EQUAL - Final report

Transkript

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
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
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.
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;
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).
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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)
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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
The report was drawn up as a complex analysis of focus groups and evaluation of processes, it
contained conclusions and recommendations.
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
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 Praktická doporučení Květen 2008
a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti. 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? Praktická doporučení Květen 2008
a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti. 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? Praktická doporučení Květen 2008 a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti. Praktická doporučení Květen 2008
a tipy pro řízení programů podporujících projekty zaměřené na mezinárodní spolupráci v novém programovém období i dále v budoucnosti. 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 EVALUATION OF CIP EQUAL TRANSNATIONAL CO-OPERATION PRINCIPLE
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
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
DEADLINE
FOR
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
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
EVALUAT
ION
METHOD
S USED
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
DESCRIPTIO
N/
EVALUATION
CRITERIA
RELATION
SHIP WITH
EVALUATI
ON
OBJECTIVE
S
EXPERTS
EVALUAT
ION
METHOD
S USED
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?
(Applies to
both
tasks)
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)
(Applies to
both
tasks;
findings
from EU
countries
will be
compared
with the
findings
from CZ)
(Applies to both
tasks)
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
RELATIO
NSHIP
WITH
EVALUAT
ION
OBJECTI
VES
EXPERTS
EVALUAT
ION
METHOD
S USED
TARGET
GROUPS
OUTPUTS
REQUIRED
DEADLINE
FOR
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
(Applies to
both
tasks)
(Applies to
both
tasks)
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)
ANAL,
CASE,
SWOT, FS,
INT
5.2. Analysis of the
(Applies to
both tasks)
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
(Applies to both
tasks)
(Applies to
both tasks)
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
DESCRIPTIO
N/
EVALUATION
CRITERIA
RELATIO
NSHIP
WITH
EVALUAT
ION
OBJECTI
VES
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)
(Applies to
all tasks)
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
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)
(Applies to
all tasks)
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
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
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
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
What are the requirements for the application of this possibility?
Practical
recommendations and
tips for the
management of
programmes
supporting projects
focusing on
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;
was a choice of one possibility only and none of the possibilities was ticked off - the
“other” possibility was ticked off;
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
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
National Supporting
Structure; 8
Applicant or a person
interested in getting
involved in EQUAL project;
5
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
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
trainings
other
twinning
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
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
other
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
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
other
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
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;
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
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
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
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
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
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
other
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
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
to transnational cooperation would you emphasize more? [projects]
100
Czech Republic
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
91
joint research
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
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
to transnational cooperation would you drop out or significantly restrict?
[projects]
Czech Republic
15
10
5
0
92
joint research
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
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
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?
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
joint research
4,50
4,00
3,50
other:
self-assessment
project management
trainings
twinning
capacity building
Total average
joint recognition of qualifications or competences
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
What activities are in your view the most appropriate for transnational cooperation?
from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very much so)
95
3,00
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?
5,50
from 1 (not at all) to 6 (very much so)
4,50
4,00
3,50
96
long-term perspective)?“ (only one option could be selected; the data for all respondents and also for the
20
Who benefits from transnational cooperation the most?
19
Total
15
Czech Republic
10
6
5
4
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
project partners
ultimate
beneficiaries
project
management
social partners
managing
authority
none of them
97
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
0
no impacts on
duration
it requires up to
20% more time
up to 40%
up to 60%
0
up to 80%
0
0
more
98
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
definition of
rules and
procedures
overall
coordination
monitoring and implementation
evaluation
drawing of
conclusions
2
0
other
99
other
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
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
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
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
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?
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
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
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?
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
competences
project planning
capacity building
seminars
conferences
benchmarking
study trips
joint research
0,00
transfer of tools
know-how transfer
0
20
105
managing structures and only for Czech Republic are mentioned) - ordered by average suitability of
respondents from managing structures from Czech Republic descending
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
competences
transfer of tools
study trips
joint research
0,00
know-how transfer
0
20
106
managing structures and only for Czech Republic are mentioned) - ordered by frequency of activities usage
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
competences
trainings
benchmarking
joint research
0,00
self-assessment
transfer of tools
study trips
seminars
project planning
project management
conferences
know-how transfer
0
c
20
107
0
benchmarking
trainings
twinning
capacity building
competences
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
Combination of activities performed and not performed
together with possibly empesized and restricted activities
250
Czech Republic
150
100
50
c
108
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
ultimate beneficiaries
project management
social partners
managing authority
none of them
109
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]
68
63
70
80
92
90
9
51
43
7
0
0
no impacts on duration
it requires up to 20% more
time
up to 40%
up to 60%
up to 80%
0
more
110
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]
90
80
68
70
63
60
51
50
43
40
30
21
20
20
16
11
9
10
6
10
2
0
preparatory work
overall coordination
implementation
definition of rules and
procedures
monitoring and
evaluation
drawing of conclusions
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
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.
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
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
Employment
Centrum voor Dienstverlening
(CvD)
GOA Noord
NV REWIN West Brabant
Gewest Eemland
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
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
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]
Name of
Organization
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/ ,
p?cip=SK&national=91
N
Agency
EUROFORMES,
non-profitable org.
Vysokoškolákov 4
010 08 Žilina
SK 25
2D
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#,
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
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
(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
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
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
Liz Logan, Network Director
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]
Name of
Organization
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
Name of
Organization
Contact
Project
num.
Topi
c[nu
m.]
Name of Project
TCA
[num]
TCA
URL
Cesre
Provincial
Administration of
Health Local
Administration of
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
[email protected]
[email protected]
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: <http://www.strukturalni-fondy.cz/uploads/old/1141122325.materi-l-nrp--iii.-nrp-upraveny---str-113-a-124.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://old.mmr.cz/upload/files/evropska_politika/nsrf_CJ_170707_final_db.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/200606-reflection-notetrans_en.pdf>.
•
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: <http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:210:0025:0078:EN:PDF> (in English)
or <http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/cs/oj/2006/l_210/l_21020060731cs00250078.pdf> (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: <http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:210:0012:0018:EN:PDF>.
•
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: <http://www.mvcr.cz/sbirka/2004/sb143-04.pdf> (original text) or
<http://business.center.cz/business/pravo/zakony/zamestnanost/> (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: <http://www.mvcr.cz/sbirka/2006/sb037-06.pdf> (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:
<http://www.mvcr.cz/sbirka/2004/sb012-04.pdf> or
<http://business.center.cz/business/pravo/zakony/verzak/> (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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/200704-transactionplan_en.pdf>.
132
change of other related acts]. Sbírka zákonů Česká republika. 2000, částka 65, p. 3140-3128.
URL: <http://www.mvcr.cz/sbirka/2000/sb065-00.pdf> (original text).
•
Czech Republic. Ministry of Labour and Social Affaires. Práce a právo [Labour and law]
[online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: <http://www.mpsv.cz/cs/6>.
•
International Labour Organization. National Labour Law Profile: The Czech Republic [online].
[cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/ifpdial/info/national/cz.htm>.
•
Czech Republic. Právní předpisy : portál o veřejných zakázkách a koncesích [Legislation :
public procurement and trading licences portal] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.portal-vz.cz/pravni-predpisy>.
•
International Labour Organization. National Labour Law Profile: Italy [online]. [cit. 2008-0415]. URL: <http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/ifpdial/info/national/it.htm>.
•
Germany. Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales. Arbeitsrecht [Labour law] [online]. [cit.
2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.bmas.de/coremedia/generator/16194/filter=Thema:Arbeitsrecht/ergebnisse.htm
l>.
•
International Labour Organization. National Labour Law Profile: Federal Republic of Germany
[online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/ifpdial/info/national/ger.htm>.
•
United Kingdom. Employees : Directgov – Employment [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/index.htm>.
•
Poland. Ministry of Labour and Social Affaires. Obowiązujące Akty Prawne [Binding legislation]
[online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://psz.praca.gov.pl/main.php?do=ShowPage&nPID=867685&pT=details&sP=CONTENT,
objectID,873075>.
•
France. Ministry of Labour, Social Relations, Family and Solidarity. Fiches pratiques [Useful
documents] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:<http://www.travail-
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: <http://www.employment.gov.sk/new/index.php?SMC=1&id=442>.
•
Slovakia. Verejné obstarávanie [Public procurement] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.esf.gov.sk/esf/index.php?SMC=1&id=148>.
•
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: <http://www.uvo.gov.sk/download/2006/zakon25_2006/zakon25_2006.pdf>.
•
Austria. Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour. Labour law [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15].
URL: <http://www.bmwa.gv.at/EN/Topics/Labourlaw/Law/default.htm>.
133
•
Spain. Ministry of Labour and Social Affaires. Trabajo y empleo [Labour and employment]
[online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: <http://www.mtas.es/sec_leyes/trabajo.htm>.
•
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:
<http://home.szw.nl/> or <http://www.employment.gov.nl/ (website temporarily
unavailable).
•
Portugal. Ministry of Labour and Social Solidarity. Legislação – Emprego [Legislation - Labour]
[online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: <http://www.mtss.gov.pt/left.asp?01.07.03.03>.
•
Portugal. CITE. Legislação nacional [National Legislation] [online]. [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.cite.gov.pt/cite/Legisnac.htm>.
•
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 :
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/about/prog-doc-ms_en.cfm>.
URL: <http://www.equalcr.cz/clanek.php?lg=1&id=265>.
Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí ČR, aktualizace: 6.10.2005 [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL:
<http://www.esfcr.cz/clanek.php?lg=1&id=13>.
a sociálních věcí, aktualizace: 11.4.2008 [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.esfcr.cz/clanek.php?lg=1&id=15>.
European Commission, 30.12.2003 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 25 s. URL: <http://europa.eu/eurlex/en/com/cnc/2003/com2003_0840en01.pdf>. 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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/GLen.pdf>. 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:
<http://www.esfcr.cz/files/clanky/3486/OP_LZZ_FINAL.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://www.esfcr.cz/files/clanky/5748/PD_OPLZZ_leden2008.pdf>.
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: <http://www.esfcr.cz/clanek.php?lg=1&id=6214>.
•
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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/transnatguide2005whl_en.pdf
> (in English) or
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/transnatguide2005_cs.pdf>
(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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/transnatguide_en.pdf>.
Communities, 2005 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 42 p. URL:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/partnerguide-lo_en.pdf> (in
English) or
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/partnerguide_cs.pdf> (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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/pdtoolkit_en.pdf>. ISBN 9279-00177-9.
•
ESF France National Level: Transnational Measures : Call for Projects 2008 [online]. [cit.
2008-04-15]. URL: <http://www.esfcr.cz/files/clanky/6305/Vyzva_Francie.pdf>,
<https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.attachment.php?f=5266,433> or
<http://www.racine.fr/virtual/22/Documents/pdf/Presentation_Transnat_France_eng(1).pdf>.
•
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: <https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.attachment.php?f=5104,419>.
[online]. [cit. 2008-05-15]. 3 p. Available via ESF Forum. URL:
<https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.attachment.php?f=5104,418>.
•
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: <https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.attachment.php?f=5161,421>.
•
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:
<<https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.attachment.php?f=5266,432>.
•
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: <http://www.esfcr.cz/files/clanky/5484/Evaluace-OPLZZ-final.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://circa.europa.eu/Public/irc/empl/equal_etg/library?l=/etg2/01_documents/etg2_doc_s
ummary/_EN_1.0_&a=d>.
Ministerstvo práce a sociálních věcí, červen 2007 [cit. 2008-04-07]. 50 p. URL:
<http://www.equalcr.cz/files/clanky/898/zaverecna_zprava.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://www.esfcr.cz/files/clanky/1659/zprava.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://www.equalcr.cz/files/clanky/613/zaverecna_zprava.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/about/evaluation_en.cfm>.
•
ETCIM [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-15]. Includes Transnational Cooperation Agreements
(TCAs) of all projects. URL: <https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/login.jsp> (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
<https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/reports.jsp>.
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:
<https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.php?ident=38&1207567449>.
(without login and password). URL:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/tools/extranet_en.cfm>.
wide evaluation of the CI EQUAL 2000-2006. URL:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/evaluation/esf_en.html>.
(Germany) : Economix Research & Consulting, 12th October 2007 [cit. 2008-05-15]. 89 p.
Available via ESF Forum. URL:
<https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.file.php?ident=106&fileid=530&md5=1d6b874eb59e
6a3964c4e195a8e70b62&1210878167>.
•
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:
<https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.attachment.php?f=5245,431>.
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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/evalsed/library/influential_eval
uation_case_studies_en.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://www.jica.go.jp/english/evaluation/guides/guideline.html>.
Agency, c1995-2007 [cit. 2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.jica.go.jp/english/evaluation/guides/management.html>.
•
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: <http://www.nros.cz/programy-nros/ukonceneprogramy/resolveUid/06e1830c8fea9e6dc121350b7fd68a1a>.
•
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:
<http://mande.co.uk/2008/topic-bibliographies/standards/discussion-of-the-use-of-the-oecddaccriteria-for-international-development-evaluations/>.
2008-09-12]. URL: <http://eval-net.org/view_konf.php?id=2008>.
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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/conferences/od2006/doc/presentations/e/santos_12e29.doc
>.
•
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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/sucstor05_en.pdf>. 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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/freemovbroch2004_en.pdf>.
ISBN 92-894-7001-1 (printed version).
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/data/document/200704-trans-seminarresults.pdf>. D(2007) 8550.
•
Transnationality – a guide for Development Partnerships [online]. GB EQUAL Support Unit, [cit.
2008-04-07]. 43 p. URL:
137
<http://www.equal.ecotec.co.uk/resources/gpg/gpg/down_doc.asp?file=gpg_transnationality.doc
>.
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:
<http://www.bruxelles.irisnet.be/fr/region/region_de_bruxellescapitale/ministere_de_la_region_de_bruxelles_capitale/competences_et_organisation/secretari
at_general/cellule_de_coordination_des_fonds_structurels_europeens/documentation/rapport
s_annuels_et__valuations.shtml>.
Belgium – Wallonia:
•
PROGRAMMATION 2007-2013 [online]. Région wallonne [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://economie.wallonie.be/02PolEco/Territoires/territoires.htm>.
•
PROGRAMMATION 2007-2013 DES FONDS STRUCTURELS EN REGION WALLONNE [online].
Région wallone [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://economie.wallonie.be/02FondStructurels/20072013/FondsStructurels1.htm>.
Bulgaria:
•
Structural funds [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.eufunds.bg/>.
Czech Republic:
•
Evaluace v období 2004-2006 [online]. Ministerstvo pro místní rozvoj, c2003-2007 [2008-0912]. URL: <http://www.strukturalni-fondy.cz/evaluace>.
Denmark:
•
Regionalt.dk [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.regionalt.dk/>.
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:
<http://www.struktuurifondid.ee/public/Handbook_Final_3.Nov.2006_ENG.pdf>.
•
<http://www.struktuurifondid.ee/?id=3975>.
Euroopa Liidu struktuurifondid : Informaterjalid [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.struktuurifondid.ee/?id=4797>.
Finland:
•
Sisäasiainministeriö
[online].
<http://www.intermin.fi/>.
Sisäasiainministeriö,
c2008
[2008-09-12].
URL:
France:
•
•
•
DIAC : accueil [online]. DIAC, 2008 [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.diact.gouv.fr/>.
Société Française de l’Évaluation [online]. Paris : SFE, [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.sfe.asso.fr/>.
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: <http://www.fse.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Doc1-PO2007-DeposeSFC-9fevrier.pdf>.
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: <http://82.138.79.135/fse/IMG/pdf/6pages_competitivite.pdf>.
12]. URL: <http://www.fse.gouv.fr/Les-textes-de-reference-2007-2013.html>.
Idequal : la plateforme des produits Equal France [online]. EQUAL France, [cit. 2008-09-12].
URL: <http://www.idequal.fr/>.
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: <http://www.dps.tesoro.it/uval.asp>.
•
Rete NUVV [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.retenuvv.it>.
•
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: <http://www.lavoro.gov.it/NR/rdonlyres/C7FC0061-CBE7-47C2-8DCDC3CD7384297D/0/2007IlpuntosuilnuovoFSE.pdf>. ISSN 1129-1451.
•
Programmi operativi (Po) [online]. Ministero del Lavoro e della Previdenza Sociale, [cit. 200809-12].
URL:
<http://www.lavoro.gov.it/Lavoro/Europalavoro/SezioneOperatori/ProgrammazioneFSE200720
13/DocumentazioneFSE200720013/ProgrammiOperativi.htm>.
Sociali
[cit.
2008-09-12].
Zejména
<http://www.equalitalia.it/is/ismeri_home.asp>.
evaluační
zprávy.
URL:
Ireland:
•
NDP : National Development Plan 2007-2013 : Transforming Ireland [online]. Dublin :
NDP/CSF Information Office [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.ndp.ie/docs/NDP_Homepage/1131.htm>.
Cyprus:
•
Planning Bureau [online]. Republic of Cyprus, [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.planning.gov.cy/>.
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-
<http://www.esparama.lt>.
12]. URL: <http://www.esparama.lt/2007-2013/lt/>.
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:
<http://www.esfondi.lv/page.php?id=340>.
•
ES Fondi : Pabeigtās izvērtēšanas un pētījumi [online]. Finanšu ministrija, 2007 [2008-09-12].
URL: <http://www.esfondi.lv/page.php?id=302>.
•
ES Fondi : Šobrīd notiekošās izvērtēšanas un pētījumi [online]. Finanšu ministrija, 2007 [200809-12]. URL: <http://www.esfondi.lv/page.php?id=301>.
<http://www.esfondi.lv/>.
139
•
ES Fondi : Plānotās izvērtēšanas, pētījumi un izsludinātie iepirkumi [online]. [2008-09-12].
URL: <http://www.esfondi.lv/page.php?id=351>.
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:
<http://www.eco.public.lu/attributions/dg2/d_politique_regionale/>.
Hungaria:
•
Nemzeti Fejlesztési Ügynökség [online]. Nemzeti Fejlesztési Ügynökség, c2007 [cit. 2008-1011]. URL: <http://www.fejlesztespolitika.gov.hu/>.
Malta:
•
Planning and Priorities Coordination Division : Evaluation [online]. Valletta : Office of the
Prime Minister, [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.ppcd.gov.mt/evaluation>.
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: <http://www.zporr.gov.pl/Ewaluacje/>.
•
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-
<http://www.pte.org.pl/>.
Ewaluacyjne, c2006, 2008-08-07 [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.efs.gov.pl/Materialy+informacyjne+publikacje+i+ekspertyzy/Raporty+ewaluacyj
ne/>.
Rozwoju Regionalnego, 2008-07-28 [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.konkurencyjnosc.gov.pl/Ewaluacja+SPO+WKP+raporty/>.
2008. [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.parp.gov.pl/index/index/30>.
[online]. 2004 [cit. 2008-09-12].154 s. URL:
<http://www.equal.gov.pl/NR/rdonlyres/0E4E4528-2BB8-4972-806B34891F7DB67E/0/piw_equal_1108.pdf>.
09-12]. 160 s. URL: <http://www.equal.gov.pl/NR/rdonlyres/FD66F3A5-D338-48A5-A02AD7DDFC23F629/43155/Raportewaluacyjny.pdf>.
•
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:
<http://www.equal.gov.pl/NR/rdonlyres/FD66F3A5-D338-48A5-A02AD7DDFC23F629/41002/2RC_Tematyczny_Final.pdf>.
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: <http://www.planotecnologico.pt/>.
[2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.qca.pt/>.
<http://www.qren.pt/>.
140
Austria:
•
ÖROK : Homepage der Österreichischen Raumordnungskonferenz [online]. Wien : ÖROK,
2008 [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.oerok.gv.at/>.
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: <http://anaf.mfinante.ro/wps/portal>.
URL: <http://www.mfinante.ro/engl/index.jsp>.
URL: <http://www.mie.ro/index.php?p=555>.
Greece:
•
Programmes 2000-2006 [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.hellaskps.gr/>.
Slovenia:
•
Področje evropske kohezijske politike [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.svlr.gov.si/si/delovna_podrocja/podrocje_evropske_kohezijske_politike/>.
United Kingdom:
•
Welcome, the UK government’s European Regional Development Fund site [online]. [2008-09-
12]. URL: <http://www.erdf.communities.gov.uk/>.
•
Evaluation – Introduction [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:
•
European Social Fund : Home Page [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.esf.gov.uk/>.
<http://www.esf.gov.uk/archive/2000_2006_esf_programme/evaluation_introduction.asp>.
United Kingdom – Wales:
•
Welsh European Funding Office [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.wefo.wales.gov.uk/>.
•
Welsh European Funding Office : Research, Monitoring and Evaluation [online]. [2008-09-12].
URL: <http://www.wefo.wales.gov.uk/default.asp?action=page&ID=2>.
United Kingdom – Scotland:
•
The Scottish Government : Business & Industry : Resources, requesting information and links
[online]. Page updated: Friday, March 30, 2007 [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Business-Industry/support/17404/8407>.
United Kingdom – Nothern Ireland:
•
European Union Structural Funds in Northern Ireland [online]. Department of Finance and
Personnel, c2005[2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.europe-dfpni.gov.uk/>.
•
Special EU Programmes Body : Reports & Publications [online]. SEUPB, c2005 [2008-09-12].
URL: <http://www.seupb.org/pub.htm>.
Spain:
•
DIRECCIÓN GENERAL DE FONDOS COMUNITARIOS [online]. [2008-09-12]. URL:
<http://www.dgfc.sgpg.meh.es>.
Sweden:
•
Välkommen till ITPS [online]. Östersund : ITPS, [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.itps.se/>.
•
Internationellt: Nuteks webbplats [online]. Stockholm (Sweden) : Nutek, Dagens datum:
2008-09-12 [2008-09-12]. URL: <http://www.nutek.se/sb/d/108>.
141
•
Startsida – Svenska ESF-Rådet [online]. Svenska ESF-Rådet, Uppdaterad: 2008-08-19 [200809-12]. URL: <http://www.esf.se/>.
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: <http://www.equalpartner.net/>.
•
Welcome to the EQUAL Common Database (ECDB) section [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-07].
URL: <https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/index.jsp?lang=en#round>. (also included in
Contacts section)
•
Upcoming and recent events [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/activities/events_en.cfm>.
•
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: <http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/products/index_en.cfm>.
[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: <https://forum.esfcr.cz/node/discussion.php?ident=30&1210878853>.
<https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/tcaFullTextSearch.jsp>.
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:
<http://partnership.esflive.eu/>.
85) Sound planning and management : a community of practice on Project Cycle Management
(PCM) [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: <http://soundplanning.esflive.eu/>.
86) Programme Management : a Community of Practice on Programme Management [online].
ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: <http://programmemanagement.esflive.eu/>.
87) Transnationality : exchange and cooperation across Europe – learning for change [online].
ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: <http://www.transnationality.eu/>.
88) European Community of Practice : Innovation and Mainstreaming [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-0415]. URL: <http://innovation.esflive.eu/>.
89) Gender mainstreaming : a tool for change [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL:
<http://www.gendermainstreaming-cop.eu/>.
90) ESF Forum [online]. ESF, [cit. 2008-04-15]. URL: <http://evaluation.esflive.eu/> or
<https://forum.esfcr.cz/>.
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:
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/equal/tools/contacts_en.cfm>.
•
Welcome to the EQUAL Common Database (ECDB) section [online]. EQUAL [cit. 2008-04-07].
URL: <https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/index.jsp?lang=en#round>. [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: <http://www.esfcr.cz/clanek.php?lg=1&id=11>.
•
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:
<https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/equal/jsp/advancedSearch.jsp?ffCommandId=searchAdvanced&ff
RoundFilter=on&ffRound=0&ffCipFilter=on&ffCip=CZ&ffAppStatusFilter=on&ffAppStatus=ZSA04&
ffAppStatus=RND1ATV&search=Search#Result>.
[online]. EQUAL ČR [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL:
<http://www.equalcr.cz/files/clanky/288/06_05_30_seznam.xls>.
<http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/esf/fields/transnational_en.htm>.
accessible after registration (free of charge). [cit. 2008-04-07]. URL:
<http://www.transnationality.eu/view/ms_list>.
<http://www.equalcr.cz/clanek.php?lg=1&id=21>.
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
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
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
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
[email protected] [email protected]
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
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)
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)
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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]
s.r.o.
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]
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
Organizace pro pomoc uprchlíkům
31
HELIX
Ludmila Bobysudová
220 397 220
212
[email protected],
Organization
Development
partnership ID
(v ECDB)
Project
Contact
Phone
E-mail
[email protected]
32
KARAVANA
Jan Vavrečka
777 597 996
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
Rekvalifikační a informační
centrum, s.r.o.
36
DELTA
Dagmar Prošková
476 104 912
[email protected]
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
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]
Nadace Terezy Maxové
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
Development
partnership ID
(v ECDB)
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
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
Development
partnership ID
(v ECDB)
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
Otevřená společnost, obecně
prospěšná společnost
Člověk v tísni, Společnost při ČT,
o.p.s.
73
PRO EQUALITY
75
POLIS
76
Role rovných
příležitostí v
prosperitě
společenosti
Linda Sokačová
224 915 666
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
Otevřená společnost, obecně
prospěšná společnost
77
PRO EQUALITY
Petra Kubálková
222 540 979,
l.38
[email protected]
78
Role rovných
příležitostí pro ženy a
muže v prosperitě
společenosti
Pavla Frýdlová
224 915 666
[email protected],
[email protected]
Organizace pro pomoc uprchlíkům
79
Podpora nezletilých
žadatelů o azyl
Petra Nováková
220 397 220,
220 397 355
80
ROMA
Lubomír Kuznik
596 325 790
[email protected],
[email protected]
ukončil činnost
Rekvalifikační a informační
Institut a sítě pro
Zuzana Bařtipánová
739046457
215
[email protected]
Organization
centrum, s.r.o.
Development
partnership ID
(v ECDB)
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]
s.r.o.
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
Organization
Development
partnership ID
(v ECDB)
Project
Contact
Phone
E-mail
pracujících s uprchlíky v ČR
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]
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
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
13
Asociace krajů ČR
Mgr. Bc. Jana Smetanová
Ing. Lubomír Šmíd
Tel.: 466 026 121
Tel.: 54165 1541
E-mail:
[email protected]
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
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
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
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.:
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
011 Slezská diakonie
Vladislav Lipus, Vladimíra
Malátová
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
604 269
521, 602
568 799
030 Moravská asociace podnikatelek a manažerek
Věra Staňková, Mona Nechvátalová
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
377 329 558
120 CONEO, s.r.o.
Ivana Hlavňovská, Petra Štefulíková
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
603 447 370
087 Úřad práce v Chrudimi
Helena Tuhá
[email protected]
108 Nový Prostor
Jakub Chudomel, Robert
Sztarovics, Peter Mezsaros
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
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
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
MŠMT odbor koncepce vzdělávací soustavy a dalšího
vzdělávání
Klára Bezděková
klara.bezdekova@msm
t.cz
257 193 487
vzdělávání
Jitka Krmíčková
jitka.krmickova@msmt.
cz
257 193 538
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
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected]
476 137 506
067 Regionální rozvojová agentura Ústeckého kraje
Bohumil Bocian
070, 071 Otevřená společnost, obecně prospěšná
společnost
Ivana Střílková
[email protected]
[email protected]
476 206 538,
linka 207, 604
231 742
222 54 09 79
095 Gender Studies, o.p.s.
Linda Sokačová, Alena
Králíková
[email protected],
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
[email protected]
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
Aleš Belka
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

EQUAL - Final report

Transkript

Podobné dokumenty

youth in action program 2010