A Proposal for a Standard With Innovation Management System

Source: Authors
Teresa Costa and Luísa Carvalho
“Crescer Com Afetividade” 68.500,00 650,00 0,95%
“Crescer dos 8 aos 80” 80.648,00 21.556,00 26,73%
“EC3, Eco-Centro de Compostagem Caseira” 38.644,00 135,00 0,35%
“Educação é a Melhor Prevenção” 200.000,00 2.885,00 1,44%
“EfeitoD” 97.388,00 48.128,00 49,42%
“Formar Campões para a Vida” 53.880,00 1.240,00 2,30%
“Lar Telhadinho” 200.000,00 4.441,00 2,22%
“Lavandaria Solidária” 164.733,00 46.935,00 28,49%
“Mais Cuidados, Mais Integrados” 20.470,00 15,00 0,07%
“Passos de Tempo” 46.420,00 12.364,00 26,64%
“Piscina Terapêutica os 4 Elementos” 118.000,00 1.856,00 1,57%
“Por ti” – Projecto de Apoio a ti 14.835,00 2.636,00 17,77%
“Porto de Abrigo” 129.600 2.855 2,20%
“Retalhos de Esperança” 5.000,00 5.000,00 100,00%
“Rir é o melhor remédio?” 134.000,00 28.988,00 21,63%
“Saúde a Sorrir” 112.376,00 2.148,00 1,91%
“Semear o Futuro” 100.000,00 27.012,00 27,01%
“Serviço de Intervenção e Apoio à Criança” 58.469,00 4.633,00 7,92%
“UMAD” 50.000,00 50.000,00 100,00%
It is possible to verify that 48% of the projects have less than 10% of funding (15 projects), 7% (2
projects) have funding higher than 10% and lower than 20%, 19% (6 projects) have funding higher
than 20% and lower than 30%, 3% (1 project) have funding higher than 30% and lower than 40%, 10/
(3 projects) have funding higher than 40% and lower than 50% and finally 13% of the projects (4
projects) have 100% of funding.
This analysis suggests that the attractiveness of the projects can vary, and its funding may depends
on several factors, such as the social entrepreneurs’ proactivity, the stakeholders’ involvement, the
age of the project, region and type of public target.
In order to understand the reasons of this attractiveness it was also studied some features of the
projects: initial date, region, scope of activities, type of organization (Social Solidarity Institutions –
public or private), entrepreneur proactivity, stakeholders’ participation and public target (see Table 2).
Table 2: Assessment of project attractiveness (data results)
%
Funding
Autistic children
and young 0,32%
Project name Public target
"Centro ABCReal
Portugal"
"Polo Social
Manto”
"Projeto Viver,
Crescer e
Integrar"
"Social Innovation
Challenge"
“A Vida Vale”
“Agência ODM”
“Audiodescrição.
pto”
Disadvantaged
communities 48,23%
Imigrant
population 9,20%
Students high
school 36,51%
Elderly
population 20,94%
Students in
higher education 44,44%
People with
visual disabilities
100,00
%
Dat
e Scope activity NUT II
201
1
201
1
201
1
201
1
201
1
200
9
201
0
109
Geographic
scope
Public
Institut
ion
Education / Special
Education
Social
entrepreneurship
/Socio-Economic
Lisbon National Yes
development Lisbon National Yes
Education for
citizenship
Education/ education
Lisbon National No
for sustainability
Entrepreneurship/Soci
Lisbon National Yes
o-Economic Alentej
development
Education for
o Regional Yes
citizenship
Education/ education
Lisbon National Yes
for sustainability Lisbon Regional No