EQUAL - Final report - eng - navreme

EVALUATION OF CIP EQUAL TRANSNATIONAL CO-OPERATION PRINCIPLE
We understand the question, in which way it would be possible, from the part of the programme
managing authority, to prevent or at least to minimise the found negative factors, at two levels: 1) the
concrete steps related to the roles of the managing and support structure, costs for the transnational
cooperation, length of the preparatory period, created information tools are concerned, and 2) the
point is, which new or innovated tools concerning both the obligatory structure (terms and conditions)
and the auxiliary structure for the projects MA can create.
6.7 Topic 6: Part of the study focused on the synthesis of the
findings from previous parts of the study (part 2)
Subtopics:
Factors of success and failure, roles, suitability and unsuitability of supporting tools, forms of
announcement of calls, cooperation in monitoring, stage of closure of projects and possible roles in it.
Partial evaluation outputs to the second part of topic 6:
The Third Interim Report (19 September), output No. 5 of the project
Short summary of the process:
The report was drawn up as a complex analysis of focus groups and evaluation of processes, it
contained conclusions and recommendations.
Short summary of partial outputs (basic findings):
This part of the study focused on the recommendations directed into the area of systemic utilisation of
the selected outputs and results of the projects financed from the ESF, when it was considered on the
one hand when this support should start (from preparation of the projects till the period of projects’
closure), and on the other hand how to implement this support. Both the possibilities of external
solution (external agencies) and the means of systemic projects, where both the support of
preparation of strong transnational partnerships and mainstreaming of outputs and results of their
work may be concerned, were considered. The sense of further utilisation of the projects’ outputs and
results consists in it that their quality improves in this way, the parallel development of similar or
same products is eliminated and mainstreaming is supported significantly. The role of the managing
authority can be seen for example as an administrator of a central platform, which would present
individual outputs of the projects classified – besides other criteria – according to the target groups.
Since the target groups are given by the respective operational programmes and further by the
orientation of the individual projects actually implemented, the question then does not consist in who
the outputs should be mediated to, but above all how. The evaluation team’s proposals mentioned for
example information campaigns (including TV spots, billboards and other means of traditional
advertising), Internet advertising and viral marketing (in general, this is possible to be used for
everything, a communication method is concerned), support to thematic networks with bigger accent
on expert authority, national, as the case may be thematic competitions, conferences and fairs and
further the events specifically focused and made to measure to concrete target groups.
As regards the models of financing, common budget sources, revenues, systemic projects, national
projects may be used. As regards the cost factors of the project outputs, the Cost-Benefit Analysis
(CBA) may be included in the project applications; as regards the systemic and budget means, then
the strategic decisions at the level of ministries are concerned, as the case may be of concrete
operational programmes. The rule is valid that the system of support to outputs and results of the
projects must be transparent at the most for a selective (not a flat) matter will be obviously
concerned. Further, this system will be introduced newly therefore it will be necessary at the
beginnings of the implementation to verify, whether the support really achieves the stipulated
objectives and quality. Thus the evaluation will proceed by means of common techniques of social and
economical analysis – namely already at the selection of the projects, in course of creation of the
outputs and also after the termination of the projects and handover of the outputs – on the basis of
data obtained through monitoring and specific evaluating procedures - on the basis of the criteria
known in advance contained in the operational programmes, in the calls and, as the case may be also
in assignments of systemic/national projects. But the evaluation methods could be applied also for the
decision-making process itself, which will be necessary before the beginning itself of the mentioned
Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. 47