EQUAL - Final report - eng - navreme

EVALUATION OF CIP EQUAL TRANSNATIONAL CO-OPERATION PRINCIPLE
The question wording: How would you define your relationship to the Community Initiative
Programme EQUAL?
QUESTION SET 12 TARGET GROUP
1 Independent expert
2 Politician / Decision Maker
2 Representative of the Managing Authority
2 Representative of the National Supporting Structure
2 ESF or HRD policy maker
2 Representative of the European Commission
1 Representative of the Development Partnership
1 Ultimate beneficiary of services provided/initiated by CIP EQUAL projects
2 Member of the Monitoring Committee
1 Member of the National Thematic Network
2 Member of the payment authority / payment unit
1 Applicant or a person interested in getting involved in EQUAL project
The received questionnaires were reviewed as follows:
• The check for any double counting was done according to the date and time of the form
sending, and subsequently according to answers (especially the open ones) – identified
double counting (one in each set, two in total) were eliminated;
• In the cases when less than 20 % of questions were filled in in the questionnaire (i.e.
less than three out of eleven = the set of questions for the managing structures, or less than
five out of nineteen = the set of questions for projects), the obtained answers were not used
and the respective questionnaire was deleted from the database of results; this was applied 0
times altogether in the case of managing structures and 6 times in the case of projects (out of
which two were completely empty questionnaires, two with two answers and two with three
answers);
• There was carried out the check of answers to open questions of the “other:” type:
o In the case an answer was filled in, but the “other” possibility was not ticked off and it
was a multiple-possibilities-choice – the “other” possibility was ticked off;
o In the case an answer was filled in, but the “other” possibility was not ticked off and it
was a choice of one possibility only and none of the possibilities was ticked off - the
“other” possibility was ticked off;
o In the case an answer was filled in, but the “other” possibility was not ticked off and it
was a choice of one possibility only and another of the possibilities had already been
ticked off – the answer obtained under the “other” column was not used (it was
deleted).
After the above mentioned adaptations have been done, the number of analysed answers
furthermore decreased by eight ones to the final 212 questionnaires aimed at specific
projects or recipients, and 34 questionnaires filled in by members of managing structures,
i.e. to 246 in total.
All the above mentioned corrections were a necessary step towards the homogenization of obtained
data, not having any negative influence neither on the answers nor on the results of the investigations
by means of questionnaires.
12
The term projects covers set of questions no.1 and the term managing structures covers set of
questions no.2.
Navreme Boheme, s.r.o. 66