• Homepage
• About us
• Contact
• Documents

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 “euro-professionals” - 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 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.