihlářská 4132, 430 02, Chomutov

CZ-23

PENTACOM

1A

4441, 4019

Extend, Chances

www.edost.cz/RAP

N

TROAS, s.r.o.

Poznaňská 451/20 Praha 8, 181 00

CZ-32

KARAVANA

1A

3981

Beyond Silence

www.troas.cz

N

Drom, romské středisko

Bratislavská 227 602 00 Brno

CZ-29

Microbus

1A

N

SOZE

Mostecká 5/855, 614 00 Brno

CZ-24

Hedera

1A

N

SONS

Krakovská 1695, 110 00 Praha 1 www.sons.cz

CZ-25

Tyfloemploy

1A

N

Město Krásná Lípa

MÚ, Masarykova 6/246, Krásná Lípa, 407 46

CZ-27

Partnership for the centre of Bohemian Switzerland

1A

N

Národní rada zdravotně postižených ČR

Partyzánská 1 170 00 Praha 7

CZ-30

N

Sdružení Romů Severní Moravy

Palackého 607, 73506 Karviná – Nové město

CZ-80

Equal opportunities for unemployed disabled persons 1A 2005 ROMA

N

Člověk v tísni - společnost při ČT, o.p.s

Sokolovská 1869, 120 00 Praha

CZ-75

Polis

1B

N

Odborový svaz ECHO

CZ-33

NEW CHANCE

2C

N

Jihočeská hospodářská komora

DOS, nám. W.Churchilla , 13000, Praha 3 Husova 9, 370 01 České Budějovice *Jihočeská rozvojová o.p.s., Tyršova 65, 397 01 Písek

CZ-51

Mercury

2C

www.jhk.cz

N

Sdružení CEPAC MORAVA

CZ-40

Zaměstnej sám sebe

2C

www.cepac.cz

N

DC VISION, s.r.o.

CZ-39

New chance

2C

www.dcvision.cz


Jeremenkova 1142/42, 779 11, Olomouc Náměstí Republiky 2, 746 01 Opava

119

www.slezskadiakonie.cz

www.drom.cz

http://www.soze.cz/workinczech 4284, 3719

Vision=E3, SHARE

www.tyfloemploy.org

1A

4980

Employability United

www.nrzp.cz

1B

4342

R.O.A.D. (Romany Organizations for Aid and Development)

https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equa l/ jsp/tcaView.jsp?id=4342 www.clovekvtisni.cz


Visit[N]

Interview[R]


Contact

Project number

N

Rekvalifikacní a informacní centrum s.r.o.

Bánská 287 434 01 Most

CZ-36

N

Moravská asociace podnikatelek a manažerek, o.s.

Dvořákova 14, 602 00 Brno

CZ-38

N

FCH Starý Knín

N

Nový Prostor

Pod Svahem 12 147 00 Praha 4

CZ-59

N

KAZUIST,spol. s r.o.

Husova 401 73961 Třinec

N

Svaz českých a moravských výrobních družstev Sdružení pro péči o duševně nemocné Fokus Praha

N

N

N

N

Topic [num.]

Name of Project INNOSTART - Komplečxní program podpory začínajících podnikatelů ze znevýhodněných skupin v Ústeckém kraji Asistenční centra pro podporu podnikání žen a snížení rizik na začátku podnikání

TCA [num.] 3558

TELNET

www.ric-most.cz

2C

4373

TASE Transnational Approaches to Sustaining Entrepreneurshi p

http://www.mapm.cz/?page=27lan g=cs

2C

CZ-35

Beskydy pro všechny

2D

3954

Václavské náměstí 21 113 60 Praha 1

CZ-42

Sociální družstvo a podnik

2D

3883

Dolákova 24 180 00 Praha

CZ-64

Rozvoj sociální firmy

2D

3938

RPIC-ViP s.r.o.

Výstavní 2224 709 00 Ostrava

CZ-43

Competencies for Labour Market (Kompetence pro trh práce)

3E

3940, 4372

Centrum vizualizace a interaktivity vzdělávání Ostrava s.r.o. (dříve Free Art Records s.r.o.) Člověk hledá člověka, o.s.

Bohumínská 788 710 00 Ostrava

CZ-45

Pro plný život

3E

4382

Nadace Terezy Maxové Na Florenci 19, 110 00 Praha 1 * Člověk hledá člověka, o.s. Klimentská 1246/1, 110 00 Praha 1

CZ-46

Najdi svůj směr

3E

4371


120

URL

2C

Heart of Bohemia and charity social services in the countryside 2C 2004 Human Resources Development Interface

CZ-57

TCA

2D

www.novyprostor.cz

Inclusion through entrepreneurshi p (ITE) – Inkluze prostřednictvím podnikání NEU Entrepreneurs

http://www.bezchyby.cz

BUILDING BRIDGES between people, policies and enterprises 3940 North Devon College (Skills Analysis) 4372 Maria Joao Rauch Roads from Silence – Cesty z ticha

www.fokus-praha.cz

Happy Smiling People Holistic Approches for Young People

www.clovekhledacloveka.cz

www.azzpcr.cz/equal/seznam.php

www.mamenato.cz

http://proplnyzivot.osu.cz


Visit[N]

Interview[R]


Contact

Project number

Topic [num.]

Name of Project

TCA [num.]

TCA

URL

N

Úřad práce v Semilech

Bořkovská 572 513 01 Semily

CZ-47

Facilitation of lifelong education in rural conditions

3E

4053

REAL

www.krakonos.com

N

IQ Roma servis

Hybešova 41, 602 00 Brno

CZ-48

Partnerství pro úspěch Romů na trhu práce

3E

3701

TOGETHER AND ACROSS

N

Expertis

Kafkova 605/16, Praha 6,160 00

CZ-72

Third Career

3E

http://www.iqrs.cz/search.php?rsv elikost=sab&rstext=all-phpRSall&rstema=44 www.expertis.cz

N

LANGMaster Group, s.r.o.

Branická 107, Praha 4, 14700

CZ-53

Chance for Teleworking

3F

www.langmaster.cz

N

Obchodní a hospodářská komora

Studentské náměstí 1531 686 01 Uherské Hradiště

CZ-56

JOB POINTS

3F

www.ohkuh.cz

N

Český svaz žen (Czech Women's Union)

Nekázanka 16-18 111 53 Praha 1

CZ-67

MOPPS DP

4G

4201

Balancing Life in Europe

http://www.csz.cz/sekce/ProjektyCeskeho-svazu-zen/Modelovyprogram-podpory-sladovaniprofesniho-a-rodinneho-zivotakraj-Vysocina

N

Střední škola technická

Dělnická 21 434 80 Most - Velebudice

CZ-69

BACK TO THE FUTURE

4G

4468

FUTURE

www.iks-navraty.cz

N

Gender Studies, o. p. s.

Gorazdova 20 120 00 Praha 2

CZ-76

4H

3562, 4435

VEGA, EWA

www.rovneprilezitosti.cz

N

Otevřená společnost, obecně prospěšná společnost

Prokopova 9 Seifertova 47 130 00 Praha 3

CZ-77

Role of equal opportunities for women and men in prosperity of the society ProEquality

4H

4010, 4056

WOMEN AGREEMENT, G.L.A.D.

www.otevrenaspolecnost.cz

N

Úřad práce Brno - venkov

Šujanovo náměstí 7/3 660 35 Brno

CZ-66

Net 2005

N

Organizace pro pomoc uprchlíkům

Kovářská 4, Praha 9, 190 00

CZ-105

Work in Prag

4472

AIM Acceptance Integration Migrants

www.opu.cz


5

121


Slovakia Visit[N]

Intervi ewR]


Contact

Project number

Name of Project

Topic [num.]

TCA [num.]

TCA

URL

N

PROMA, Ltd.

Bytčická 2 010 01 Žilina

SK 79

1A

https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/dpComplete.js p?cip=SK&national=79#national_partner_0

No reaction

Únia nevidiacich a slabozrakých

Sekulská 1 842 50 Bratislava

SK 91

1A

http://www.sizar-vision.sk/ , https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/dpComplete.js p?cip=SK&national=91

N

Agency EUROFORMES, non-profitable org.

Vysokoškolákov 4 010 08 Žilina

SK 25

2D

https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/dpComplete.js p?cip=SK&national=25

N

Áno pre život nezisková organizácia poskytujúca všeobecne prospešné služby

Adresa: ul. Farská 543/2, 013 13 Rajecké Teplice

SK 32

2D

http://www.anoprezivot.sk/project-equal,31.html

N

Únia centier prevencie a pomoci DAFNÉ

Zátočná 221 013 13 Rajecké teplice

SK 55

1B

http://www.dafne.sk/equal/

No reaction

Nadácia Milana Šimečku

Panenská 4 811 03 Bratislava

SK 73

1B

http://www.clovekvtisni.sk/index.php?clanok=16#, https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/dpComplete.js p?cip=SK&national=73

Does not exist

Európska rómska pracovná agentúra

Dunajská 4-6, 811 08 Bratislava

SK 45

4H

http://www.erpa.sk/?id=5&lang=sk

N

Aspekt

Mýtna 38 811 07 Bratislava

SK 41

4H

http://www.ruzovyamodrysvet.sk/sk/spodnemenu/kontakt


122


Poland Visi t [N]

Inte rvie w[R ] R


Contact

Project number

Name of Project

Top ic [nu m.] 2D

TC A [nu m.] 1

Uniwersytet Warszawski, Instytut Polityki Społecznej

Prof. dr hab. Ewa Leś Eles@gospodarka spoleczna.pl

PL 57

„Tu jest praca” („We have jobs”)

R

Krajowa Izba Gospodarcza, ul. Trebacka, Warszawa

Mieczyslaw Bąk [email protected]

PL117

Fair Play Employment (Zatrudnienie Fair Play. Promocja kultury przedsiębiorczości i etyki rynku pracy

3F

R

Regionalny Osrodek Polityki Społecznej, Kraków

Joanna Kubik [email protected]

PL-37

Ośrodek Praw Człowieka, UJ Kraków

Jadwiga Mączyńska, UJ, [email protected]

PL-94

Academy of Entrepreneurship. Development of alternative forms of employment” (Akademia Przedsiębiorczości.Rozwój alternatywnych form zatrudnienia) Edukacja dla Integracji – Partnerstwo na Rzecz Uchodźców (EDI) [Education for Integration – Partnership for Refugees (EDI)]

R

WSB Nowy Sącz

Kinga Pawłowska Kepawloska@gmai l.com

PL-82

R

Instytut Spraw Publicznych, Warszawa

PL-41

R

Żorska Izba Gospodarcza, Żory

Anita Sobanska, Anita.sobanska@i sp.org.pl Aneta Bagińska, [email protected]

R

Grupa Antares, Warszawa

Dariusz Motyl, dariusz.motyl@gru paantares.com.pl

PL-112

R

Fundacja Instytut Rozwoju Regionalnego, Kraków

Anna Waszkielewicz, Anna.Waszkielewi [email protected]

PL-5

N


PL-32

TCA

URL

4344 Seed

www.tujestpraca.pl www.equalseed.eu

1

4216 Access

www.praca.fairplay.pl

2D

1

4915 European Enterprise

www.akademiaequal.pl

5

2

www.opc.uj.edu.pl/eq ual

Partnerstwo na rzecz rozwoju kompetencji informatycznych w Polsce (Partnership for the development of ICT competences in Poland)

3F

2

4515 Trialogue, 4399 Integrated Ways TCA: 4533 PAEE, TCA: 4219 COMPETE RE

W stronę polskiego modelu gospodarki społecznej budujemy nowy Lisków (PROJECT LIFE Local Inclusion for Everyone Dynamism and experience - joint change piloting (Dynamizm i doświadczenie – wspólne sterowanie zmianą) Partnership without uniform. Partnership for economic activation of persons living in areas left by military basis (SZANSA BEZ MUNDURU - Partnerstwo na rzecz aktywizacji zawodowej mieszkańców terenów powojskowych) Partnership for the Increase of Blind Persons to the Labour Market (Partnerstwo na Rzecz Zwiększenia Dostępności Rynku Pracy dla Osób Niewidomych) Vision=E3

2D

1

TCA 3557 Trailer

www.liskow.org.pl

3F

1

TCA 4359

www.equal.zory.pl www.intermentoring.pl

1A

1

TCA 4072

http://equal.grupaanta res.com.pl/

1A

1

TCA 4284

www.firr.org.pl

123

www.itqual.pl


Visi t [N]

Inte rvie w[R ] R

R

Name of Organization Stowarzyszenie Doradców Europejskich, Plineu, Kraków

WDpF Nowolipki, Warszawa

N

Fundacja Partnerstwo dla Środowiska, Kraków

N

Dom Maklerski Penetrator, Miodowa, Kraków

N

Instytut MiSTiA, Na Szlaku, Kraków

Contact Katarzyna Piecuch, Katarzyna.Piecuch @plineu.org Mirosław Czyżewski, chief project coordinator, [email protected] Andrzej Biederman, Andrzej.Biderman @epce.org.pl Waldemar Zych, chief project coordinator, Waldemar.Zych@p enetrator.com.pl Jacek Kwiatkowski, Jacek.Kwiatkowski @mistia.org.pl

Project number

Name of Project

Top ic [nu m.] 4G

TC A [nu m.] 1

TCA 4247

http://equal.plineu.org

TCA

URL

PL-92

Kompromis na rynku pracy (Compromise on the Labour Market)

PL-19

Face to face with Labour market – Transitional Employment (Twarzą w twarz z rynkiem pracy. Model zatrudnienia przejsciowego)

1A

1

TCA 4354

www.twarzawtwarz.pl

PL-48

Gospodarka Społeczna na Bursztynowym Szlaku (Social Economy in the Amber Path)

2D

2

TCA 4003 and TCA 4164

http://equal.szlakburs ztynowy.pl

PL-35

Krakowska Inicjatywa na rzecz Gospodarki Społecznej Cogito (Krakow Initiative for Social Economy Cogito)

2D

2

TCA 4124 and TCA 4522

www.cogito-equal.org

PL 36

Możemy więcej (We Can More)

2D

3

TCA 3917, TCA 4448, TCA 4690

http://www.mozemywi ecej.pl/

The Netherlands Vi siz s[ N]

N

Inte rvie ws[ R] R

Stichting Edukint

Roessinghbleekweg 33 , 7522 AH Enschede Mr. Lambert van Leeuwen , director of the Institute.

A0027

R

Gewest Eemland

Postbus 4000 , 3800 EA Amersfoort

ROC ID College

Bredewater 22 , 2715 CA Zoetermeer Telephone 0031 715 353 399 (Mr. Klaas Kuin)



Contact

Project number

Name of project

Topic [numer]

TCA [num.]

Jobcomposer

Activering

4215

Working towards diversity (NL, AU, GE, UK)

www.ocr.nl

E0011

Met Talent

Activering

4420

www.rocmn.nl

A0075

Tripple WIN

Activering

3886

Pro Diversity (NL, GE, GR, ES) New labour market possibilities (NL, DE, GE, ES)

124

TCA

URL

www.equallabour.c om


Vi siz s[ N] N

Inte rvie ws[ R]


Contact

Project number

Name of project

Topic [numer]

TCA [num.]

TCA

URL

Dienst Justitiële Inrichtingen (Ministry of Justice , Agency “Prisons” , sector “Youth”)

Postbox 30132 , 2500 GC Den Haag

A0059

Match

Activering

3855

New Horizons (NL, UK, ET, FI, FR, IT, PL)

Centrum voor Dienstverlening (CvD)

Glashaven 42 te 3011 XJ Rotterdam

A0022

Home Sweet Home

Activering

4013

Home@work (NL, CZ, PL)

www.cvd.nl

R

GOA Noord

Leonard Springerlaan 5A , 9727 KB Groningen

E0013

Golden oldies in the infra

Leren & Werken

3934

Age value (NL, FR, CZ, IR, SW)

www.goanoord.nl

R

Brekend Vatwerk

Van Beuningenstraat 84 D , 1015XS Amstrdam

F0005

My portfolio online

Leren & Werken

3553

www.webindewijk.n l/equal

R

Stichting Aangepaste Werkvormen O.Z.L. Der Sjtiel

Casinolaan 6 , 6372 XG Landgraaf

E0053

Autorestaurati e project

Leren & Werken

4208

Vit@l Society, Technology for people (NL, LT, UK) Creating opportinities (NL, ES, IT)

R

Stichting ROC Drenthe

Postbus 173 , 7800 AD Emmen

E0012

SPARK

4210

A.V.E (NL, AU, SW, HU)

www.drenthecolleg e.nl

R

Gemeente (municipality) Hengelo

Hazenweg 121 , 7556 BM Hengelo

A0033

Couleur Twente

4188

TALE (NL, GE, ES, PL)

www.hengelo.nl

R

Dienst Justitiële Inrichtingen

G0009

Toekomst in balans

Integratie en Arbeidsmar kt Integratie en Arbeidsmar kt Gelijke Kansen

3805

www.transitions-inprison.net

R

University of Maastricht

Postbus 616 , 6200 MD Maastricht

H0014

Gelijke Kansen

4080

NV REWIN West Brabant

Mozartlaan 7 te Breda (PO-Box 3182 / 4800 DD Breda)

C0013

Onderneme rschap

3709

Entrepreneurs Unlimited! (NL, ES, IT)

www.westtop.nl

Coevorden (municipality)

Aleida Kramersingel 4 , 7741 GE Coevorden

D0001

Participatie van vrouwen als prioriteit in de wetenschap West Brabants Training Ondernemersv aardigheden Programma Sociaal Contract

Transitions in Prison (NL, GE, HU, UK) Equality by degree(NL, BE, ES, UK)

Onderneme rschap

4020

S.O.A.P.S. (NL, FI, IT, PL)

www.emmen.nl

N

N

R


125

www.sjtiel.nl

www.priorityforparti cipation.org


Vi siz s[ N]

Inte rvie ws[ R] R

Name of Organization Kunstenaars en Co

Project number

Contact Nieuwe Herengracht 19 , 1011 SB Amsterdam

D0008

Name of project Kunst Werk-t in de tertiaire sector

Topic [numer]

TCA [num.]

Onderneme rschap

4427

TCA Skills through the art (NL, UK, HU, IT)

URL www.kunstenaarse nco.nl

United Kingdom Vis its[ N]

Int erv iew s[R ]


Contact

Project number

Name of Project

To pic [nu m.]

TCA [nun. ]

TCA

URL

N

Carers UK

20 Great Dover Street in London SE1 4LX

UKgb091

ACE National

3563

We care, do you? (UK, ES, LV, NL, IT)

www.caresronline.o rg.uk

N

Marchmont Observatory, University of Exeter

St Luke’s Campus, Exeter EX4 7EH

UKgb099

High Road UK

3613

www.tuc.org.uk

N

SEEDA

Cross Lane , Guildford , Surrey

UKgb138

Exodus

3663

The Diversity, Equality and Access to Learning (DEAL) Partnership (UK, AT, FI, FR) CARAVEL

N

Off the Streets & Into Work

4th Floor The Pavilion , 1 Newhams Row , London SE1 3UZ

UKgb140

3963

4 Inclusion

www.osw.org.uk

Glasgow City Council

Liz Logan, Network Director Glasgow City Council

UKgb156

Tackling Multiple Disadvantage in London RE:Focus

3740

M.A.I.S.H.A.(= More Abilities, Integration, Skills and Higher Ambitions)

www.m.a.i.s.h.a.co m

R


126

www.seeda.org.uk


Vis its[ N]

Int erv iew s[R ]


Contact

Project number

Name of Project

To pic [nu m.]

TCA [nun. ]

TCA

URL

(UK, IT, GE)

R

Welsh Development Agency

Plas Glyndwr , Kingsway , CF10 3AH Cardiff

UKgb181

Cyfenter 2Development Partnership Hi Hopes

3808

R

UHI Milennium Institute Inverness

Nicola Smith SDB Project Officer

UKgb159

R

Kirklees Metropolitan Council Economic Development Service All Wales Ethnic Minority Association

Civic Centre III , Huddersfield , HD1 2EY

UKgb133

Common Ground – Breaking New Ground Curiad Calon Cymru

3930

Suite 1, 1st Floor , St David's House , CF10 1ES Cardiff

UKgb182

R

Scottisc Council For Voluantary Organisations

Floor 3 Centrum Building , 38 Queen Street , G1 3DX Glasgow

UKgb155

Social Economy Scotland

4124

R

University of Wales

Margaret Davies margaret,[email protected]

UKgb170

Equinex

3864

No reaction

Ukgb130

Progress

3733

M.E.E.T.

No reaction

UKgb175

A.C.C.O.R.D.

3800

Primavera

No reaction

UKgb157

Equal Access

4163

Fit For Work

No reaction

UKgb083

Agender

4170

Wings

R


127

3852

4049

Dr. Bernd Curtius (UK, GE, PT, SW) Hackers for Equality (UK, SW, SL)

www.wales.gsi.com

Fair Ground (UK, AT, CZ, SW) FOR M.O.S.T. (UK, FI, CZ, ES, NL) Social Economy Exchange Network (UK, FI, IT, PL) Ireland-WalesEstonia (UK, IR, ET)

www.kirklees.gov.u k

---

www.awema.uk www.socialeconom yscotland.info


France Vis it[ N]

Int erv iew [R]


Contact

Project number

Name of Project

Topi c[nu m]

TCA [num .]

TCA

URL

Institut Breton d’Education Permanente Ass.Rég.Formation Continue Bâtiment et Travaux - Bretagne Boutiques de Gestion

[email protected] [email protected]

FRBRE200441551

Nouvelles coopérations régionales pour la qualification et l'intégration en entreprise

1A

4123

NEXT2 (FR, ES, HU, IT)

---

[email protected]

Maillages

2C

3621

Confédération générale de Sociétés Coopératives de production

[email protected]

Economie sociale et territoire (EST) : Emploi, Services, Égalité

2D

4214

N

CLPS ARACT Bretagne

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

FRBRE200443628

Ages et travail

3E

3931 4157

ENTRE - Transitions Towards Entrepreneurship (PT, FR, CZ, BE) TESEO- Territoire, Economie Sociale, Egalité de chance Opportunité d’emploi (IT, FR, ES) TCA(1): Compétences et territoire (FR, IT) TCA(2): Ages and Work - Intersectional Job Rotation (FR, NL)

http://www.m aillages.fr/

N

FRNAT200443921 FRNAT200443115

N

N


128

http://www.eq ualfuoriorario. it/efqtrans.ht ml ---


Italy Vis it[ N]

Int erv iew [R]

N


Contact

Project num.

Topi c[nu m.]

Name of Project

TCA [num]

TCA

URL

Cesre Provincial Administration of Reggio nell’Emilia Health Local Administration of Reggio nell’Emilia Ageform Cides

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

IT-ITG2EMI002

ALUNGO. Percorsi personalizzati di inserimento e stabilizzazione nel lavoro

1A

4194

AGIL-E (DE, IT, AT, LT)

http://www.alu ngo.eu/index2. html

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

INCLUDENDO

2D

4274

Includendo&Acreditar (IT, PT)

N

Provincial Administration of Pistoia

[email protected]. it [email protected]

IT-ITG2EMI028 IT-ITG2TOS049

FLO.VI.TUR - sviluppo rurale sostenibile ed integrato

3E

4166

Agri-able: Competencies in European Agriculture (IT, DE, PT)

N

Municipal Administration Prato


IT-ITG2TOS060

Tempo

4H

4264

Equal time (IT, ES, FR)

http://www.con sulenzasociale .it/equal2/index _eq.htm http://xrl.us/kkc fs http://www.irip atoscana.it/2.1 2.0.0.1.0.phtml http://progettot empo.comune. fi.it/

N

Austria Visit [N]

Interview [R] R

Name of Organization Zentrum für Soziale Innovation


Contact Linke Wienzeile 246 A-1150 Wien

Project number AT_1A_01

Name of Project ELDERLY

Topic [num.] 1A

129

TCA [num.]

TCA

URL http://www.elderly.at/


8.8

Template for Case Studies

CASE STUDY NO. --/COUNTRY „Evaluation of CIP EQUAL transnational co-operation principle“ Section I: Information about the organization, DP, and TCA Organization name Address Legal form, size, type Project Title and no. Project / TC website Project Duration DP Coordinator TCA name/s and no. TC Coordinator/s TC Partners

Organization you interviewed – point of view for the CS

National project, i.e. DP National project, i.e. DP duration / duration of TC if differs

Who was a secretary for given TCA/s Number of partners: Name, country, name of the national DP

Section II: TCA Objectives

Activities

Outcomes Budget

Ultimate beneficiaries (target groups) Crucial tests Sustainability

How were TC objectives formulated in the plan and what was the reality, what makes the difference and why. How were TC objectives connected with national DP objectives, what were the expectations of DPs and TC partners? How TC objectives influenced DP objectives and vice versa. How did TC partners achieve TCA objectives, what were the activities which provided the most of the TC success? What activities where unsuccessful and why? What is recommended by TCA members to include in TC activities? What was the real outcome from the TC? Budget for entire TC, share of it by interviewed organization, budget for DP and % of it dedicated to TC - Estimate in % is enough (reality! not the original plan from the TCA, commentary why the budget increased/decreased, was the share of TC financing equal, why not, did it cause any problems etc.) Who benefited from the TC? Only TCA members? National DP partners? Politicians? DP target groups? What role had local players in negotiations? How results from TCA filtered down to the level of national activities? What challenges did the TC faced Is there any intention to continue with started TC and activities, and why yes/not

Section III: Environment Influences History

Criteria for setting up TC rules EQUAL environment


social problems and challenges which had inspired the project, motivations, role of those not directly involved in the TC or national project origins of the initiative, contacts, where did they found partners / contacts / information, criteria for matching (selecting partners) (goals, values, countries, previous experience, type of organization… etc.), estimation of the length of necessary incubation period, involvement of national partners, policy makers and other players in the establishment of the TC criteria for allocation of responsibilities Managing authority support, use of National support structure, National thematic networks, EQUAL guides, etc. – requirements, quality of support, constrains, recommendations

130


Section IV: Processes Management Communication Planning

Evaluation

Managing model for the TC, division of work, ways of reaching TC goals Models, interesting tools, language and terminology troubles How and why did they plan activities in such and such way, did the plan change, could it change, how did they make sure they fulfil the plan and in the same way they reach their goals, how did they solve situations when their plan did not match the reality, how did they make changes, who made decisions, when did they intervene and why, how did they monitor the plan Did they evaluate themselves, which methods and why did they use, how did they use the outcomes from evaluations, how it was connected to project cycle

Section V: Conclusions Recommendations

Comments / Follow-up


For Managing Authorities, for TC partners, for potential applicants formulated by project partners / team leaders / responsible for TC during the interviews Your comments for the team, interconnections with other case studies

131


8.9 Structured list of Information Sources 8.9.1 Framework and strategic documents •

Návrh Národního rozvojového plánu České republiky 2007-2013 [Draft of the National Development Plan of the Czech Republic from 2007 to 2013] [online]. [Praha] : Ministerstvo

pro místní rozvoj, leden 2006 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 206 p. This draft was accepted by the Government of the Czech Republic on 22nd February 2006 (government decree no. 175/2006). URL: .

•

Národní strategický referenční rámec ČR 2007-2013 [National Strategic Reference Framework of the Czech Republic from 2007 to 2013] [online]. [Praha] : Ministerstvo pro místní rozvoj, červenec 2007 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 137 p. URL: .

•

The principle of transnational and interregional cooperation in the new ESF programmes : a framework for programming [online]. Report by an ad hoc working group of Member States

on Transnational and Interregional Cooperation. EQUAL Managing Authorities, June 2006 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 24 p. URL: . •

ESF support to transnational cooperation 2007-2013 [online]. European Commission,

•

Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006 laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999. Official Journal of the European Union [online]. L210, 31.7.2006, p. 25-78 [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: (in English) or (in Czech).

•

Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European Social Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999. Official Journal of the European Union [online]. L210, 31.7.2006, p. 12-18 [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: .

•

Czech Republic. Zákon č. 435 ze dne 13. května 2004 o zaměstnanosti [Act no. 435 from 13th May 2004 on employment]. Sbírka zákonů Česká republika. 2004, částka 143, p. 8270-8316. Also available at URL: (original text) or (current/consolidated text).

•

Czech Republic. Zákon č. 108 ze dne 14. března 2006 o sociálních službách [Act no. 108 from 14th March 2006 on social services]. Sbírka zákonů Česká republika. 2006, částka 37, p. 1257-1289. Also available at URL: (original text).

•

Czech Republic. Zákon č. 40 ze dne 17. prosince 2003 o veřejných zakázkách [Act no. 40 from 17th December 2003 on public procurement]. Sbírka zákonů Česká republika. URL: or (current/consolidated text).

•

Czech Republic. Zákon č. 218 ze dne 27. července 2000 o rozpočtových pravidlech a o změně některých souvisejících zákonů [Act no. 218 from 27th July 2000 on budgeting rules and on

Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities, DG [cit. 2008-04-07]. 8 p. URL: .


132


change of other related acts]. Sbírka zákonů Česká republika. 2000, částka 65, p. 3140-3128. URL: (original text). •

Czech Republic. Ministry of Labour and Social Affaires. Práce a právo [Labour and law] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

International Labour Organization. National Labour Law Profile: The Czech Republic [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

Czech Republic. Právní předpisy : portál o veřejných zakázkách a koncesích [Legislation : public procurement and trading licences portal] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

International Labour Organization. National Labour Law Profile: Italy [online]. [cit. 2008-0415]. URL: .

•

Germany. Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales. Arbeitsrecht [Labour law] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

International Labour Organization. National Labour Law Profile: Federal Republic of Germany [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

United Kingdom. Employees : Directgov – Employment [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

Poland. Ministry of Labour and Social Affaires. Obowiązujące Akty Prawne [Binding legislation] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

France. Ministry of Labour, Social Relations, Family and Solidarity. Fiches pratiques [Useful

documents] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
solidarite.gouv.fr/informations-pratiques/fiches-pratiques/>. •

Slovakia. Ministry of Labour, Social Affaires and Family. Kľúčové zákony [Key laws] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

Slovakia. Verejné obstarávanie [Public procurement] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

Slovakia. Zákon č. 25 zo 14. decembra 2005 o verejnom obstarávaní a o zmene a doplnení niektorých zákonov [Act no. 25 from 14th December 2005 on public procurement and change and amendments to other acts]. Zbierka zákonov. 2006, částka 14, p. 142-204. Also available at URL: .

•

Austria. Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour. Labour law [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .


133


•

Spain. Ministry of Labour and Social Affaires. Trabajo y empleo [Labour and employment] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

Netherlands. Ministry of Social Affaires and Labour. Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid [Ministry of Social Affaires and Labour] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: or
•

Portugal. Ministry of Labour and Social Solidarity. Legislação – Emprego [Legislation - Labour] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

Portugal. CITE. Legislação nacional [National Legislation] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

other relevant European Council regulations

•

other relevant documents issued by the Government of the Czech Republic and other ten EU countries on which this evaluation focuses

•

other relevant EU legislation

8.9.2 Programme documents and methodical aids •

Programming documents in the Member States [online]. [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL:

•

Informace pro příjemce dotace [Information for beneficiaries] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-07].

•

Program Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL [Community Initiative Programme EQUAL] [online].

•

Evropský sociální fond ČR : Mezinárodní spolupráce [online]. Praha : Ministerstvo práce

•

Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions establishing the guidelines for the second round of the Community Initiative EQUAL concerning transnational cooperation to promote new means of combating all forms of discrimination and inequalities in connection with the labour market “Free movement of good ideas” [online]. Brussels :

.

URL: .

Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí ČR, aktualizace: 6.10.2005 [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: .

a sociálních věcí, aktualizace: 11.4.2008 [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

European Commission, 30.12.2003 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 25 s. URL: . COM(2003) 840 final.

•

Communication from the Commission to the member states establishing the guidelines for the Community Initiative EQUAL concerning transnational co-operation to promote new means of combating all forms of discrimination and inequalities in connection with the labour market [online]. Brussels : European Commission, 14.04.2000 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 16 p. URL: . C (2000) 853.

•

Operační program Lidské zdroje a zaměstnanost 2007-2013 [Operational Programme Human Resources and Employability] [online]. Praha : Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí ČR, září 2007 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 184 s. URL: .

•

Prováděcí dokument Operačního programu Lidské zdroje a zaměstnanosti [Implementation Guide for the Operational Programme Human Resources and Employability] [online]. [Praha] :

Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí ČR, leden 2008 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 117 p. URL: .


134


•

Příručky platné pro OP LZZ pro programové období 2007 – 13 [Guides for Operational Programme Human Resources and Employability from 2007 to 2013] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-

07]. URL: . •

EQUAL Guide on Transnational Co-operation 2004-2008 [online]. European Commission, 2004 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 27 s. Includes examples of Transnational Co-operation Agreements. URL: (in English) or (in Czech).

•

EQUAL Guide on Transnationality [online]. European Commission, c2001, January 2002 [cit.

•

EQUAL Guide for Development Partnerships : Learning from the experience of EQUAL partnerships [online]. Luxembourg : Office for Official Publications of the European

2008-04-07]. 109 p. URL: .

Communities, 2005 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 42 p. URL: (in English) or (in Czech). ISBN 92-79-00135-3 (printed version). •

EQUAL Partnership Development Toolkit : A partnership oriented planning, monitoring and evaluation guide for facilitators of EQUAL Development and Transnational Partnerships

[online]. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2005 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 57 p. URL: . ISBN 9279-00177-9. •

ESF France National Level: Transnational Measures : Call for Projects 2008 [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: , or .

•

Peer Support Meeting, Prague, 16 January 2008 [online]. [cit. 2008-05-15]. 10 p. Available via

•

Doporučení pro zajištění mezinárodní spolupráce podporované v rámci ESF v novém programovém období 2007-2013 [Recommendations concerning the implementation of transnational cooperation within ESF during the new programming period 2007-2013]

ESF Forum. URL: .

[online]. [cit. 2008-05-15]. 3 p. Available via ESF Forum. URL: . •

Formulář návrhu globálního grantu OP LZZ [OP Human Resources and Employment Glogal Grant Proposal Form] [online]. [cit. 2008-05-15]. 14 p. In Czech only. Available via ESF Forum. URL: .

•

Výzva pro předkládání grantových projektů OP LZZ [OP Human Resources and Employment Call for Proposals] [online]. [cit. 2008-05-15]. 9 p. Available via ESF Forum. URL: <.

•

programming documents and guides for beneficiaries (for Human Resources and Employment) from other member states (addresses of national websites are available at http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/esf/index_en.htm)

8.9.3 Evaluation and monitoring reports •

Ex-ante evaluace operačního programu Lidské zdroje a zaměstnanost pro období 2007-2013 : závěrečná zpráva [Ex-ante evaluation of the operation programme Human Resources and


135


Employability from 2007 to 2013 : final report] [online]. Ostrava : prosinec 2006 [cit. 200804-07]. 41 p. URL: .

•

Summary report of the analysis of EQUAL TCAs involving the Enterpreneurship Theme

•

Závěrečná zpráva prvního kola Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL České republiky [Final Report : Phase 1 of the first round of Community Initiative EQUAL in the Czech Republic] [online].

[online]. 07/04/08 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 11 p. URL: .

Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí, červen 2007 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 50 p. URL: .

•

Závěrečná zpráva : První etapa průběžného hodnocení Programu Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL [Final Report : Phase 1 of the continuous evaluation of Community Initiative Programme EQUAL] [online]. Euro Service Group, Auditcom, Intermundia, prosinec 2005 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 75 p., 12 p. of annexes. URL: .

•

Závěrečná zpráva : Druhá etapa průběžného hodnocení Programu Iniciativy Společenství EQUAL [Final Report : Phase 2 of the continuous evaluation of Community Initiative Programme EQUAL] [online]. Euro Service Group, Auditcom, Intermundia, prosinec 2006 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 145 s. Four annexes available as separate files at http://www.equalcr.cz/clanek.php?lg=1&id=612. URL: .

•

ECDB Statistics [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL:

•

EQUAL ongoing evaluation - The 3rd Phase 2007-08 - Steering Group [online]. Internal

•

Evaluation and EQUAL [online]. [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: .

•

ETCIM [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-15]. Includes Transnational Cooperation Agreements (TCAs) of all projects. URL: (access to be provided by the client).

•

EQUAL Extranet [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-15]. Many documents available to the public

•

Employment and Social Affaires – Evaluation [online]. ESF [cit. 2008-04-15]. Especially EU

•

DUELL, Nicola. Synthesis of the Evaluation Reports of the EQUAL Programmes in the EUR-10 Member States submitted to the Commission within 2006 and 2007 [online]. Draft. Munich

.

documents from an ongoing EQUAL evaluation (access to ESF Forum available from Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs of the Czech Republic to team members – on request via a web registration form). URL: .

(without login and password). URL: .

wide evaluation of the CI EQUAL 2000-2006. URL: .

(Germany) : Economix Research & Consulting, 12th October 2007 [cit. 2008-05-15]. 89 p. Available via ESF Forum. URL: .

•

GRAVESTEIJN, José et al. GELIJK IN ARBEID DOOR VERNIEUWEND BELEID : TWEEDE MIDTERM EVALUATIE VAN HET EQUAL-PROGRAMMA [online]. Rotterdam (Netherlands) : SEOR, November 2005 [cit. 2008-05-15]. [cit. 2008-05-15]. 172 p. + annexes. In Dutch only. Available via ESF Forum. URL: .


136


•

monitoring data from the technical and financial monitoring report of individual projects (acces to MSSF Monit – to be provided by the client)

8.9.4 Guides about evaluation and project management •

Influential evaluations : detailed case studies [online]. Washington (DC, USA) : World Bank Operations Evaluation Department, January 2005 [cit. 2008-09-12]. vi, 73 s. URL: .

•

JICA Guideline for Project Evaluation (September 2004) [online]. Tokyo : Japan International

•

Management-Focused Monitoring and Evaluation (Participants Workbook for JICA/WBI Joint Distance Learning Course on Evaluation) [online]. Tokyo : Japan International Cooperation

Cooperation Agency, September 2004 [cit. 2008-09-12]. URL: .

Agency, c1995-2007 [cit. 2008-09-12]. URL: . •

Příprava a řízení projektů aneb Jak řídit projektový cyklus : manuál [online] Praha : NROS, 2003 [cit. 2008-09-12]. 64 s. English original by: Centre for International Development and Training (CIDT), University of Wolverhampton. URL: .

•

International Conference "Ensuring Effective Performance Through Evaluation" [online]. [cit.

•

Discussion of the use of the OECD/DAC Criteria for International Development Evaluations. Monitoring and Evaluation NEWS [online]. 18 August, 2008 – 8:34 am [cit. 2008-09-12]. URL: .

2008-09-12]. URL: .

8.9.5 Research and studies •

SANTOS, Ruth. An investment in Europe’s present and future : The added value of Transnational Co-operation at Project level under EQUAL [online]. ECOTEC Research and Consulting Ltd. [cit. 2008-04-07]. 4 s. URL: .

•

EQUAL Success Stories : Development Partnerships working against discrimination and inequality in Europe [online]. Luxembourg : Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,

September 2005 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 65 s. URL: . ISBN 92-7900180-9 (printed version). •

EQUAL, Free Movement of Good Ideas : Working against discrimination and inequality in Europe

•

Results of the ESF Seminar on “Support to Transnational Co-operation in ESF Programmes for 2007-2013”, on March 22, 2007 [online]. [cit. 2008-04-07]. 4 p. URL:

[online]. Luxembourg : Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004[cit. 2008-04-07]. 21 p. URL: . ISBN 92-894-7001-1 (printed version).

. D(2007) 8550. •

Transnationality – a guide for Development Partnerships [online]. GB EQUAL Support Unit, [cit.

2008-04-07]. 43 p. URL:


137


.

8.9.6 Websites of EU member states focused on evaluation in the field of structural funds and related sources Poznámka: Listed as in the Czech version of document (in alphabetical order in Czech language)

Belgium – Brussels: •

Rapports annuels et

ella ón ns [online]. Bruxelles (Belgium) : Centre d’Informatique pour la Région Bruxelloise, c2008 [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Belgium – Wallonia: •

PROGRAMMATION 2007-2013 [online]. Région wallonne [2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

PROGRAMMATION 2007-2013 DES FONDS STRUCTURELS EN REGION WALLONNE [online]. Région wallone [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Bulgaria: •

Structural funds [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Czech Republic: •

Evaluace v období 2004-2006 [online]. Ministerstvo pro místní rozvoj, c2003-2007 [2008-0912]. URL: .

Denmark: •

Regionalt.dk [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Estonia: •

Euroopa Liidu struktuurifondid : Hindamisaruanded [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:

•

Estonsko. Ministry of Finance of Estonia. Evaluation handbook : final version [online]. Ministry of Finance of Estonia, 03. November 2006 [2008-09-12]. 81 s. URL: .

•

.

Euroopa Liidu struktuurifondid : Informaterjalid [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:

.

Finland: •

Sisäasiainministeriö

[online]. .

Sisäasiainministeriö,

c2008

[2008-09-12].

URL:

France: • • •

DIAC : accueil [online]. DIAC, 2008 [2008-09-12]. URL: . Société Française de l’Évaluation [online]. Paris : SFE, [2008-09-12]. URL:

.

Programme opérationnel national Fonds social européen : France [online]. Ministère de l’emploi, de la cohésion sociale et du logement, Vendredi 9 février 2007 [cit. 2008-09-12]. 133 s. URL: .


138


•

Compétitivité régionale et emploi 2007-2013 [online]. Fonds social européen en France, [cit.

•

Les textes de référence 2007-2013 [online]. Fonds social européen en France, [cit. 2008-09-

• •

•

2008-09-12]. 6 s. URL: . 12]. URL: .

Idequal : la plateforme des produits Equal France [online]. EQUAL France, [cit. 2008-09-12].

URL: .

Evaluation finale du PIC EQUAL en France 2004-2005 : Rapport final d’évaluation. Ministère

de l’emploi, de la 2005. 133 s.

ella

ón sociale et du logement, Commission européenne, Décembre

Evaluation finale du PIC EQUALen France 2004-2005 : Synthèse du rapport final d’évaluation. Ministère de l’emploi, de la Décembre 2005. 40 s.

ella ón sociale et du logement, Commission européenne,

Italy: •

DPS : UVAL [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

Rete NUVV [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

Iniziativa comunitaria EQUAL [online]. Ministero del Lavoro, della Salute et delle Politiche

•

Il punto su… : Il Nuovo Fondo Sociale Europeo (2007-2013) [online]. ISFOL, 2007 [cit. 200809-12]. 24 s. URL: . ISSN 1129-1451.

•

Programmi operativi (Po) [online]. Ministero del Lavoro e della Previdenza Sociale, [cit. 200809-12]. URL: .

Sociali [cit. 2008-09-12]. Zejména .

evaluační

zprávy.

URL:

Ireland: •

NDP : National Development Plan 2007-2013 : Transforming Ireland [online]. Dublin : NDP/CSF Information Office [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Cyprus: •

Planning Bureau [online]. Republic of Cyprus, [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Lithuania: •

ES parama [online]. LR Finansų Ministerija, c2008 [2008-09-12]. URL:

•

ES Strukturine parama 2007-2013 metams [online]. LR Finansų Ministerija, c2008 [2008-09-

.

12]. URL: .

Latvia: •

ES Fondi : Jaunumi [online]. Finanšu ministrija, 2007 [2008-09-12]. URL:

•

ES Fondi : Izvērtēšana un pētījumi [online]. Finanšu ministrija, 2007 [2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

ES Fondi : Pabeigtās izvērtēšanas un pētījumi [online]. Finanšu ministrija, 2007 [2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

ES Fondi : Šobrīd notiekošās izvērtēšanas un pētījumi [online]. Finanšu ministrija, 2007 [200809-12]. URL: .

.


139


•

ES Fondi : Plānotās izvērtēšanas, pētījumi un izsludinātie iepirkumi [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Luxemburg: •

Direction de la politique régionale [online]. Ministère de l’Économie et du Commerce extérieur, dernière mise à jour de cette page le 25-06-2008 [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Hungaria: •

Nemzeti Fejlesztési Ügynökség [online]. Nemzeti Fejlesztési Ügynökség, c2007 [cit. 2008-1011]. URL: .

Malta: •

Planning and Priorities Coordination Division : Evaluation [online]. Valletta : Office of the Prime Minister, [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Poland: •

Witamy na stronach internetowych PTE [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:

•

Portal Funduszy Strukturalnych : Raporty ewaluacyjne [online]. Polskie Towarzystwo

•

Portal Funduszy Strukturalnych : Ewaluacje w ramach ZPORR [online]. Ministerstwo Rozwoju Regionalnego, 2008-08-20 [2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

Portal Funduszy Strukturalnych : Ewaluacja SPO WKP – raporty [online]. Ministerstwo

•

PARP : EWALUACJA PROGRAMÓW POMOCOWYCH [online]. Polska Agencja Rozwoju, c2001-

•

Program operacyjny – Program Inicjatywy Wspólnotowej EQUAL dla Polski 2004-2006

•

Ewaluacja bieżąca Programu Operacyjnego „Program Inicjatywy Wspólnotowej EQUAL dla Polski 2004-2006” : 2 RAPORT CZĄSTKOWY [online]. Warszawa, 30 lipca 2007 r. [cit. 2008-

.

Ewaluacyjne, c2006, 2008-08-07 [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Rozwoju Regionalnego, 2008-07-28 [2008-09-12]. URL: . 2008. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

[online]. 2004 [cit. 2008-09-12].154 s. URL: .

09-12]. 160 s. URL: . •

Ewaluacja bieżąca Programu Operacyjnego ”Program Inicjatywy Wspólnotowej EQUAL Dla Polski 2004-2006” : RAPORT TEMATYCZNY (przygotowany w ramach prac nad 2 Raportem Czastkowym) [online]. Warszawa, 30 lipca 2007 r. [cit. 2008-09-12]. 31 s. URL:

. Portugal: •

Quadro Comunitário de Apoio III : Portugal 2000-2006 [online]. Actualizado a 12/9/2008

•

QREN 2007-2013 [online]. QREN 2007-2013, 2008 [2008-09-12]. URL:

•

Plano tecnológico – Portugal a inovar [online]. Plano Tecnológico, 2006-2008 [2008-0912].URL: .

[2008-09-12]. URL: . .


140


Austria: •

ÖROK : Homepage der Österreichischen Raumordnungskonferenz [online]. Wien : ÖROK,

2008 [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Romania: •

Guvernul Romaniei : Acasa [online]. Ministerul Economiei si Finantelor – DGTI [2008-09-12].

•

Ministry of Public Finance [online]. [2008-09-12]. Especially Evaluation section under ECU.

•

InfoRegional : Ministerul Dezvoltãrii, Lucrãrilor Publice si Locuintelor [online]. [2008-09-12].

URL: .

URL: .

URL: .

Greece: •

Programmes 2000-2006 [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Slovenia: •

Področje evropske kohezijske politike [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:

.

United Kingdom: •

Welcome, the UK government’s European Regional Development Fund site [online]. [2008-09-

12]. URL: .

•

Evaluation – Introduction [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:

•

European Social Fund : Home Page [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

.

United Kingdom – Wales: •

Welsh European Funding Office [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

Welsh European Funding Office : Research, Monitoring and Evaluation [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

United Kingdom – Scotland: •

The Scottish Government : Business & Industry : Resources, requesting information and links [online]. Page updated: Friday, March 30, 2007 [2008-09-12]. URL: .

United Kingdom – Nothern Ireland: •

European Union Structural Funds in Northern Ireland [online]. Department of Finance and Personnel, c2005[2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

Special EU Programmes Body : Reports & Publications [online]. SEUPB, c2005 [2008-09-12].

URL: .

Spain: •

DIRECCIÓN GENERAL DE FONDOS COMUNITARIOS [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: .

Sweden: •

Välkommen till ITPS [online]. Östersund : ITPS, [2008-09-12]. URL: .

•

Internationellt: Nuteks webbplats [online]. Stockholm (Sweden) : Nutek, Dagens datum: 2008-09-12 [2008-09-12]. URL: .


141


•

Startsida – Svenska ESF-Rådet [online]. Svenska ESF-Rådet, Uppdaterad: 2008-08-19 [200809-12]. URL: .

8.9.7 Development Partnerships, Transnational Cooperation Agreements, outputs of projects •

Welcome to the EQUAL products database [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-15]. Includes list of

•

EQUAL TCA [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

Welcome to the EQUAL Common Database (ECDB) section [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: . (also included in Contacts section)

•

Upcoming and recent events [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: .

•

Koordinační klub Národních tematických sítí [Coordination Club of National Thematic Networks]

•

TCA Search [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-06-11]. URL:

available national EQUAL product databases (Austria, France, Great Britain, Ireland, Italia, Spain, Portugal). URL: .

[online]. [cit. 2008-05-15]. A club in ESF Forum. Especially Files section (e.g. 2007 conference proceedings, project digest (working draft), A tables – a list of all products and available materials from validations). URL: . .

8.9.8 Partner’s platforms (ESF Live) Note: Links to all ESF Live platforms are also available at http://www.esflive.eu/?q=aggregator/categories/1.

84) Community of Practice on Partnership in the ESF [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: . 85) Sound planning and management : a community of practice on Project Cycle Management (PCM) [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: . 86) Programme Management : a Community of Practice on Programme Management [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: . 87) Transnationality : exchange and cooperation across Europe – learning for change [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: . 88) European Community of Practice : Innovation and Mainstreaming [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-0415]. URL: . 89) Gender mainstreaming : a tool for change [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: . 90) ESF Forum [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: or .


142


8.9.9 Contacts Note: The following outline contains only the basic sources for obtaining contacts. More detailed data on the sources (including updated and complemented data obtained by means of electronic mail) and the contacts as such are mentioned in Annex No. 1. Contact Data. •

Seznam členů jednotlivých NTS [List of individual members of National Thematic Networks]

•

EQUAL in the Member States – Contacts [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: .

•

Welcome to the EQUAL Common Database (ECDB) section [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: . [also included in Develpoment Partnerships, Transnational Cooperation Agreements and outputs from project section]

•

Transnational projects and networks [online]. ESF [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL:

•

Overview of Operational Programmes [online]. A number of documents and data are only

•

OP RLZ [Operational Programme of Human Resources Development] [online]. Aktualizace: 5.9.2007 [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: .

•

Užitečné odkazy [Useful links] [online]. Aktualizace: 30.10.2007 [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL:

•

[A list of CIP EQUAL projects in the Czech Republic] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: .

[online]. EQUAL ČR [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: .

. accessible after registration (free of charge). [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL: .

.

8.9.10 Internal sources i.e. the sources created in the course of the evaluation •

questionnaire survey results

•

phone calls transcripts/recordings

•

reports from evaluation visits

•

reports from focus groups

•

case studies

•

reports from process evaluation


143


8.10 Contact Data With regard to difficulty in obtaining the up-to-date data (the ECDB database operated by the European Commission contains in many cases out-of-date contact and other data) and to the fact that a number of data was obtained by means of MoLSA employees, we consider to be suitable and useful to mention in this Annex all the contacts, which are relevant for this evaluation and may be subsequently reused by MoLSA employees, promoters of further CIP EQUAL evaluations, as the case may be by other co-operating entities. In the first evaluation stage in particular the obtained e-mail contacts were used, namely for the purposes of distribution of the call to complete the questionnaire. Further contact data were used in particular for purposes of communication in connection with the implementation of the evaluation visits.

Annex No. 8.10 consists in total of 24 tables: TAB. 1: MANAGING AUTHORITIES (MA, MA), ESF OP (2007-2013), TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION (TC) ________________________________________________________ 146 TAB. 2: ELECTRONIC ADDRESSES, ON WHICH A REQUEST FOR VERIFICATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE COMPLEMENTING AND UPDATING THE CONTACTS WAS SENT ________ 147 TAB. 3: ESF OP- TRANSNATIONAL CO-OPERATION (PART 1) ______________________ 148 TAB. 4: ESF OP- TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION (PART 2) ______________________ 150 TAB. 5: NATIONAL SUPPORT STRUCTURES____________________________________ 151 TAB. 6: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS - ITALY ________________________________ 151 TAB. 7: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS -GERMANY _____________________________ 165 TAB. 8: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS –UNITED KINGDOM (GREAT BRITAIN) _______ 170 TAB. 9: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – UNITED KINGDOM (NORTHEN IRELAND) ___ 174 TAB. 10: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – POLAND_____________________________ 175 TAB. 11: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – FRANCE _____________________________ 179 TAB. 12: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – SLOVAKIA ___________________________ 188 TAB. 13: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – AUSTRIA ____________________________ 192 TAB. 14: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – SPAIN ______________________________ 194 TAB. 15: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – NETHERLAND ________________________ 204 TAB. 16: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – PORTUGAL __________________________ 208 TAB. 17: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – CZECH REPUBLIC _____________________ 212 TAB. 18: MEMBERS, OBSERVERS AND THEIR ALTERNATE MEMBERS IN THE CIP EQUAL MONITORING COMMITTEEE_____________________________________________________________ 217 TAB. 19: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (A) ____________________________________ 221 TAB. 20: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (B) ____________________________________ 222 TAB. 21: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (C) ____________________________________ 224 TAB. 22: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (D) ____________________________________ 225 TAB. 23: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (E) ____________________________________ 228 TAB. 24: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (F)_____________________________________ 229 Under each table always the source is mentioned, of which the data concerned have been obtained. The data in the tables are ordered according the persons’ surnames and names, according to the


144


identifiers of the development partnerships, as the case may be other data (relevant in the given case). The data are mentioned in the Czech language predominantly, in case of names of organisations and the like the English wording has been left, as the case may be the wording in the language of the given country.


145


TAB. 1: MANAGING AUTHORITIES (MA, MA), ESF OP (2007-2013), TRANSNATIONAL CO-OPERATION (TC) Name

E-mail

Almeida, Sandra, Ms.

[email protected]

Gietema, Brenda, Ms.

[email protected]

Hakkarainen, Ritva, Ms.

[email protected]

Chetcuti, Stephanie, Ms.

[email protected]

Type MA

TNC

MA ESF OP

[email protected]

MA

Kojonsaari, Tapani, Mr.

[email protected]

MA

Lahlou, Yasmina, Ms.

[email protected]

MA

Mora, F.

[email protected]

Müller, Katrin, Ms.

[email protected]

Patsali, Toula

[email protected]

Piqué, Joan Miquel, Mr.

[email protected]

Rack, Claude, Mr.

[email protected]

MA

Schulz-Trieglaff, Stefan, Mr.

[email protected]

MA

Staikou, Kiki, Mrs.

[email protected]

MA

ESFOP

NSS ESF OP

TNC

ESF OP

[email protected]

MA

Thomson, Will, Mr.

[email protected]

MA

Veske, Christian, Mr.

[email protected]

MA

TNC

NSS

ESF OP ESF OP

Organization

Portugalsko

(351) 21 799 49 30

Nizozemsko

Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, Transnational Cooperation ESF

0031 70 3152041; 0031 651535110

Finsko

Ministry of Employment and the Ec.

Malta

Office of the Prime Minister, Planning and Priorities Coordination Division

(00356) 2200 1185

Řecko

Equal M.A

210-5271301

Finsko

Ministry of Employment and the Ecn.

Francie

DGEFP - Ministère de l'économie, des finances et de l'emploi, SousDirection du Fonds social européen

Notes

TNC

TNC

Německo

Ministerium für Arbeit, Soziales, Gesundheit und Familie des Landes Brandenburg

0331-866-5341

Kypr

Planning Bureau

0035722602891

může být využito jako univerzální kontakt pro Kypr; kontakt pravděpodobně reprezentuje MA

Katalánie

Government of Catalonia, Public Employment Service of Catalonia

Francie

DGEFP - Ministère de l'économie, des finances et de l'emploi, SousDirection du Fonds social européen

01.43.19.30.33

má také na starosti evaluaci

Německo

Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs

++49 - (0)228 527 4129

Řecko

Programming and Evaluation Unit

00302105271318

Finsko

Ministry of Employment and the Economy

Velká Británie

0044 114 267 7303

Estonsko

Ministry of Social Affairs

+372 626 9174

Řecko

Managing Authority of OP Human Resources Development

00302105201200, 0030 210 5201273

Source: MoLSA Navreme Boheme, s.r.o.

Phone

Gabinete de Gestão EQUAL, EQUAL Managing Authority PORTUGAL

Francie

MA

Taarna, Varpu, Ms.

[email protected]

NSS ESF OP

Karolidou, Eugenia, Ms.

Zervos, George, Mr.

Country

146


TAB. 2: ELECTRONIC ADDRESSES, ON WHICH A REQUEST FOR VERIFICATION, AS THE CASE MAY BE COMPLEMENTING AND UPDATING THE CONTACTS WAS SENT E-mail [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]


147


[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

Source: Messages sent by MoLSA

TAB. 3: ESF OP- TRANSNATIONAL CO-OPERATION (PART 1) Name

E-mail

Type

Country

Phone

Alexandrou, Alexandros

[email protected]

ESF OP

Kypr

+357 22400951

Ballwein, Doris

[email protected]

ESF OP

Rakousko

+43 1 171100 5408

Berrocal, Victoria

[email protected]

ESF OP

Španělsko

+34 91 363 2053

Bodonea, Adrian

[email protected]

ESF OP

Rumunsko

+40 21 3150208

Bortnowska, Dorota

[email protected]

ESF OP

Polsko

+48 22 501 50 00

Brügel, Holger

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 36 34 57 38

Småland s ostrovy

Citát z e-mailu A. Calmese z 2. 6. 2008: "For the new period 2007-2013, their focus is not on transnationality, more precisely, in case of transnationality, our focus is on Grand Region, that’s mean our neighbour country. Our experience of last period has beeen limited to about 5 projects and EQUAL is ending. For the moment we have no transnational project in our first call for proposals."

Calmes, Alain

[email protected]

ESF OP

Lucembursko

+352 247 86192

Dilba, Ramunas

[email protected]

ESF OP

Litva

+370 5 219 4437

Donlevy, Vicky

[email protected]

ESF OP

Francie


Notes

148


Name

E-mail

Type

Country

Phone

Notes

Dortane, Kristine

[email protected]

ESF OP

Lotyšsko

Dragsdal Sorensen, Jakob

[email protected]

ESF OP

Dánsko

Ferjancik, Peter

[email protected]

ESF OP

Slovensko

+421 2 5975 2014

Fiolhais, Rui, Dr.

[email protected]

ESF OP

Portugalsko

+351217227281

García Rodriguez, Marta

[email protected]

ESF OP

Španělsko

+34 91 363 1843

Gellin, Karin

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 26 54 26 60

Georgiova Savova, Galya

[email protected]

ESF OP

Bulharsko

+359 29329518

Gietema, Brenda

[email protected]

ESF OP

Nizozemsko

+31 (0)703152041

Gunnarsson, John

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 63 14 28 64

Střední sever

Hermansen, Ulf

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 19 16 54 87

Východní střed

Holmqvist, Karin

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 8 457 33 09

Stockholm

Charlier, Jenny

[email protected]

ESF OP

Belgie

+32 2 2343970

Valonsko

Chetcuti, Stephanie

[email protected]

ESF OP

Malta

+356 2200 1185

Jenko, Gorazd

[email protected]

ESF OP

Slovinsko

+38 61 478 3792

Johnsson, Emma

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 920 384 86

Karolidou, Venia

[email protected]

ESF OP

Řecko

+30 210 527 1301

Kelly, John

[email protected]

ESF OP

Irsko

+353 1 63131120

Lahlou, Yasmina

[email protected]

ESF OP

Francie

Larsson, Andreas

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+371 7095 635

Severní střed

Region vyššího severu

+46 40 17 42 16

Jižní Švédsko

Loftsson, Eva

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 8 457 33 18

Stockholm

Mcmillan, Jane

[email protected]

ESF OP

Spojené království

+44 1685 729 404

Wales


149


Name

E-mail

Type

Country

Phone

Notes

Meyers, Caroline

[email protected]

ESF OP

Belgie

+32 2 5462234

Flandry

Müller, Katrin

[email protected]

ESF OP

Německo

+331 866 5341

kontakt (TC) pro jednotlivé spolkové země (Länder)

Neill, John

[email protected]

ESF OP


+44 28 9025 7874

Severní Irsko

Nunes, Carlos, Dr.

[email protected]

ESF OP

Portugalsko

+351217241126

Pěchoučková, Markéta

[email protected]

ESF OP

Česká republika

+420 226206865

Pitoňáková, Livia

[email protected]

ESF OP

Česká republika

+420 257196890

Riz, Adam

[email protected]

ESF OP

Maďarsko

+36 1 354 3867

Scarpitti, Lucia

[email protected]

ESF OP

Itálie

+39 06 46834328

SchulzTrieglaff, Stefan

[email protected]

ESF OP

Německo

+49 228 527 4129

Staikou, Kiki

[email protected]

ESF OP

Řecko

+30 210 527 1318

Stiernström, Louise

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 31 707 73 87

Taarna, Varpu

[email protected]

ESF OP

Finsko

+358 10 60 49262

Thompson, Will

[email protected]

ESF OP


+44 114 267 7282

Anglie

Vervloet, Louis

[email protected]

ESF OP

Belgie

+32 2 5462238

Flandry

Veske, Christian

[email protected]

ESF OP

Estonsko

+372 6269174

Wikman, Johannes

[email protected]

ESF OP

Švédsko

+46 8 579 171 30

Zervos, George

[email protected]

ESF OP

Kypr

00302105201200, 0030 210 5201273

kontakt (TC) pro federální úroveň

Západní Švédsko

Source: http://www.translatiality.eu/view/ms_list (contacts which are identical with contacts from the table no. 1 are printed in bold)

TAB. 4: ESF OP- TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION (PART 2) Name

E-mail

Main contact - type

Country

Phone

Arikan, Sureyya

[email protected]

ESF OP

Dánsko

Borg, Brian

[email protected]

ESF OP

Malta

+356 2200 1174

Garcia Lopez, David

[email protected]

ESF OP

Španělsko

+34 91 3631815

Janko, Tamaz

[email protected]

ESF OP

Maďarsko

+36 1 354 3862


150

Notes


[email protected]

ESF OP

Slovensko

+421 2 5975 2914

Louwes, Korrie

Kompisová, Mária

[email protected]

ESF OP

Nizozemsko

+31 70-333 35 51

Munoz Baca, José Manuel

[email protected]

ESF OP

Španělsko

+34 955 03 31 84

Pique, Joan Miquel

[email protected]

ESF OP

Španělsko

+34 93 553 63 06

Torturero, Carlos

[email protected]

ESF OP

Španělsko

+34 913631813

Source: List of member state contact points for transnational cooperation in the ESF for the programme period 2007-2013 (sent by Filip Kučera 6. 5. 2008)

TAB. 5: NATIONAL SUPPORT STRUCTURES E-mail

Contact Type

Country

[email protected]

?

Itálie

[email protected]

?

Nizozemsko

[email protected]

přímo NSS

Německo

[email protected]

přímo NSS

Polsko

[email protected]

přímo NSS

Spojené království (Velká Británie)

[email protected]

?

Portugalsko

[email protected]

přímo NSS

Slovensko

[email protected]

?

Itálie

[email protected]

MA

Španělsko

[email protected]

přímo NSS

Spojené království (Severní Irsko)

[email protected]

?

Francie

[email protected]

?

Rakousko

Source: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/tools/contacts_en.cfm

TAB. 6: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS - ITALY Development partnership ID

E-mail

IT-IT-G2-ABR-001

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-002

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-003

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-005

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-006

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-008

[email protected]


151


Development partnership ID

E-mail

IT-IT-G2-ABR-011

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-013

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-017

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-018

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-019

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-020

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-024

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-025

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-030

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-031

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-033

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-036

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-038

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-044

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-047

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-053

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-054

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-058

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-059

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-061

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-062

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-066

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-075

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-077

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-078

[email protected]


152



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-ABR-079

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-081

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-084

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-086

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-091

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-092

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-096

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-098

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-099

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-106

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-107

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-111

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-112

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-ABR-114

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-003

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-010

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-016

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-018

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-021

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-022

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-026

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-030

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BAS-036

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BOL-002

[email protected]


153



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-BOL-003

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BOL-004

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-BOL-005

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAL-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAL-019

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAL-063

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAL-090

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAL-097

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAL-101

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-002

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-004

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-014

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-017

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-018

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-019

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-028

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-029

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-030

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-038

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-039

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-040

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-041

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-044

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-049

[email protected]


154



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-CAM-050

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-051

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-060

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-061

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-063

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-069

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-071

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-072

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-073

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-084

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-096

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-097

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-103

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-106

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-107

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-108

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-109

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-112

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-118

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-123

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-124

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-125

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-131

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-133

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-134

[email protected]


155



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-CAM-151

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-152

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-153

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-154

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-158

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-162

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-163

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-CAM-164

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-002

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-003

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-005

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-006

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-008

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-011

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-013

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-014

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-015

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-017

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-019

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-020

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-021

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-022

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-023

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-025

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-026

[email protected]


156



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-EMI-027

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-028

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-031

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-032

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-033

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-035

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-037

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-EMI-040

[email protected] P

IT-IT-G2-EMI-042

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-FRI-001

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-FRI-002

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-FRI-006

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-FRI-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-FRI-008

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-FRI-009

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-FRI-012

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-002

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-004

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-006

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-008

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-011

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-031

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-054

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-057

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-058

[email protected]


157



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-069

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-076

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-077

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-089

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-092

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-093

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-095

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-096

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-097

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LAZ-100

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LIG-002

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LIG-005

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LIG-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LIG-009

[email protected] Fi

IT-IT-G2-LIG-011

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LIG-012

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LIG-017

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LIG-025

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LIG-029

cesos@ mclink.it

IT-IT-G2-LOM-001

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-003

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-006

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-009

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-010

[email protected]


158



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-LOM-012

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-021

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-023

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-025

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-027

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-028

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-034

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-035

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-038

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-039

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-040

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-043

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-044

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-045

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-048

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-051

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-055

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-056

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-061

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-063

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-068

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-LOM-071

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-MAR-008

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-MAR-011

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-MAR-012

[email protected]


159



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-MAR-013

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-MAR-019

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-MAR-023

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-MAR-028

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-MOL-003

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-004

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-009

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-020

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-023

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-032

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-036

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-037

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-042

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-050

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-052

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-056

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-059

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-063

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-064

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PIE-069

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-002

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-005

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-016

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-017

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-021

[email protected]


160



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-PUG-029

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-038

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-043

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-054

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-060

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-070

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-080

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-082

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-085

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-088

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-092

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-096

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-099

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-PUG-113

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SAR-005

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SAR-008

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SAR-040

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-037

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-047

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-055

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-058

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-066

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-074

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-075

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-086

[email protected]


161



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-SIC-089

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-091

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-092

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-093

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-099

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-103

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-116

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-129

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-133

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-164

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-167

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-169

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-172

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-192

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-202

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-SIC-205

uff.organizzazione.croce.it

IT-IT-G2-TOS-021

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-029

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-030

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-031

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-032

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-046

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-048

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-049

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-051


kontakt neuveden

162



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-TOS-055

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-060

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TOS-061

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TRE-005

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TRE-006

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TRE-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-TRE-012

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-UMB-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-UMB-009

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-UMB-014

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-UMB-015

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-UMB-016

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-UMB-020

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-UMB-023

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-UMB-025

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VAL-001

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VAL-003

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-002

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-003

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-008

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-009

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-010


IT-IT-G2-VEN-019

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-022

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-024

[email protected]


163



E-mail

IT-IT-G2-VEN-029

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-033

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-035

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-044

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-046

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-047

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-050

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-051

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-054

[email protected]

IT-IT-G2-VEN-056

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-001

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-007

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-011

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-019

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-049

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-053

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-077

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-103

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-109

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-118

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-126

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-139

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-147

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-153

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-167

[email protected]


164



E-mail

IT-IT-S2-MDL-189

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-193

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-225

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-230

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-272

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-274

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-283

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-293

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-304

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-329

[email protected]

IT-IT-S2-MDL-396

[email protected]

Source: ECDB (https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/index.jsp?lang=en)

TAB. 7: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS -GERMANY Development partnership ID

E-mail

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/202

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/205

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/208

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/213

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/216

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/218

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/219

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/221

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/224

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/237

[email protected]


165



E-mail

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/238

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/243

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/248

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/256

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/260

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/268

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/275

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/279

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/286

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/288

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/293

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/297

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/298

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/299

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/301

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/308

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/309

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/312

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/331

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/332

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/335

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/337

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/347

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/351

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/358

[email protected]


166



E-mail

DE-XB4-76051-20-20/359

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BB/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BB/203

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BB/206

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BB/207

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BB/209

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BB/213

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BE/206

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BE/209

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BE/211

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BE/215

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BE/217

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BE/219

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BE/220

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BW/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BW/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BW/203

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BW/207

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BW/209

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BW/213

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/203

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/204

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/205

[email protected]


167



E-mail

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/206

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/207

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/209

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-BY/211

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HB/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HB/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HE/204

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HE/205

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HE/206

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HE/209

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HE/211

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HH/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-HH/202

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-MV/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-MV/206

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-MV/208

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-MV/211

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/204

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/205

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/209

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/210

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/212

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/213

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/215

[email protected]


168



E-mail

DE-XB4-76051-20-NI/216

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/202

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/204

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/205

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/206

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/212

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/216

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/221

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/222

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/224

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/225

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/232

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/238

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/244

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/246

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-NW/248

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-DP/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-DP/203

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-DP/207

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-DP/208

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SH/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SH/202

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SH/203

[email protected]


169



E-mail

DE-XB4-76051-20-SL/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SL/202

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SN/207

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SN/208

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SN/211

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SN/213

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SN/221

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SN/224

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-SN/225

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-ST/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-ST/202

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-ST/209

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-ST/210

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-TH/200

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-TH/201

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-TH/202

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-TH/209

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-TH/216

[email protected]

DE-XB4-76051-20-TH/224

[email protected]


TAB. 8: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS –UNITED KINGDOM (GREAT BRITAIN) Development partnership ID

E-mail

UKgb-100

[email protected]

UKgb-101

[email protected]

UKgb-102

[email protected]


170



E-mail

UKgb-103

socserv.suffolkcc.gov.uk

UKgb-104

[email protected]

UKgb-105

[email protected]

UKgb-106

[email protected]

UKgb-107

[email protected]

UKgb-108

[email protected]

UKgb-109

[email protected]

UKgb-110

[email protected]

UKgb-112

kontakt neuveden

UKgb-113

[email protected]

UKgb-114

[email protected]

UKgb-115

[email protected]

UKgb-116

[email protected]

UKgb-117

[email protected]

UKgb-118

[email protected]

UKgb-120

[email protected]

UKgb-121

[email protected]

UKgb-123

[email protected]

UKgb-124

[email protected]

UKgb-125

[email protected]

UKgb-126

[email protected]

UKgb-127

[email protected]

UKgb-128

[email protected]

UKgb-129

[email protected]

UKgb-130

[email protected]


171



E-mail

UKgb-131

[email protected]

UKgb-132

[email protected]

UKgb-133

[email protected]

UKgb-134

[email protected]

UKgb-135

[email protected]

UKgb-136

[email protected]

UKgb-137

[email protected]

UKgb-138

[email protected]

UKgb-139

[email protected]

UKgb-140

[email protected]

UKgb-141

[email protected]

UKgb-142

[email protected]

UKgb-143

[email protected]

UKgb-144

[email protected]

UKgb-145

[email protected]

UKgb-146

[email protected]

UKgb-147

[email protected]

UKgb-148

[email protected]

UKgb-149

[email protected]

UKgb-150

kontakt neuveden

UKgb-151

[email protected]

UKgb-152

[email protected]

UKgb-153

[email protected]

UKgb-154

[email protected]

UKgb-155

[email protected]


172



E-mail

UKgb-156

[email protected]

UKgb-157

[email protected]

UKgb-158

[email protected]

UKgb-159

[email protected]

UKgb-160

[email protected]

UKgb-161

[email protected]

UKgb-162

[email protected]

UKgb-163

[email protected]

UKgb-164

[email protected]

UKgb-165

[email protected]

UKgb-167

[email protected]

UKgb-168

[email protected]

UKgb-170

[email protected]

UKgb-171

[email protected]

UKgb-172

[email protected]

UKgb-173

[email protected]

UKgb-174

[email protected]

UKgb-175

[email protected]

UKgb-176

[email protected]

UKgb-177

[email protected]

UKgb-178

[email protected]

UKgb-179

[email protected]

UKgb-180

[email protected]

UKgb-181

[email protected]

UKgb-182

[email protected]


173



E-mail

UKgb-78

[email protected]

UKgb-79

[email protected]

UKgb-80

[email protected]

UKgb-83

[email protected]

UKgb-84

[email protected]

UKgb-85

[email protected]

UKgb-86

[email protected]

UKgb-87

[email protected]

UKgb-88

[email protected]

UKgb-89

[email protected]

UKgb-90

[email protected]

UKgb-91

[email protected]

UKgb-92

[email protected]

UKgb-93

[email protected]

UKgb-94

[email protected]

UKgb-95

[email protected]

UKgb-96

[email protected]

UKgb-97

[email protected]

UKgb-98

[email protected]

UKgb-99

[email protected]


TAB. 9: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – UNITED KINGDOM (NORTHEN IRELAND) Development partnership ID

E-mail

UKni-10

[email protected]

UKni-11

[email protected]


174



E-mail

UKni-12

[email protected]

UKni-13

[email protected]

UKni-14

[email protected]

UKni-15

[email protected]

UKni-16

[email protected]

UKni-17

[email protected]

UKni-18

[email protected]

UKni-19

[email protected]

UKni-20

[email protected]

UKni-21

[email protected]

UKni-9

[email protected]


TAB. 10: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – POLAND Development partnership ID

E-mail

PL-1

[email protected]

PL-10

[email protected]

PL-106

kontakt neuveden

PL-109

[email protected]

PL-11

[email protected]

PL-111

[email protected]

PL-112

[email protected]

PL-113

[email protected]

PL-114

[email protected]

PL-115

[email protected]

PL-116

[email protected]


175



E-mail

PL-117

[email protected]

PL-119

[email protected]

PL-12

[email protected]

PL-120

[email protected]

PL-121

[email protected]

PL-122

[email protected]

PL-13

[email protected]

PL-14

[email protected]

PL-15

[email protected]

PL-16

[email protected]

PL-17

[email protected]

PL-18

[email protected]

PL-19

[email protected]

PL-2

[email protected]

PL-20

[email protected]

PL-21

[email protected]

PL-22

[email protected]

PL-23

[email protected]

PL-24

[email protected]

PL-25

[email protected]

PL-26

kontakt neuveden

PL-27

[email protected]

PL-28

[email protected]

PL-29

[email protected]

PL-3

[email protected]


176



E-mail

PL-30

[email protected]

PL-31

[email protected]

PL-33

[email protected]

PL-34

[email protected]

PL-35

[email protected]

PL-36

[email protected]

PL-37

[email protected]

PL-38

[email protected]

PL-39

[email protected]

PL-40

[email protected]

PL-41

[email protected]

PL-42

[email protected]

PL-43

[email protected]

PL-44

kontakt neuveden

PL-45

[email protected]

PL-46

[email protected]

PL-48

[email protected]

PL-49

[email protected]

PL-5

[email protected]

PL-50

[email protected]

PL-51

[email protected]

PL-54

[email protected]

PL-55

[email protected]

PL-57

[email protected]

PL-58

[email protected]


177



E-mail

PL-59

[email protected]

PL-6

[email protected]

PL-60

[email protected]

PL-61

[email protected]

PL-62

[email protected]

PL-63

[email protected]

PL-64

[email protected]

PL-65

[email protected]

PL-66

[email protected]

PL-68

[email protected]

PL-69

[email protected]

PL-7

[email protected]

PL-70

[email protected]

PL-71

[email protected]

PL-72

[email protected]

PL-73

[email protected]

PL-74

[email protected]

PL-75

[email protected]

PL-76

[email protected]

PL-77

[email protected]

PL-78

[email protected]

PL-79

[email protected]

PL-8

[email protected]

PL-80

[email protected]

PL-81

[email protected]


178



E-mail

PL-82

[email protected]

PL-85

[email protected]

PL-86

[email protected]

PL-87

[email protected]

PL-88

[email protected]

PL-9

[email protected]

PL-90

[email protected]

PL-91

[email protected]

PL-92

[email protected]

PL-93

[email protected]

PL-94

[email protected]

PL-95

[email protected]


TAB. 11: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – FRANCE Development partnership ID

E-mail

FR-ALS-2004-42350

[email protected]

FR-ALS-2004-43633

[email protected]

FR-ALS-2004-43723

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-40973

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-41194

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-41366

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-41751

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-42215

kontakt neuveden

FR-AQU-2004-42320

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-42342

[email protected]


179



E-mail

FR-AQU-2004-42437

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-42614

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-42740

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-43021

[email protected]

FR-AQU-2004-43178

[email protected]

FR-AUV-2004-41249

[email protected]

FR-AUV-2004-42449

[email protected]

FR-AUV-2004-42793

[email protected]

FR-AUV-2004-42843

[email protected]

FR-AUV-2004-43052

[email protected]

FR-AUV-2004-43688

[email protected]

FR-AUV-2004-43936

[email protected]

FR-BNR-2004-41126

[email protected]

FR-BNR-2004-41547

[email protected]

FR-BNR-2004-42385

[email protected]

FR-BNR-2004-42823

[email protected]

FR-BNR-2004-43224

[email protected]

FR-BNR-2004-43471

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-41551

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-41718

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-42379

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-42606

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-43586

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-43628

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-43657

[email protected]


180



E-mail

FR-BRE-2004-43715

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-43805

[email protected]

FR-BRE-2004-44390

[email protected]

FR-BRG-2004-41144

[email protected]

FR-BRG-2004-41916

[email protected]

FR-BRG-2004-41990

[email protected]

FR-BRG-2004-43064

[email protected]

FR-BRG-2004-43196

[email protected]

FR-BRG-2004-43309

[email protected]

FR-BRG-2004-43635

[email protected]

FR-BRG-2004-43937

[email protected]

FR-CEN-2004-41021

kontakt neuveden

FR-CEN-2004-42239

[email protected]

FR-CEN-2004-42862

[email protected]

FR-CEN-2004-43053

[email protected]

FR-CEN-2004-43176

[email protected]

FR-CEN-2004-43502

[email protected]

FR-CHA-2004-41525

[email protected]

FR-CHA-2004-42030

[email protected]

FR-CHA-2004-42245

[email protected]

FR-CHA-2004-43842

[email protected]

FR-COR-2004-40994

[email protected]

FR-COR-2004-42207

[email protected]

FR-COR-2004-43232

[email protected]

FR-COR-2004-43582

[email protected]


181



E-mail

FR-FRC-2004-41859

[email protected]

FR-FRC-2004-42029

[email protected]

FR-FRC-2004-43337

[email protected]

FR-FRC-2004-43373

[email protected]

FR-FRC-2004-43740

[email protected]

FR-FRC-2004-44034

[email protected]

FR-GUA-2004-43521

[email protected]

FR-GUA-2004-44278

[email protected]

FR-GUY-2004-41136

[email protected]

FR-GUY-2004-44294

[email protected]

FR-HNR-2004-40951

[email protected]

FR-HNR-2004-42241

[email protected]

FR-HNR-2004-43592

[email protected]

FR-HNR-2004-43846

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-41076

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-41468

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-41734

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-42294

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-42472

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-42685

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-42770

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43028

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43031

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43140

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43266

[email protected]


182



E-mail

FR-IDF-2004-43323

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43327

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43383

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43486

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43557

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43594

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43626

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43653

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43678

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43687

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43714

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-43909

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-44088

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-44269

[email protected]

FR-IDF-2004-44343

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-42200

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-42212

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-42674

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-42729

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-42827

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-42994

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-43096

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-43107

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-43305

[email protected]

FR-LGR-2004-43571

[email protected]


183



E-mail

FR-LGR-2004-43731

[email protected]

FR-LIM-2004-41977

[email protected]

FR-LIM-2004-42967

[email protected]

FR-LIM-2004-43004

[email protected]

FR-LOR-2004-41758

[email protected]

FR-LOR-2004-43597

[email protected]

FR-LOR-2004-44074

[email protected]

FR-MAR-2004-42123

kontakt neuveden

FR-MAR-2004-43720

[email protected]

FR-MAR-2004-43943

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-41555

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-42097

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-42744

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-43013

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-43103

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-43384

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-43550

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-43810

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-43863

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-43930

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-43959

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-44060

[email protected]

FR-MDP-2004-44402

kontakt neuveden

FR-NAT-2004-41074

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-41094

[email protected]


184



E-mail

FR-NAT-2004-41493

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-41599

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-41686

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-41687

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-41704

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-41737

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-41787

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-41892

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-42319

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-42471

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-42864

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43039

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43115

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43251

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43255

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43609

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43690

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43709

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43879

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43921

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-43941

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-44231

[email protected]

FR-NAT-2004-44327

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-41009

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-41243

[email protected]


185



E-mail

FR-NPC-2004-41256

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-41337

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-41380

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-41837

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-42944

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-43102

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-43410

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-43661

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-43785

[email protected]

FR-NPC-2004-43989

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-40982

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-41558

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-42915

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-43011

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-43037

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-43143

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-43223

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-43279

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-43465

[email protected]

FR-PAC-2004-43467

[email protected]

FR-PCD-2004-40995

[email protected]

FR-PCD-2004-41016

[email protected]

FR-PCD-2004-43036

[email protected]

FR-PCD-2004-43372

[email protected]

FR-PCD-2004-43796

[email protected]


186



E-mail

FR-PCD-2004-44004

[email protected]

FR-PCH-2004-41960

[email protected]

FR-PCH-2004-42619

[email protected]

FR-PCH-2004-42978

[email protected]

FR-PCH-2004-43341

[email protected]

FR-PCH-2004-43718

[email protected]

FR-PDL-2004-41348

[email protected]

FR-PDL-2004-41590

[email protected]

FR-PDL-2004-41661

[email protected]

FR-PDL-2004-42524

[email protected]

FR-PDL-2004-42548

[email protected]

FR-PDL-2004-43480

[email protected]

FR-PDL-2004-44033

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-41991

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-42044

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-42382

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-42564

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-42574

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-42578

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-42903

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-43134

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-43237

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-43286

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-43401

[email protected]

FR-RAL-2004-43566

[email protected]


187



E-mail

FR-RAL-2004-43607

kontakt neuveden

FR-RAL-2004-44005

[email protected]

FR-REU-2004-40949

[email protected]

FR-REU-2004-41788

[email protected]

FR-REU-2004-42091

[email protected]

FR-REU-2004-42380

[email protected]

FR-REU-2004-42541

[email protected]

FR-REU-2004-43109

[email protected]

FR-REU-2004-43529

[email protected]

FR-REU-2004-43556

[email protected]


TAB. 12: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – SLOVAKIA Development partnership ID

E-mail

SK-1

[email protected]

SK-10

[email protected]

SK-100

[email protected]

SK-101

[email protected]

SK-11

[email protected]

SK-13

[email protected]

SK-14

[email protected]

SK-15

[email protected]

SK-16

[email protected]

SK-17

[email protected]

SK-18

[email protected]

SK-19

[email protected]


188



E-mail

SK-2

[email protected]

SK-20

[email protected]

SK-21

[email protected]

SK-22

[email protected]

SK-23

[email protected]

SK-24

[email protected]

SK-25

[email protected]

SK-26

[email protected]

SK-27

[email protected]

SK-28

[email protected]

SK-29

[email protected]

SK-3

[email protected]

SK-30

[email protected]

SK-31

[email protected]

SK-32

[email protected]

SK-33

[email protected]

SK-34

[email protected]

SK-35

[email protected]

SK-36

[email protected]

SK-37

[email protected]

SK-38

[email protected]

SK-39

[email protected]

SK-4

[email protected]

SK-40

[email protected]

SK-41

aspekt@aspekt. sk


189



E-mail

SK-42

[email protected]

SK-43

[email protected]

SK-44

[email protected]

SK-45

[email protected]

SK-46

[email protected]

SK-47

[email protected]

SK-48

[email protected]

SK-49

[email protected]

SK-5

[email protected]

SK-50

[email protected]

SK-51

[email protected]

SK-52

[email protected]

SK-53

[email protected]

SK-54

[email protected]

SK-55

[email protected]

SK-56

[email protected]

SK-57

[email protected]

SK-58

[email protected]

SK-59

[email protected]

SK-6

[email protected]

SK-60

[email protected]

SK-61

[email protected]

SK-62

[email protected]

SK-63

[email protected]

SK-64

[email protected]


190



E-mail

SK-65

[email protected]

SK-66

[email protected]

SK-67

[email protected]

SK-68

[email protected]

SK-69

[email protected]

SK-7

[email protected]

SK-70

[email protected]

SK-71

[email protected]

SK-72

[email protected]

SK-73

[email protected]

SK-74

[email protected]

SK-75

[email protected]

SK-76

[email protected]

SK-77

[email protected]

SK-78

[email protected]

SK-79

[email protected]

SK-8

[email protected]

SK-80

[email protected]

SK-81

[email protected]

SK-82

[email protected]

SK-83

[email protected]

SK-84

[email protected]

SK-85

[email protected]

SK-86

[email protected]

SK-87

[email protected]


191



E-mail

SK-88

[email protected]

SK-9

[email protected]

SK-90

[email protected]

SK-91

[email protected]

SK-92

[email protected]

SK-93

[email protected]

SK-94

[email protected]

SK-95

[email protected]

SK-96

[email protected]

SK-97

[email protected]

SK-98

[email protected]

SK-99

[email protected]


TAB. 13: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – AUSTRIA Development partnership ID

E-mail

AT-1A-01/229

[email protected]

AT-1A-01/236

[email protected]

AT-1A-02/290

[email protected]

AT-1A-08/305

[email protected]

AT-1A-11/256

[email protected]

AT-1A-11/266

[email protected]

AT-1A-11/268

[email protected]

AT-1A-11/271

[email protected]

AT-1A-11/272

[email protected]


192



E-mail

AT-1A-11/273

[email protected]

AT-1A-12/296

[email protected]

AT-1A-14/226

[email protected]

AT-1A-15/282

[email protected]

AT-1A-15/284

[email protected]

AT-1A-16/230

[email protected]

AT-1A-18/313

[email protected]

AT-1B-01/237

[email protected]

AT-1B-01/309

[email protected]

AT-1B-01/341

[email protected]

AT-1B-11/209

[email protected]

AT-1B-12/288

[email protected]

AT-1B-13/201

[email protected]

AT-1B-16/207

[email protected]

AT-1B-18/308

[email protected]

AT-2-01/310

[email protected]

AT-2-01/338

[email protected]

AT-2-11/263

[email protected]

AT-2-11/276

[email protected]

AT-3A-07/332

[email protected]

AT-3A-16/215

[email protected]

AT-3A-18/217

[email protected]

AT-3B-01/277

[email protected]

AT-3B-02/295

[email protected]

AT-3B-08/315

[email protected]


193



E-mail

AT-3B-14/231

[email protected]

AT-3B-18/314

[email protected]

AT-4A-08/234

[email protected]

AT-4A-08/292

[email protected]

AT-4A-08/326

[email protected]

AT-4B-08/304

[email protected]

AT-4B-16/235

[email protected]

AT-5-01/233

[email protected]

AT-5-01/260

[email protected]

AT-5-11/265

[email protected]

AT-5-13/202

[email protected]

AT-5-14/223

[email protected]

AT-5-17/316

[email protected]

AT-5-18/212

[email protected]

AT-6-01/318

[email protected]

AT-6-11/261

[email protected]

AT-6-15/283

[email protected]

AT-6-18/342

[email protected]


TAB. 14: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – SPAIN Development partnership ID

E-mail

ES-ES20040015

[email protected]

ES-ES20040033

[email protected]

ES-ES20040036

[email protected]

ES-ES20040038

[email protected]


194



E-mail

ES-ES20040046

[email protected]

ES-ES20040047

[email protected]

ES-ES20040058

[email protected]

ES-ES20040074

[email protected]

ES-ES20040078

[email protected]

ES-ES20040081

[email protected]

ES-ES20040082

[email protected]

ES-ES20040083

[email protected]

ES-ES20040084

[email protected]

ES-ES20040085

[email protected]

ES-ES20040089

[email protected]

ES-ES20040090

[email protected]

ES-ES20040093

[email protected]

ES-ES20040094

[email protected]

ES-ES20040096

[email protected]

ES-ES20040098

[email protected]

ES-ES20040102

[email protected]

ES-ES20040104

[email protected]

ES-ES20040108

[email protected]

ES-ES20040110

[email protected]

ES-ES20040112

[email protected]

ES-ES20040115

[email protected]

ES-ES20040126

[email protected]

ES-ES20040128

[email protected]

ES-ES20040130

[email protected]


195



E-mail

ES-ES20040134

[email protected]

ES-ES20040135

[email protected]

ES-ES20040137

[email protected]

ES-ES20040139

[email protected]

ES-ES20040142

[email protected]

ES-ES20040145

[email protected]

ES-ES20040149

[email protected]

ES-ES20040150

[email protected]

ES-ES20040151

[email protected]

ES-ES20040153

[email protected]

ES-ES20040157

[email protected]

ES-ES20040165

[email protected]

ES-ES20040170

[email protected]

ES-ES20040174

kontakt neuveden

ES-ES20040175

[email protected]

ES-ES20040180

[email protected]

ES-ES20040183

[email protected]

ES-ES20040184

[email protected]

ES-ES20040185

[email protected]

ES-ES20040187

[email protected]

ES-ES20040192

[email protected]

ES-ES20040195

[email protected]

ES-ES20040196

[email protected]

ES-ES20040197

[email protected]

ES-ES20040198

[email protected]


196



E-mail

ES-ES20040202

[email protected]

ES-ES20040205

[email protected]

ES-ES20040207

[email protected]

ES-ES20040209

[email protected]

ES-ES20040217

[email protected]

ES-ES20040218

[email protected]

ES-ES20040219

[email protected]

ES-ES20040221

[email protected]

ES-ES20040222

[email protected]

ES-ES20040223

[email protected]

ES-ES20040224

[email protected]

ES-ES20040225

[email protected]

ES-ES20040226

[email protected]

ES-ES20040229

[email protected]

ES-ES20040238

[email protected]

ES-ES20040240

[email protected]

ES-ES20040241

[email protected]

ES-ES20040244

[email protected]

ES-ES20040245

[email protected]

ES-ES20040249

[email protected]

ES-ES20040251

[email protected]

ES-ES20040252

[email protected]

ES-ES20040253

[email protected]

ES-ES20040254

[email protected]

ES-ES20040256

[email protected]


197



E-mail

ES-ES20040258

[email protected]

ES-ES20040259

[email protected]

ES-ES20040262

[email protected]

ES-ES20040264

[email protected]

ES-ES20040268

[email protected]

ES-ES20040270

[email protected]

ES-ES20040272

[email protected]

ES-ES20040277

[email protected]

ES-ES20040281

[email protected]

ES-ES20040283

[email protected]

ES-ES20040284

[email protected]

ES-ES20040288

[email protected]

ES-ES20040290

[email protected]

ES-ES20040292

[email protected]

ES-ES20040293

[email protected]

ES-ES20040295

[email protected]

ES-ES20040297

[email protected]

ES-ES20040299

[email protected]

ES-ES20040304

[email protected]

ES-ES20040307

[email protected]

ES-ES20040312

[email protected]

ES-ES20040315

[email protected]

ES-ES20040318

[email protected]

ES-ES20040322

[email protected]

ES-ES20040323

[email protected]


198



E-mail

ES-ES20040327

[email protected]

ES-ES20040331

[email protected]

ES-ES20040332

[email protected]

ES-ES20040334

[email protected]

ES-ES20040335

[email protected]

ES-ES20040336

[email protected]

ES-ES20040337

[email protected]

ES-ES20040338

[email protected]

ES-ES20040340

[email protected]

ES-ES20040341

[email protected]

ES-ES20040343

[email protected]

ES-ES20040353

[email protected]

ES-ES20040356

[email protected]

ES-ES20040357

[email protected]

ES-ES20040361

kontakt neuveden

ES-ES20040363

[email protected]

ES-ES20040364

[email protected]

ES-ES20040365

[email protected]

ES-ES20040369

[email protected]

ES-ES20040371

[email protected]

ES-ES20040373

[email protected]

ES-ES20040374

[email protected]

ES-ES20040376

[email protected]

ES-ES20040380

[email protected]

ES-ES20040381

[email protected]


199



E-mail

ES-ES20040382

[email protected]

ES-ES20040386

[email protected]

ES-ES20040387

[email protected]

ES-ES20040393

[email protected]

ES-ES20040394

[email protected]

ES-ES20040399

[email protected]

ES-ES20040400

[email protected]

ES-ES20040404

[email protected]

ES-ES20040405

[email protected]

ES-ES20040406

[email protected]

ES-ES20040408

[email protected]

ES-ES20040412

[email protected]

ES-ES20040413

[email protected]

ES-ES20040414

[email protected]

ES-ES20040415

[email protected]

ES-ES20040416

[email protected]

ES-ES20040418

[email protected]

ES-ES20040420

[email protected]

ES-ES20040421

[email protected]

ES-ES20040422

[email protected]

ES-ES20040424

[email protected]

ES-ES20040425

[email protected]

ES-ES20040426

[email protected]

ES-ES20040427

[email protected]

ES-ES20040429

[email protected]


200



E-mail

ES-ES20040430

[email protected]

ES-ES20040433

[email protected]

ES-ES20040435

[email protected]

ES-ES20040436

[email protected]

ES-ES20040439

[email protected]

ES-ES20040441

[email protected]

ES-ES20040442

[email protected]

ES-ES20040443

[email protected]

ES-ES20040444

[email protected]

ES-ES20040448

[email protected]

ES-ES20040450

[email protected]

ES-ES20040452

[email protected]

ES-ES20040456

[email protected]

ES-ES20040459

[email protected]

ES-ES20040460

[email protected]

ES-ES20040461

[email protected]

ES-ES20040462

[email protected]

ES-ES20040463

[email protected]

ES-ES20040465

[email protected]

ES-ES20040468

[email protected]

ES-ES20040469

[email protected]

ES-ES20040470

[email protected]

ES-ES20040472

[email protected]

ES-ES20040473

[email protected]

ES-ES20040474

[email protected]


201



E-mail

ES-ES20040482

[email protected]

ES-ES20040483

[email protected]

ES-ES20040485

[email protected]

ES-ES20040487

[email protected]

ES-ES20040488

[email protected]

ES-ES20040494

[email protected]

ES-ES20040498

[email protected]

ES-ES20040499

[email protected]

ES-ES20040501

[email protected]

ES-ES20040504

[email protected]

ES-ES20040508

[email protected]

ES-ES20040509

[email protected]

ES-ES20040510

[email protected]

ES-ES20040512

[email protected]

ES-ES20040515

[email protected]

ES-ES20040522

[email protected]

ES-ES20040523

[email protected]

ES-ES20040524

[email protected]

ES-ES20040533

[email protected]

ES-ES20040536

[email protected]

ES-ES20040543

[email protected]

ES-ES20040549

[email protected]

ES-ES20040550

[email protected]

ES-ES20040553

[email protected]

ES-ES20040557

[email protected]


202



E-mail

ES-ES20040558

[email protected]

ES-ES20040562

[email protected]

ES-ES20040563

[email protected]

ES-ES20040566

[email protected]

ES-ES20040569

[email protected]

ES-ES20040571

[email protected]

ES-ES20040576

[email protected]

ES-ES20040578

[email protected]

ES-ES20040581

[email protected]

ES-ES20040585

[email protected]

ES-ES20040592

[email protected]

ES-ES20040593

[email protected]

ES-ES20040596

[email protected]

ES-ES20040597

[email protected]

ES-ES20040603

[email protected]

ES-ES20040609

[email protected]

ES-ES20040617

[email protected]

ES-ES20040625

[email protected]

ES-ES20040639

[email protected]

ES-ES20040643

[email protected]

ES-ES20040644

[email protected]

ES-ES20040653

[email protected]

ES-ES20040654

[email protected]

ES-ES20040664

[email protected]



203


TAB. 15: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – NETHERLAND Development partnership ID

E-mail

NL-2004/EQA/0001

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0003

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0004

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0008

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0009

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0011

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0013

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0014

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0015

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0018

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0022

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0024

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0025

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0027

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0028

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0029

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0033

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0035

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0036

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0039

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0040

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0042

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0046

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0047

[email protected]


204



E-mail

NL-2004/EQA/0048

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0050

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0055

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0056

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0059

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0062

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0063

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0067

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0068

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0069

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0071

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0072

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0075

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0079

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0080

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0083

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0084

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0086

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQA/0088

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQB/0001

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQB/0005

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0003

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0006

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0008

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0010

[email protected]


205



E-mail

NL-2004/EQC/0012

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0013

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0015

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0018

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0019

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0020

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0021

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0022

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0024

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQC/0026

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQD/0001

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQD/0002

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQD/0005

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQD/0006

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQD/0008

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQD/0009

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQD/0010

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0001

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0003

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0004

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0005

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0007

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0009

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0011

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0012

[email protected]


206



E-mail

NL-2004/EQE/0013

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0014

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0017

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0020

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0023

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0025

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0027

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0029

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0031

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0035

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0037

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0038

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0043

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0044

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0046

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0048

thev@s-hertogenbosch

NL-2004/EQE/0049

thev@s-hertogenbosch

NL-2004/EQE/0052

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQE/0053

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQF/0004

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQF/0005

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQF/0007

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQF/0009

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQG/0001

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQG/0002

[email protected]


207



E-mail

NL-2004/EQG/0004

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQG/0009

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQG/0010

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0001

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0004

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0005

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0007

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0008

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0010

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0012

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0013

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0014

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0016

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQH/0017

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQI/0001

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQI/0003

[email protected]

NL-2004/EQI/0004

[email protected]


TAB. 16: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – PORTUGAL Development partnership ID

E-mail

PT-2004-003

[email protected]

PT-2004-005

[email protected]

PT-2004-007

[email protected]

PT-2004-010

[email protected]

PT-2004-011

[email protected]


208



E-mail

PT-2004-013

[email protected]

PT-2004-018

[email protected]

PT-2004-019

[email protected]

PT-2004-024

[email protected]

PT-2004-027

[email protected]

PT-2004-028

[email protected]

PT-2004-029

[email protected]

PT-2004-031

[email protected]

PT-2004-032

[email protected]

PT-2004-033

[email protected]

PT-2004-037

[email protected]

PT-2004-038

[email protected]

PT-2004-041

[email protected]

PT-2004-043

[email protected]

PT-2004-046

[email protected]

PT-2004-047

[email protected]

PT-2004-048

[email protected]

PT-2004-049

[email protected]

PT-2004-051

[email protected]

PT-2004-057

[email protected]

PT-2004-059

[email protected]

PT-2004-065

[email protected]

PT-2004-066

[email protected]

PT-2004-070

[email protected]

PT-2004-082

[email protected]


209



E-mail

PT-2004-083

[email protected]

PT-2004-085

[email protected]

PT-2004-096

[email protected]

PT-2004-099

[email protected]

PT-2004-108

[email protected]

PT-2004-110

[email protected]

PT-2004-125

[email protected]

PT-2004-126

[email protected]

PT-2004-130

[email protected]

PT-2004-132

[email protected]

PT-2004-140

[email protected]

PT-2004-141

[email protected]

PT-2004-156

[email protected]

PT-2004-161

[email protected]

PT-2004-167

[email protected]

PT-2004-170

[email protected]

PT-2004-172

[email protected]

PT-2004-183

[email protected]

PT-2004-189

[email protected]

PT-2004-193

[email protected]

PT-2004-194

[email protected]

PT-2004-201

[email protected]

PT-2004-206

[email protected]

PT-2004-210

[email protected]

PT-2004-211

[email protected]


210



E-mail

PT-2004-212

[email protected]

PT-2004-215

[email protected]

PT-2004-216

[email protected]

PT-2004-220

[email protected]

PT-2004-235

[email protected]

PT-2004-237

[email protected]

PT-2004-240

[email protected]

PT-2004-241

[email protected]

PT-2004-242

[email protected]

PT-2004-243

[email protected]

PT-2004-247

[email protected]

PT-2004-255

[email protected]

PT-2004-256

[email protected]

PT-2004-274

[email protected]

PT-2004-275

[email protected]

PT-2004-285

[email protected]

PT-2004-288

[email protected]

PT-2004-292

[email protected]

PT-2004-293

[email protected]

PT-2004-308

[email protected]

PT-2004-314

[email protected]

PT-2004-320

[email protected]

PT-2004-322

[email protected]

PT-2004-323

[email protected]

PT-2004-325

[email protected]


211



E-mail

PT-2004-326

[email protected]

PT-2004-333

[email protected]

PT-2004-335

[email protected]

PT-2004-342

[email protected]

PT-2004-343

[email protected]

PT-2004-359

[email protected]


TAB. 17: DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS – CZECH REPUBLIC Organization

Development partnership ID (v ECDB)

Project

Slezská diakonie

21

Asistence

RYTMUS

22

Contact

Phone

E-mail [email protected], [email protected]

Jan Czudek, Vladislav Lipus

558 711 335

Let's start it

Leoš Vích

224 251 610

[email protected]

474 686 139

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]


23

RAP - PENTACOM

Lucie Novotná, Luboš Šrámek, Jaroslav Dostál, Hana Nováková

Sdružení občanů zabývajících se emigranty

24

Hedera

Petr Čejka

545 213 643

[email protected]

Sjednocená organizace nevidomých a slabozrakých České republiky

25

Tyfloemploy

Ing. Jiří Kocánek

777 214 097

[email protected]

Vyšší odborná škola Dakol a Střední škola Dakol, o.p.s.

26

Tvá budoucnost

Michaela Pacanovská, Jitka Repperová

596 361 126, 777 066 605

[email protected]

Město Krásná Lípa

27

Komunitní centrum České Švýcarsko

Hana Volfová, Lenka Tvrdková

412354822, 412 383 000

[email protected]

DROM, romské středisko

29

MIKROBUS

Roman Krištof

545 211 576

[email protected] [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

[email protected]; [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Sdružení pro probaci a mediaci v justici

29

Koalice Šance

Pavla Aschermannová

739 470 408, 246 052 416

NÁRODNÍ RADA ZDRAVOTNĚ POSTIŽENÝCH ČR

30

Posílení nezaměstnaných zdravotně postižených občanů na trhu práce na území Prahy

Bohumila Miškovská

777 572 365


31

HELIX

Ludmila Bobysudová

220 397 220


212

[email protected],


Organization


Project

Contact

Phone

E-mail [email protected]

32

KARAVANA

Jan Vavrečka

777 597 996

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Asociace podnikatelek a manažerek ČR, o.s.

33

Nová šance Europodnikatelka 21.století

Magda Piroutková

603 533 865

[email protected]

Občanské sdružení Slovo 21

34

Podpora Romů v Praze

Michaela Dvořáková

222 518 554

[email protected]

KAZUIST, s.r.o.

35

Beskydy pro všechny

Jarmila Šagátová, Jana Szczuková

558 335 479

[email protected], [email protected]

Rekvalifikační a informační centrum, s.r.o.

36

DELTA

Dagmar Prošková

476 104 912


TROAS, s.r.o.

Centrum komunitní práce Ústí nad Labem, poradenská organizace

37

Evropský dům

Lenka Krbcová Mašínová

606 641 123, 475 205 114

Moravská asociace podnikatelek a manažerek

38

Asistenční centra

Mona Nechvátalová

602 568 799

[email protected]

DC VISION, s.r.o.

39

Nová šance

Pavla Witasskova

553 620 456

[email protected]

Sdružení CEPAC – MORAVA

40

Zaměstnej sám sebe

Antonín Plíska

587 333 151

[email protected]

Centrum pro komunitní práci západní Čechy

41

Zvyšování zaměstnanosti prostřednictvím mikropůjček

Tereza Teuschelová

377 329 558

[email protected]

Svaz českých a moravských výrobních družstev

42

Sociální družstva a podniky

Radek Janošík, Miroslav Brázdil, Jana Polanská

224 109 255


RPIC – ViP, s.r.o.

43

Kompetence pro trh práce

Zdeněk Karásek

596 616 795

[email protected]; [email protected]

S-COMP Centre CZ, s.r.o.

44

Zvyšování adaptibility občanů se ZPS - ADIP

Ing. Eva Hokovská, Karel Vyhnal

261 217 509


Centrum vizualizace a interaktivity vzdělávání s.r.o. (původně Free Art Records, s.r.o.)

45

Pro plný život

Tomáš Sokolovský

596 244 502

[email protected], [email protected] [email protected], [email protected] [email protected], [email protected]

Nadace Terezy Maxové Úřad práce v Semilech


46

Najdi svůj směr

Halina Himmelová, Marie Janoušková

605 266 602, 221 733 343

47

Umožnění rozvojového partnerství ve

Tomáš Hájek

602209626, 481 663 349

213


Organization


Project

Contact

Phone

E-mail

venkovských podmínkách

48

Systém pro úspěšné uplatnění Romů na trhu práce

Wail Khazal

49

Regionální kompetence pro udržitelnou zaměstnanost

CONEO, s.r.o.

50

Podpora aktivity seniorů

Jihočeská hospodářská komora

51

LANGMaster Group, s.r.o.

608 158 372

[email protected]

Alena Přidalová

603 185 088

[email protected]

Michal Ondráček

545 212 288, 723 524 354


Merkur

Jana Kostohryzová

382 224 371, 724 981 239

[email protected]

53

Šance pro teleworking

Miroslava Pilátová

244 463 411

[email protected]

Dopravní vzdělávací institut

54

Outplacement jako komplexní podpora zaměstnancům i podnikům

Petra Přibylová, Arnošt Fišl

972 246 241


Střední odborné učiliště Tradičních řemesel, s.r.o.

55

Deep-laid regiony

Peregrina Štípová, Boris Dvořáček

541213291, 602213182


IQ Roma servis

Olomouc Training Centre, s.r.o.

56

Job Points

Jiří Zezulák

572 557 849, 608 888 594

Farní Charita Starý Knín

57

Srdce Čech a charitní sociální služby na venkově

Stanislava Krejčíková

724 236 152


Nový Prostor

59

Do it for you

Jakub Chudomel

220199301, 608 213 727

[email protected]

476206538 (203 Moravcová)

[email protected]

Obchodní a hospodářská komora

Regionální rozvojová agentura Ústeckého kraje


60

SUPPORT

Monika Moravcová

61

Společně k integraci klientů Domu na půli cesty na trh práce

Svatava Škantová

543 331 718

[email protected]

Úřad práce v Chrudimi

62

Rozvoj sociálních služeb

Helena Tuhá

469 613 211, 602 625 000

[email protected]

ORFEUS

63

Sociální politika v ČR

Jozef Slobodník

222 310 209

[email protected]

Sdružení pěstounských rodin


214


Organization


Project

Contact

Phone

E-mail

Sdružení pro péči o duševně nemocné, Fokus Praha

64

Skupina pro rozvoj sociální firmy

Radka Erbanová

283 853 466

[email protected]

Konzorcium nevládních organizací pracujících s uprchlíky v ČR

66

Proč mají zůstat stranou?

Lucie Medková

603 759 360

[email protected]

Český svaz žen

67

MOPPS

Zdeňka Hajná, Miroslava Kováčiková

224 211 017


Univerzita Karlova, Ústav jazykové a odborné přípravy

68

Vytvoření a pilotní ověření modelu pro zlepšení přístupu žadatelů o azyl na trh práce a posílení jejich schopností, které jim umožní snazší adaptabilitu na jakémkoliv trhu práce

Ing. Václav Gotz

603 424 475


Střední škola technická

69

NÁVRATY

Milena Pešoutová

476 137 511

[email protected]

Expertis Praha, spol. s r.o.

72

Třetí kariéra

Kateřina Dobiášová, Kateřina Kubešová

739 091 448

[email protected]

Petra Kubálková

222 540 979, l.38

[email protected]

Radim Habartík

226 200 476, 777 787 961


Otevřená společnost, obecně prospěšná společnost Člověk v tísni, Společnost při ČT, o.p.s.

73

PRO EQUALITY

75

POLIS

Gender Studies, o.p.s.

76

Role rovných příležitostí v prosperitě společenosti

Linda Sokačová

224 915 666


Otevřená společnost, obecně prospěšná společnost

77

PRO EQUALITY

Petra Kubálková

222 540 979, l.38

[email protected]

Gender Studies, o.p.s.

78

Role rovných příležitostí pro ženy a muže v prosperitě společenosti

Pavla Frýdlová

224 915 666



79

Podpora nezletilých žadatelů o azyl

Petra Nováková

220 397 220, 220 397 355


Sdružení Romů Severní Moravy

80

ROMA

Lubomír Kuznik

596 325 790


ukončil činnost Rekvalifikační a informační


Institut a sítě pro

Zuzana Bařtipánová

739046457

215

[email protected]


Organization centrum, s.r.o.


Project

Contact

Phone

E-mail

vzdělávání a trénink v podnikání INNOSTART Pilotáž nízkoprahových kurzů ČJ pro cizince ve vybraných regionech ČR

Vladislav Günter

222713332, 605 777 156

[email protected]


RAP - Mainstreaming

Lucie Novotná

474 686 139


EDUKOL vzdělávací a poradenské sdružení s.r.o.

Podnikatelské líhně a kompetence

Miloš Navrátil

774993055, 736 641 488


AG SYNERKO, s.r.o.

Ženský Element – Inovativní řešení podpory podnikání žen a jejich mentoring prostřednictvím šíření dobrých praxí ESF a Phare projektů

Monika Štrohalmová

739423585, 608842857


Občanské sdružení SLOVO 21

Podpora Romů při vstupu na trh práce – vzdělávání a zaměstnávání

Jelena Silajdzic

222 520 037

[email protected]

Expertis Praha, spol. s.r.o.

Fandíme 50+

Kateřina Kubešová, Kateřina Dobiášová

IREAS, o.p.s.

Integrovaná pracoviště jako nástroj dobré praxe pro začleňování osob na trh práce

Věra Slánská, Šárka Šebková

222230259, 776 881 101


Cesta domů, hospicové občanské sdružení

Umírat doma je normální

Lucie Přádová

283 850 949, 775 556 925

[email protected]

Občanské sdružení RYTMUS

S.U.P.P.

Martina Bromová

224 251 610

[email protected]

Občanské sdružení RYTMUS

S.U.P.R.

Martina Bromová

224 251 610

[email protected]

Jiná realita

Filip Smoljak

222 541 357, 777840444

[email protected]

Step to Net

Lucie Medková

224 946 635

[email protected]

Centrum pro integraci cizinců

Creative Bazar, s.r.o. Konzorcium nevládních organizací


216

739091448



Organization


Project

Contact

Phone

E-mail

pracujících s uprchlíky v ČR

Úřad práce v Semilech

Snadný návrat z mateřské do zaměstnání

Martina Bečková

481311698, 776 009 978

[email protected]

SČMVD

Podnikání v sociální ekonomice

Lucie Brančíková

224109255, 724 966 817


Source: Table provided by MoLSA (https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.file.php?ident=106&fileid=523&md5=0b42a5991fe48a8235ac9106c8396ab6&1213169272)

TAB. 18: MEMBERS, OBSERVERS AND THEIR ALTERNATE MEMBERS IN THE CIP EQUAL MONITORING COMMITTEE Organization 1

MPSV, NM Úsek 7 - předseda MV

Member / Observer

Alternate Member

Tel.: E-mail:

2

MPSV, odbor pro řízení pomoci z ESF – místopředseda

PhDr. Iva Šolcová Tel.:257196843 E-mail: [email protected]

3

4

5

6

MPSV – odd. 721

MPSV – odd. 724

MPSV – SSZ

MPSV – odbor sociálních služeb


Mgr. Markéta Pěchoučková

Ing. Kamila Davidová

Tel: 226 206 865

Tel.:226 206 857

[email protected]

E-mail: kamila.henychová@mpsv.cz

Ing. Renáta Haroková

Ing. Filip Kučera

Tel: 226 206 874

Tel: 226 206 864

E-mail.: [email protected]

E-mail: [email protected]

PhDr. Petr Kaplan

Ing. Ivana Projsová

Tel. 224 913 546

Tel.: 221923572



Mgr. Martin Žárský

Mgr. Kristýna Čermáková

Tel.: 22192 2248

Tel.: 221922471

217


7

MPSV – odbor pro migraci a integraci cizinců

8

MŠMT

9

MPO

10

Ministerstvo vnitra



Mgr. Jan Kepka

Ing. Jana Pöslová

Tel.: 221 92 3735

Tel: 221 92 2256


[email protected]

Ing. Otakar Holeček

Ing. Petr Soukup, CSc.

Tel. : 2 2485 2261

Tel.: 2 2485 3254



Mgr. Petr Trombík

Mgr. Petr Novák

Tel.: 974 832 226, 602 187 718 E-mail: [email protected]

E-mail: [email protected] Adresa: Ministerstvo vnitra Odbor azylové a migrační politiky Poštovní schránka 21/OAM 170 34 Praha 7 11

12

MMR

MF – odbor Národního fondu

Ing. Lucie Petříčková

MVDr. František Bartoš

Tel.: 224 861 599

Tel.: 602 261 233



Ing. Jan Gregor

Ing. Soňa Sajdáková

Ředitel odboru 55

Tel.:

Tel.: 257 042 445


E-mail: [email protected] 13

Asociace krajů ČR

Mgr. Bc. Jana Smetanová

Ing. Lubomír Šmíd

Tel.: 466 026 121

Tel.: 54165 1541




218


14

Ing. Ivan Matulík

PhDr. Jaroslava W e n i g e r o v á Tel: 595 622 229

Tel: 577 043 400

15

16

17

18

Komise pro školství Asociace krajů ČR

Svaz měst a obcí ČR

Svaz průmyslu a dopravy

Koordinační rada KZPS


Email: [email protected]

Mgr. Petr Doležal

Ing. Eva Vrbová

Tel.: 485 226 345

Tel: 257 280 636


Email: [email protected]

Mgr. Irena Sonntagová

Mgr. Jakub Pôbiš

Tel.: 585 562 405

Tel: 234 709 711/715


[email protected]; [email protected]

Mgr. Ivan Paul

JUDr. Ivana Šturmová

Tel.: 234 379 481

tel.: 224934088



Jaroslava Novotná

Po výzvě k předložení nominace nebyl předložen návrh na nominaci na náhradníka člena za KZPS

Tel.: 222 247 450 E-mail: [email protected] 19

20

21

22

Hospodářská komora ČR

ČMKOS

ASO

Petr Jaroš

Mgr. Dana Moree

Tel.: 296 646 163

Tel.: 224 096 672



Ing. Jitka Šebková

Dana Machátová

Tel.

Tel.: 311 673 234


E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

Ing. Ivan Kašpar

Ing. Jana Říská

Tel.: 222 540 525

Tel.: 283 018 232



Asociace institucí vzdělávání dospělých ČR Ing. Gabriela Žilinská, CSc.


PhDr. Marie Třeštíková

219


23

Rada vlády ČR pro NNO

Tel.: 233 552 193, mobil 777 176 998

Tel.: 224 213 053, mobil: 603 252 926



Veronika Součková, DiS

JUDr. Hana Frištenská


tajemnice Rady vlády pro NNO Tel.: 224 002 711 E-mail.: [email protected]

25

Rada vlády ČR pro rovné příležitosti žen a mužů

Mgr. Monika Ladmanová Otevřená společnost, o.p.s. Seifertova 47, 130 00 Praha 3 Tel.222 540 979 E-mail: [email protected]

26

27

28

Rada vlády ČR pro národnostní menšiny

Vládní výbor pro zdravotně postižené občany Rada vlády pro záležitosti romské komunity

RNDr. Milan Pospíšil

Mgr. Eva Holková

Tel.: 296 153 354

Tel.

[email protected]

[email protected]

JUDr. Pavel Ptáčník

Jaroslava Selicharová

Tel.: 224 002 241

Tel.: 224 002 705



Mgr. Hynek Bečvář

Ing. Marie Kalábová

Tel.:


E-mail: [email protected] 29

Asociace zaměstnavatelů zdravotně postižených ČR

Josef Šulc Ing. Karel Rychtář místopředseda AZZP ČR, Jindřišská 2, 110 00 Praha 2, tel. 224 229 754, fax: "ŠANCE", družstvo handicapovaných, Táborská 224 109 348, E-mail: [email protected] 138/220, 615 00 Brno, tel.: 548 212 126, fax:548 212 124, 608 440 810, E-mail: [email protected]

30

MPSV-sekce kancelář ministra

Mgr. Filip Benda Tel. 221 922 892 e-mail: [email protected]


220


Pozorovatelé Evropská komise – GŘ pro zaměstnanost a sociální věci

Dimtcho Tourdanov

Walter Faber, Head of Unit, B4, Rue de Spa 3, 03/63, B-1049, Brussels, tel: +322960332, fax: 322969770, e-mail: [email protected]

Desk Officer for the Czech Republic, B4, Rue de Spa 3, 03/99a, B-1049, Brussels, tel: +3222953056 fax: 322969770, e-mail: [email protected]

MPSV – odbor ekonomický

Mgr. Bedřich Myšička

Ing. František Tupý

Tel.: 221 922 650

Tel.: 221 922 318



Source: MoLSA (https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.file.php?ident=106&fileid=525&md5=e1de527540f5705b786269c6640fcf56&1213169272)

TAB. 19: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (A) A – (Re)-intergration of excluded individuals to the labour market 002 DROM, romské středisko

Zuzana Marhoulová, náhradník Roman Krištof


011 Slezská diakonie

Vladislav Lipus, Vladimíra Malátová


026 NÁRODNÍ RADA ZDRAVOTNĚ POSTIŽENÝCH ČR

Jiří Vencl, Bohulima Miškovská, Václav Krása

[email protected]

038 Vzdělávací společnost EDOST, s.r.o.

František Petermann

[email protected]

602 366 016

046 Sdružení pro probaci a mediaci v justici

Pavla Aschermannová

[email protected]

296 180 297

048 Město Krásná Lípa

Hana Volfová

[email protected]

412 354 842

077 IQ Roma servis

Wail Khazal

[email protected]

084 RYTMUS

Leoš Vích, Vojtěch Zima

[email protected]

224 251 610

085 Sjednocená organizace nevidomých a slabozrakých České republiky

Jiří Kocánek

[email protected]

777 214 097

119 TROAS, s.r.o.

Jan Vavrečka, David Leiss

[email protected]

777 597 996

429 IREAS, o.p.s.

Věra Slánská, Šárka Šebková



221

545 211 576 558 711 762, 737 206 446 266753432, 777 572 365


A – (Re)-intergration of excluded individuals to the labour market 434 Občanské sdružení RYTMUS

Martina Bromová

[email protected]

435 Občanské sdružení RYTMUS

Martina Bromová

[email protected]

MPSV - Správa služeb zaměstnanosti

Andrea Píblová

[email protected]


Ivana Procházková (náhradnice)

[email protected]


Ingrid Kubínová (náhradnice)

[email protected]

MPSV - oddělení pro oblast sociální politiky a sociálních služeb

Kristýna Čermáková

[email protected]

221 922 471

Vládní výbor pro zdravotně postižené občany - Mezirezortní konzultativní tým …

Pavel Ptáčník

[email protected]

224 002 241

Vládní výbor pro zdravotně postižené občany

Václav Krása

[email protected]

ČMKOS

Dana Machátová

[email protected]

311 673 234

Úřad práce Most

Hana Blažková

[email protected]

476440634

Úřad práce Most

Ivana Soukupová (náhradník)

[email protected]

476440630

Úřad práce Praha

Ladislav Hazuka

[email protected]

266 753 421, 602 366 016

Předseda : Jiří Kocánek

Source: MoLSA (https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.file.php?ident=106&fileid=522&md5=288135cda45a32d12b94f000545d2a6e&1213169272)

TAB. 20: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (B) B – Establishment of entrepreneurship and individual entrepreneurs 006 Rekvalifikační a informační centrum, s.r.o.

Kristýna Drienová

[email protected]

476 104 912

012 Jihočeská hospodářská komora

Jana Kostohryzová

[email protected]

724 981 239

022 DC VISION, s.r.o.

Libor Witassek

[email protected]


222

553 620 456-7


B – Establishment of entrepreneurship and individual entrepreneurs 604 269 521, 602 568 799

030 Moravská asociace podnikatelek a manažerek

Věra Staňková, Mona Nechvátalová


035 Sdružení CEPAC – MORAVA

Antonín Plíska

[email protected]

724 804 690

059 Asociace podnikatelek a manažerek ČR, o.s.

Magda Piroutková

[email protected]

266 312 433

082 Svaz českých a moravských výrobních družstev

Karel Rychtář, zástupce Vesecká

[email protected]

603 447 370

112 Centrum pro komunitní práci západní Čechy

Michal Ondráček, Ivana Hlavňovská, Petra Štefulíková


377 329 558

120 CONEO, s.r.o.

Ivana Hlavňovská, Petra Štefulíková


403 Rekvalifikační a informační centrum, s.r.o.

???

???

410 EDUKOL vzdělávací a poradenské sdružení s.r.o.

Miloš Navrátil


436 Creative Bazar, s.r.o.

Filip Smoljak

[email protected]

MPO - Odbor malého a středního podnikání

Václav Polák,zástupkyně Jaroslava Kubů


224 062 172 nebo +3097

MPO - Rada pro rozvoj podnikatelského prostředí

Jan Šoun

[email protected]

224 852 208


Roman Hrnčíř

[email protected]

221 923 391


Vladimír Protiva (náhradník R. Hrnčíře)

[email protected]

221 923 240


Petr Kaplan

[email protected]

221 923 546

MŠMT - Skupina regionálního školství

zástupce nebyl a zatím nebude do této skupiny nominován, MA bude hledat vhodnou osobu za MŠMT

Svaz průmyslu a dopravy ČR

Bohumil Mužík

[email protected]

224 934 512

ČMZRB

Josef Vaník

[email protected]

255 721 470

Úřad práce Olomouc

Lenka Jarmarová

[email protected]

950 141 439

Úřad práce Zlín

Miriam Majdyšová

[email protected]

577 577 415


223


B – Establishment of entrepreneurship and individual entrepreneurs Předseda: Libor Witassek


TAB. 21: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (C) C – Empowering social economics, especially community services 017 Farní Charita Starý Knín

Stanislava Krejčíková, Roman Pavlík


724 236 152

018 Sdružení pro péči o duševně nemocné, Fokus Praha

Markéta Würtherlová

[email protected]

233 540 670, 777 080 391

039 KAZUIST, s.r.o.

Jarmila Šagátová

[email protected]

042 Sdružení pěstounských rodin

Pavel Šmýd, Alexandr Dvořák

[email protected]

053 ORFEUS

Josef Vanický

[email protected]

222 310 209

076Centrum komunitní práce Ústí nad Labem, poradenská organizace

Krbcová Mašínová Lenka

[email protected]

606 641 123

082 Svaz českých a moravských výrobních družstev

Karel Rychtář, Lucie Brančíková


603 447 370

087 Úřad práce v Chrudimi

Helena Tuhá

[email protected]

108 Nový Prostor

Jakub Chudomel, Robert Sztarovics, Peter Mezsaros


432 Cesta domů, hospicové občanské sdružení

Lucie Přádová

[email protected]

440 SČMVD

Lucie Brančíková


MPSV- Úsek pro oblast sociální politiky, sociálních služeb a rodinné politiky

Markéta Holečková

[email protected]

221 922 856

Rada vlády pro nestátní neziskové organizace

Petra Francová

[email protected]

233 356 173

Rada vlády pro nestátní neziskové organizace

Jaroslava Šťastná

[email protected]

222 540 978


224

558 335 479

469659220, 602625657 608213727, 244 468 250


C – Empowering social economics, especially community services MPSV - Správa služeb zaměstnanosti

Andrea Píblová náhradnice Blatníkové

[email protected]


Milena Blatníková

[email protected]


Michaela Navrátilová

[email protected]

SKOK

Milena Černá

[email protected]

Úřad práce Příbram

Marcela Sopková

[email protected]

318 427 526

Úřad práce Ostrava

Taťána Černá

[email protected]

950 143 588

Univerzita Jana Evangelisty Purkyně

M. Huncová


FHS, Katedra oboru Občanský sektor

Marie Dohnalová

[email protected]

Christian Vip.

Barbora Stašková

[email protected]

Akademie soc.podnikání, Nadace VIA

Hana Vosmíková

[email protected]

221 923 619

606 849 229, 472 743 689, 475 284 703

Předseda: Robert Sztarovics


TAB. 22: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (D) D – Adaptability and lifelong learning 001 RPIC – ViP, s.r.o.

Zdeněk Karásek

[email protected]

008 Free Art Records, s.r.o.

Zbyněk Dvořák

[email protected]

009 Vyšší odborná škola Dakol a střední školy Dakol, o.p.s.

Jaroslava Hankeová

596 616 795

hankeova.jaroslava@d akol-karvina.cz

595 391 056, 776 208 477 572 557 849, 608 888 594

031 Obchodní a hospodářská komora

Jiří Zezulák

[email protected]

032 Úřad práce v Semilech

Tomáš Hájek

[email protected]

481 311 698

045 Olomouc Training Centre, s.r.o.

Alena Přidalová, zástupkyně pí. Zapletalová

alena.pridalova@tiscali .cz

603 185 088

047 Dopravní vzdělávací institut, a.s.

Petra Přibylová, Martina Vexlerová,

[email protected],

972 246 218


225


D – Adaptability and lifelong learning Marcela Kosová

[email protected] ,martina.vexlerova@as pra.cz katerina.dobiasova@ex pertis.cz

739 091 448

Alena Brožková

alena.brozkova@osops .cz

222 540 979

073 S-COMP Centre CZ, s.r.o.

Karel Vyhnal

[email protected]

226 205 468

080 Občanské sdružení Slovo 21

Michaela Dvořáková

[email protected] z

222 518 554

111 Nadace Terezy Maxové

Marie Janoušková, zástupkyně H. Himmelová, M. Břeňová

marie.janouskova@clo vekhledacloveka.cz, halina.himmelova@nad acetm.cz, martina.brenova@nada cetm.cz, [email protected]

221 733 343, 602 244 377

117 Střední odborné učiliště Tradičních řemesel, s.r.o.

Antonín Horák, zástupkyně Květa Šmerdová

[email protected]

728 782 051

010 Sdružení Romů Severní Moravy

Lubomír Kuznik

[email protected]

596 325 790

077 IQ Roma servis

Wail Khazal, Ivona Parciova


608 440 170, 774 818 678

056 LangMaster

Barbora Filipová

[email protected] z

407 Centrum pro integraci cizinců

Vladislav Günter

[email protected] g

416 Občanské sdružení SLOVO 21

Jelena Silajdzic

[email protected]

438 Úřad práce v Semilech

Martina Bečková

[email protected]

Kateřina Kubešová, Kateřina Dobiášová

katerina.kubesova@expertis. cz, katerina.dobiasova@expertis .cz

058 Expertis Praha, spol. s r.o.

Kateřina Dobiášová

070, 071 Otevřená společnost, obecně prospěšná společnost

424 Expertis Praha, spol. s.r.o.


226


D – Adaptability and lifelong learning MŠMT odbor koncepce vzdělávací soustavy a dalšího vzdělávání

Klára Bezděková

klara.bezdekova@msm t.cz

257 193 487

MŠMT odbor koncepce vzdělávací soustavy a dalšího vzdělávání

Jitka Krmíčková

jitka.krmickova@msmt. cz

257 193 538

MŠMT odbor koncepce vzdělávací soustavy a dalšího vzdělávání

Mgr. Monika Pokorná

monika.pokorna@msm t.cz

257 193 328

Ústav pro informace ve vzdělávání (ÚIV)

František Barták

[email protected]

224 398 104

Národního ústav odborného vzdělávání

Helena Marinková

[email protected]


Petr Kaplan

[email protected]


Miroslava Nováková (náhradník P. Kaplana)

miroslava.novakova@ mpsv.cz


Eva Síkorová

[email protected]

Ministerstvo průmyslu a obchodu

Hana Marková

[email protected]

224 853 547

Rada vlády pro záležitosti romské komunity

Hynek Bečvář

[email protected]

296 153 503


Ladislav Body

[email protected]

221 923 738

Rada vlády ČR pro rozvoj lidských zdrojů

Hana Poloncarzová

[email protected]

475 657 218

Úřad práce Jindřichův Hradec

Rostislav Škarda

[email protected] sv.cz

Úřad práce Liberec

Kateřina Sadílková

katerina.sadilkova@lb. mpsv.cz

Úřad práce Praha

Mário Faturík

[email protected] v.cz

274 862 251-6 221 923 546

384418150 nebo 384361848

Předseda: Zdeněk Karásek



227


TAB. 23: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (E) E – Equal opportunities for men and women 024 Český svaz žen

Zdeňka Hajná

[email protected]

224 211 017

055 Integrovaná střední škola technická – Centrum odborné přípravy

Jana Wernerová, Helena Pulgrová, Pavel Popluhar


476 137 506

067 Regionální rozvojová agentura Ústeckého kraje

Bohumil Bocian

070, 071 Otevřená společnost, obecně prospěšná společnost

Ivana Střílková


476 206 538, linka 207, 604 231 742 222 54 09 79

095 Gender Studies, o.p.s.

Linda Sokačová, Alena Králíková


224 915 666

096 Gender Studies, o.p.s.

Pavla Frýdlová

[email protected]

224 915 666

412 SYNERKO, s.r.o.

Monika Štrohalmová

[email protected]

MPSV- oddělení rovnosti žen a mužů (701)

Mgr. Kateřina Pacltová

[email protected]

221 923 274

MPSV - Správa služeb zaměstnanosti (odbor poradenství a zprostředkování)

Iveta Gawelczyková

[email protected]

221 923 248

MPSV - SSZ

Zbislav Moránek

[email protected]

MPSV - SSZ

Jana Smělíková

[email protected]

Rada vlády ČR pro rozvoj lidských zdrojů

Martina Šmidochová

[email protected]

261 197 176

Rada vlády pro rovné příležitosti žen a mužů

Dana Machátová

[email protected]

311 673 234

Masarykova univerzita, Katedra sociologie

Iva Šmídová

[email protected]

549 497 090

Sociologický ústav AV

Alena Křížková

[email protected]

222 220 924


228


E – Equal opportunities for men and women CMC Graduate School of Business o.p.s.

Soňa Brabcová

[email protected]

603 228 838

Magistrát hl.m.Prahy

Eva Ferrarová

[email protected]

236 003 296

Česká společnost pro rozvoj lidských zdrojů

Hana Velíšková

[email protected]

???

sekretariát Rady vlády ČR pro lidská práva

Lucie Otáhalová

[email protected]

???

Josef Turek

[email protected]

Úřad práce Ústí nad Labem Předsedkyně: Linda Sokačová


TAB. 24: NATIONAL THEMATIC NETWORKS (F) F – Intergration of foreigners to the labour market Václav Gotz

079 Člověk v tísni, Společnost při ČT, o.p.s.

Zuzana Pernicova

104 Sdružení občanů zabývajících se emigranty

Martina Kalovská


545 213 643

105 Organizace pro pomoc uprchlíkům

Ludmila Bobysudová

[email protected]

220 397 220

106 Konzorcium nevládních organizací pracujících s uprchlíky v ČR

Nidžar Džana Popović


220 397 355

2/5.2 Organizace pro pomoc uprchlíkům

Petra Nováková

[email protected]

220 397 220

437 Konzorcium nevládních organizací pracujících s uprchlíky v ČR

Lucie Medková

[email protected]

MV - odbor azylové a migrační politiky

Petr Novák, zástupce P. Trombík

[email protected]

Správa uprchlických zařízení MV ČR

Petr Pondělníček

[email protected]


[email protected]

603 424 475

063 Univerzita Karlova, Ústav jazykové a odborné přípravy

[email protected]

229

777 787 369

974 832 468, 974 827 501 974 827


F – Intergration of foreigners to the labour market Správa uprchlických zařízení MV ČR

Aleš Belka

Správa uprchlických zařízení MV ČR

Radim Prahl Valová Martina


Miloš Tichý

[email protected]

221 923 558


Martina Kalinová

[email protected]

221 923 349


Petra Boušková (náhradnice M. Tichého)

[email protected]

221 923 507

MPSV - odbor migrace a integrace cizinců

Jan Kepka

[email protected]

221 923 735

Rada vlády pro národnostní menšiny

Alexej Kelin

[email protected]

603 574 168

Úřad práce Praha

Xenie Johnová

[email protected]

118

Předseda: Václav Götz


230

FINAL REPORT. Project output no. 6 Evaluation of CIP EQUAL Transnational Cooperation Principle. Client:

Recommend Documents