CELEX: 51993PC0435
Language: en
Date: 1993-09-22
Title: Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION establishing a medium-term action programme to combat exclusion and promote solidarity: e new programme to support and stimulate innovation (1994- 1999)

CSTÎY •
 ?4 î 1 - F
            COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
                                                 COM(93) 435 final
                                                 Brussels, 22 September 1993
       IP
       lit
 £ -Ç- in
                      MEDIUM-TERM ACTION PROGRAMME TO
                   COMBAT EXCLUSION AND PROMOTE SOLIDARITY:
                      A NEW PROGRAMME TO SUPPORT AND
                            STIMULATE INNOVATION
                                     (1994-1999)
  *PB 4
STjHfcr t
                                         and
               REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMUNITY
                   PROGRAMME FOR THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC
                  INTEGRATION OF THE LEAST-PRIVILEGED GROUPS
                                     (1989*1994)
                            (presented by the Commission)
 ---pagebreak---                                            TABLE OF CONTENTS
   Foreword
   Executive Summary
   PART I     Medium-term action programme to combat exclusion and
              promote solidarity: a new programme to support and stimulate
               innovation (1994-1999)
   1.    Commission Communication to the Council
   2.    Explanatory Memorandum
   3.    Proposal for a Council Decision
         Annex 1     Guidelines regarding the fields of action, definition and
                     selection of model actions and transnational networks
         Annex 2     Financial Implications
   PART II    Report on the implementation of the Community programme
               for the social and economic integration of the least-privileged
               groups (Poverty 3, 1989-1994)
   Introduction
   1.     What the Poverty 3 programme sets out to do
   2.     Iimplementation of the Poverty 3 programme
   3.     The projects
   4.     Progress made in the programme
   5.     The lessons drawn from the programme and its impact
         Annex 1     Statistical synopsis of the Poverty 3
                     programme projects (tables)
                            Main features of the fields of activity of the
                            pilot projects
                            Figures to indicate the scale of social exclusion
                            encountered in the fields of activities of the projects
                            Nature and origin of the Poverty 3 programme projects
                            Partners with a seat on the project Steering Committees
         Annex 2     Statistical work conducted under the terms of
                     the Poverty 3 programme
2)
 ---pagebreak---                                              FOREWORD
In COM(92) 542, "Towards a Europe of Solidarity: intensifying the fight against social exclusion,
fostering integration", the Commission reviewed the diversity and severity of the problem posed by
social exclusion in the Community and put forward proposals to intensify the Community's
contribution, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, to fighting social exclusion. This
includes a proposal for a new action programme. This Communication has been discussed by the
other Community institutions.
The present communication therefore proposes a new medium-term action programme to combat
exclusion and promote solidarity (1994-1999) and is accompanied by a draft Council Decision to
establish it. This proposal constitutes Part I of the document. It is directly linked to comprehensive
assessment of progress in the implementation of the current Community programme to foster the
economic and social integration of the economically and socially least-privileged groups (Poverty 3,
1989-1994). A report on this implementation constitutes Part II of the document.
 ---pagebreak---    MEDIUM-TERM ACTION PROGRAMME TO COMBAT EXCLUSION AND PROMOTE
                                             SOLIDARITY
                                                  and
         REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE POVERTY 3 PROGRAMME
                                      EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PARTI
The processes of social exclusion are becoming more widespread and diverse in the European
Community. It is now estimated that mere are 52 million people in the Community with incomes
of less than half the average income per capita in each Member State.
This proposal is for a medium-term action programme to combat exclusion and promote solidarity
(1994-1999). It is accompanied by a report on the implementation of the Community programme
for the social and economic integration of the least-privileged groups (Poverty 3, 1989-1994). The
proposed programme implements one of the recommendations of the European Commission
Communication "Towards a Europe of Solidarity: intensifying the fight against social exclusion,
fostering integration" (COM(93) 542) of 23 December 1992. It pursues the approach agreed in the
Council Resolution on combating social exclusion of 29 September 1989.
The perspective adopted by the Community and the Member States looks beyond the diversity of
national situations to emphasize the structural nature of the phenomenon of social exclusion.
Significant changes have occurred over the last 15 years in the nature and extent of exclusion. The
process of exclusion affects an increasing variety of individuals, groups and geographical areas.
The fight against social exclusion is primarily the responsibility of the Member States and of their
national, regional and local authorities. However, whilst respecting the principle of subsidiarity, the
Community has shown its ability to provide added value with respect to the development and
dissemination of innovation, to the mobilization of persons and to the stimulation of debate.
Examples of such positive contributions and of their impact in Member States are given in the report
of the implementation of the current Poverty 3 programme.
The proposed new programme calls for continuity and progress. Continuity is needed to test further
the validity of the approach based on the principles of partnership and participation and the adoption
of comprehensive strategies. Progress should derivefromthe main new elements which are a greater
emphasis on multi-objective integrated strategies, the introduction of national-level model actions
and transnational networks of projects.
The preparation and implementation of multi-objective integrated strategies will be given higher
priority. This enhancement will improve the complementarity of programme activities with existing
policy and practice and promote the awareness of innovations at local, national and European level.
The partnership approach will be maintained. It is a strong element of the current programme. It has
resulted in the mobilization of a wider range of persons and will be pursued with particular emphasis
on developing the involvement of the social partners. It has the potential to stimulate debate and
influence practice in the longer term.
The relationship between the new programme and the structural Funds will be strengthened, taking
account, in particular, of the place given to exclusionfromthe labour market in the new Social Fund
regulations. Better planned cooperation should ensure that certain common objectives are translated
into complementary activities.
 ---pagebreak--- Finally, a doubling of the funding is proposed in view of the fact that the impact will be
proportionate to the number and diversity of experimental actions seeking to cover the complexity
of the issues and create a new momentum. Whilst a programme aiming to stimulate innovation,
experimentation and debate, operating in the framework of subsidiarity, is bound to remain modest
in relation to the scale of poverty and social exclusion, it constitutes a strong political signal of the
Community's commitment to combating social exclusion.
PARTn
The Community programme for the economic and social integration of the least-privileged groups,
Poverty 3 (1989-1994) extends and expands previous Community action known as the first and
second European programmes to combat poverty (1975-1980 and 1984-1989). These programmes
have demonstrated the Community's intention to contribute to the fight against poverty undertaken
in the Member States to the extent of its resources and competence.
Poverty 3 marks a qualitative and quantitative step forward in terms of the support given to
innovation at the levels of policy and practice. It promotes a coherent multi-dimension approach to
poverty and social exclusion based on partnership with public and private institutions and with the
participation of the least-privileged groups. It is concentrated on 41 relatively large-scale
demonstrative projects to which an average of 12 partner-organizations contribute to adopt and
implement a five-year action strategy at local level.
The innovatory activities of the projects are very diverse and seek to respond to local needs and/or
experiment with organizational change. They can combine, in various orders of priority, actions for
local development, enterprise and job creation, education, training and work experience, counselling,
health promotion, access to housing, access to social protection, development of self-help groups,
associations or social centres, etc.
The first two and a half years of the programme included a phase of definition which was longer
than anticipated but created as solid a base as possible for future activities. During this period,
 interagency decision-making structures were established and strategies were translated into action
programmes in which priorities were often based on systematic surveys of local needs. However,
 a number of difficulties had to be overcome in relation to co-financing and administrative processes
 in the numerous organizations concerned. Procedures for on-going assessment were put into place
 and the subsequent reports play an important role in planning for further development.
 The relevance of the three basic principles of partnership, multi-dimensionality and participation to
 combating poverty is confirmed. Overall, the opportunities and constraints of working in partnership
 are now well understood and the widespread commitment to cooperation has become a major
 strength throughout the programme. Within projects, the contents of multi-dimensional strategies and
 action programmes range from coherent streams of interrelated actions addressing specific needs
 in creative ways to series of separate activities which require further integration. More intensive
 efforts are also required in a majority of projects to enhance the participation of local people.
 The programme's management and coordination is carried out by the Commission with the assistance
 of specially appointed consultants at European and national level. The complexity of the
 administrative and financial processes reflects the challenges inherent to broad partnership
 arrangements and are operating effectively, as recently confirmed by the European Court of
 Auditors. The technical assistance offered to the projects plays a key role in promoting the quality
 of individual projects, in building the internal coherence of the European programme as well as in
 ensuring its visibility within the relevant networks. This has been achieved through a series of
 carefully planned and documented workshops, seminars and exchanges of experience at local,
 bilateral, transnational and European level, through regular and ad hoc publications and through
 support for new networks and forums. A statistical and socio-economic research programme has also
 been launched to prepare a framework for the interpretation of results deriving from innovatory
 practice.
 ---pagebreak--- A mid-term assessment of the impact of the programme must underline its evident success in
mobilizing the interest and obtaining the recognition by public and private agencies at local level,
including, in a few cases, social partners. Such interest is sometimes focused on specific new
methodologies with a potential for transfer to another region or field of activity. In other cases, early
developments consist in the formation of new networks. This indicates the potential for a longer-
term impact of the programme at local level.
By contrast, the stimulation of debate at national level remains limited. This can be explained in part
by the small number of projects in each Member State and by their focus on local processes of
exclusion. However, certain projects selected originally to contribute to innovatory national efforts
are and will be in a better position to disseminate their findings at national level. The programme's
Advisory Committee, which represents national governments, also plays an active role in introducing
the principles and methods of Poverty 3 into the national debate. Several national programmes to
combat exclusion now echo the principles of Poverty 3.
Relationships between the programme and other European Community actions relevant to combating
exclusion are not systematic and greater encouragement is needed to develop appropriate synergies
at operational level, especially with the structural Funds. It is noted, however, mat the Commission
has taken a number of other specific initiatives in relation to social exclusion since the start of
Poverty 3.
The assessment report concludes that despite initial delays, the benefits deriving from such a modest
programme are already identifiable and likely to increase. The stimulation of debate and promotion
of innovation made possible by the programme clearly provide added value and it is important to
permit the consolidation of these early achievements.
 ---pagebreak---                      COMMISSION COMMUNICATION TO THE COUNCIL
        on a medium-term action programme to combat exclusion and promote solidarity:
                       a new programme to support and stimulate solidarity
                                             (1994-1999)
                                          INTRODUCTION
The Commission proposes to undertake a medium-term action programme (July 1994-December
1999) to combat exclusion and promote solidarity.
This proposal is accompanied by the report on the implementation of the Community programme
for the social and economic integration of the least-privileged groups (Poverty 3, 1989-1994). It
implements one of the recommendations of the Commission Communication "Towards a Europe of
Solidarity: intensifying the fight against social exclusion, fostering integration" COM(92) 542 of
23 December 1992, which has already been discussed by the other Community institutions: Council
of Ministers, European Parliament and Economic and Social Committee. It also pursues the approach
adopted by the Member States and the Council in a Resolution of the Council of Ministers for
Social Affairs on combating social exclusion of 29 September 1989 which stated a determination
to intensify efforts undertaken in common as well as those made by each Member sSate.
The fight against social exclusion is primarily the responsibility of the Member States and of their
national, regional and local authorities. However, beyond the diversity of national situations, the
processes which tend to exclude part of the population from economic and social life are often
linked to the scale of economic and social change. The role of of the structural Funds aiming at
strenghtening economic and social cohesion in the Community is not sufficient in itself to promote
social integration. The intensity of the phenomenon of exclusion therefore calls for common
approaches to the processes of economic and social integration.
The Community has increasingly displayed its concern. Apart from specific action concentrated on
encouraging and optimizing national efforts through support for innovation and exchanges of
experience, various measures have been aimed at particular groups via special budgets and funds.
Whilst respecting the principle of subsidiarity, the Community has shown its ability to provide added
value with respect to the development and dissemination of innovation, to the mobilization of
persons and to the stimulation of debate. Examples of such positive contributions and of their impact
in Member States are given in the report of the implementation of the current Poverty 3 programme.
Through this new programme, the Community aims to contribute to the efforts already undertaken
in the Member States by encouraging experimentation around innovatory strategies to combat social
exclusion. These are expected to complement local, regional or national policies and programmes,
to enrich both expert and public debates and to promote good practice. The European nature of the
programme permits exchanges, comparisons and new synergies to arise which would not necessarily
emerge in purely national contexts.
1.     THE COMMUNITY'S APPROACH TO COMBATING EXCLUSION
The proposed new programme forms part of the Community's approach to combating social
exclusion and calls for both continuity and progress in relation to previous programmes.
In the last four years, Community action has become more coherent and wide-ranging in view of
the rising public awareness of the scale of the phenomena of social exclusion. Specific initiatives
have included a Council Recommendation concerning the criteria relating to sufficient resources and
benefits in systems of social protection, a third anti-poverty programme concerning the economic
and social integration of the economically and socially least privileged (1989-1994), as well as
certain measures in the framework of the structural Funds, aimed at neighbourhoods in crisis or
particularly vulnerable groups in the labour market.
 ---pagebreak--- The Council Resolution of 29 September 1989 on combating social exclusion stated the
determination of the Community and Member States to intensify efforts undertaken in common as
well as those made by each Member State. This led to the Commission Communication to the
Council "Towards a Europe of Solidarity: intensifying the fight against social exclusion, fostering
integration" of 23 December 1992.
The Community's approach is based on a common understanding of the phenomenon of social
exclusion. It refers both to processes of exclusion and consequent situations characterized by a
diversity of factors which combine to exclude certain groups, individuals or areas from ordinary
social processes and rights. It is both a structural and multi-dimensional process likely to be
exacerbated in future.
The current Poverty 3 programme runs for a five-year period (1989-1994) and a report on its
implementation forms Part II of this Communication. It extends and expands upon previous
Community action known as the first and second European programmes to combat poverty (1975-
 1980 and 1984-1989) which demonstrated the Community's intention to contribute to the fight
against poverty undertaken in the Member States to the extent of its competence and resources.
In the light of lessons drawn from the two earlier programmes, Poverty 3 gives greater support to
innovation at the levels of both policy and practice. It promotes a multi-dimensional approach to
social exclusion, based on partnership between public and private institutions and with the
participation for the least-privileged groups. Its resources are concentrated on some 40 local projects
throughout the Member States which experiment with new strategies to combat poverty and thus
contribute to identifying good practice, encouraging policy and stimulating public debate. The
projects are linked by a transnational organizational structure which permits exchanges of experience
and know-how, sustained by systematic evaluation and complementary research.
A first assessment of the third programme has been carried out (Part II of this Communication) and
a broad consultation on its perceived strengths and weaknesses has taken place in various meetings
and especially at a European Conference held in Copenhagen on 3 and 4 June 1993, airing the
views of researchers, practitioners and administrators involved in the programme.
The analyses conducted of the third action programme as well as the debates arising in emerging
networks of public and private agencies have revealed the desirability to pursue specific actions
whilst incorporating the main lessons learned from past efforts.
These include inter alia:
(1)   the need to concentrate action both on territorial areas and on specified ranges of strategic
      issues over several years of operation to obtain favourable results;
 (2)  the need to develop partnership with public and private bodies and associations, including the
      social partners, to identify and tackle the main concerns, including those of citizens most at
      risk of lasting economic and social exclusion;
(3)   the need to give additional support to the specification of coherent and integrated strategies
      containing interrelated priorities;
(4)   the need for an on-going assessment of the effectiveness of measures;
 (5)  the need to coordinate projects according to their main concern and taking account of their
      specificity (regional, national, urban, rural, etc.) in order to facilitate the transfer of innovation
      and good practice;
 (6)  the need to develop synergies between local, regional, and national and European level by
      giving greater support to innovative approaches which mobilize national-level agencies around
      key issues;
 ---pagebreak--- (7)   the need to support related statistical and other comparative analyses and studies to enrich
      exchanges;
(8)   the need to promote the effectiveness and efficiency of the measures through an adjustment
      of certain key features in the functioning of the programme, especially a gradual
      implementation in the early stages, improved linkages and synergy with the Community
      structural Funds, and a closer relationship between programme evaluation and statistical and
      other studies.
2.    THE NEED FOR A NEW ACTION PROGRAMME TO COMBAT EXCLUSION
Whilst an assessment of earlier measures has proved positive, an analysis of the current situation
in the Community reveals the need to step up these measures as, in most countries, the following
trends are observed:
(1)   the extent and diversity of social exclusion continue to increase as a result of major changes
      in economic, social and demographic structures in recent years;
(2)   the increasingly explicit national policies to combat social exclusion as the drive towards
      economic and social cohesion exacerbates the need to modernize traditional welfare systems;
(3)   the wealth of innovations aiming to prevent or cure social exclusion arising from a variety of
      agencies calls for more coherence in the content and methods of cooperation between public
      and private sectors to combat social exclusion.
Consequently, the new programme is intended to be a more purposeful and structured forum for
experimentation, exchange, stimulation and optimization of efforts and for the development of
transferable organization models. It will emphasize support for the development of new skills, within
the local, regional or national fabric, to devise, plan and implement multi-dimensional strategies
involving a partnership between relevant public and private bodies concerned with the promotion
of integration around an area focus or an issue focus.
Combating exclusion is primarily the responsibility of the Member States and of their national,
regional and local authorities, therefore the added value of Community action is at several levels,
notably:
      The Community can contribute to the development and transfer of methods and know-how
      which are relevant to the current forms of exclusion, to the identification of good practice, to
      the creation of and support for networks enabling them to share experience and develop
      concerted initiatives at European level, and to the deeper understanding of the debate.
      The Community must also, with a view to coherent action, restate the positive development
      of its policies and analyse their impact in relation to the fight against social exclusion.
The proposed new programme calls for continuity and progress. Continuity is needed further to test
the validity of the approach based on the principles of multi-dimensionality, partnership and
participation, in which experimental actions give rise to exchanges of experience and know-how,
nurtured by systematic evaluation. Progress should derive from the main new elements which are:
      a greater emphasis on multi-objective integrated strategies;
      a widening of the partnership process which offers further opportunities for a significant
      contribution by certain types of partners, especially economic persons such as social partners,
      and expert organizations, such as certain national non-governmental organizations whose
      activities are relevant to specific aspects of social exclusion;
      experimentation with national (or regional) level issue-based actions combining innovatory
      approaches previously developed by separate agencies and linking to local and European levels
      for exchanges and debates;
 ---pagebreak---            a small number of transnational networks of projects, which could include some of those
          previously funded by a European poverty programme, to permit continued sharing of
           experience and know-how;
           a particular focus on processes of social exclusion affecting urban areas;
           a strengthened relationship with the European structural Funds, taking account in particular
           of the place given to exclusion from the labour market in the new European Social Fund
           regulations (see paragraph 5).
    These objectives require increased resources to reflect the variety of levels and situations at which
    developments will take place.
    3.     BASIC PRINCIPLES OF THE ACTION PROGRAMME
    The programme will strengthen the approach based on the principles of multi-dimentionality,
    partnership and participation, thus providing an advance on the third programme with respect to its
    acknowledged positive characteristics.
    These common principles will be translated in practice into actions which respond to the diverse
    forms and intensity of the processes of social exclusion. Particular attention will be paid to various
    population categories (gender, age, ethnic group) and to various types of areas (urban, rural, semi-
    rural, peripheral).
    Priority will be given to the economically and socially least-privileged individuals or groups that
    find themselves in situations or processes of social exclusion especially with regard to education
    and training, employment, housing, health, transport, social protection, free movement, access to
    justice and access to public services. Proposed actions will, however, avoid further stigmatization
    of vulnerable groups through integrated action strategies.
    31     Multi-dimensionality
    From the outset, emphasis will be put on the preparation of integrated multi-dimensional strategies.
    These strategies will be expected to integrate multiple objectives in a coherent manner and create
    linkages and synergies, adapted to particular local or national (or regional) situations, to foster
    economic and social integration. Such multi-dimensionality is an essential characteristic of the
    European programme in view of the multi-dimensional character of processes of social exclusion.
    For example, objectives of integration into employment give rise to counselling and training
    initiatives linked to actions in relation to public transport, housing or childcare for the target groups.
    European Social Fund actions promoting the integration into the labour market of persons exposed
    to social exclusion will complement linked to the multi-dimensional model actions whenever
    possible.
    Actions at local level will establish a comprehensive strategy and a multiple-objective programme
    of activities to supplement existing provision through interrelated measures which facilitate the
    integration of the least-privileged people.
    Actions at national (or regional) level will provide opportunities for integrated approaches which
    address particular issues by combining innovatory practices.
    3.2    Partnership
    The pursuit of a multi-dimensional approach requires the involvement of all key persons usually
    including public authorities or bodies, non-governmental organizations, semi-public bodies, social
    partners, small and medium-size enterprises, cooperatives, friendly societies and charitable trusts,
    and consumer or resident associations. Programme actions are expected to bring together these
                                                         10
(3)
 ---pagebreak--- persons in a partnership which develops a common agreement on a strategy and operational
objectives and shares responsibility for translating them into effective action.
The programme will give priority to proposals for actions which demonstrate that significant
progress has been made towards the effective functioning of a structured partnership.
Priority will also be given to partnerships which include economic operators such as social partners
or organizations developing the social economy or third sector.
3.3   Participation
The principle of participation derives from the observation that population groups affected by social
exclusion tend to be in a position of dependency with little ability - or sometimes desire - to
influence actively the institutions and agencies on which they depend. Yet, the participation by the
population groups most concerned is considered to be essential for effective action in the field of
social and economic integration.
The partners to programme actions are therefore invited to identify means by which the views of
those most concerned can be heard and to devise innovative ways of ensuring that those who have
the most stake in the programme's success are able to influence its planning and management.
The application of this principle offers an opportunity for the development of solidarity and active
citizenship.
4. GENERAL APPROACH AND METHODOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES
4.1    Model actions
The principal element of the programme consists in a number of model actions which have the dual
purpose of combating exclusion in an innovatory way and of providing examples of experimentation
with developments in policy and practice. Such demonstrative projects can indicate new ways
forward which may be transferable across Member States. Exchanges of experience and know-how
will therefore be supported between model action partners and other key persons at three different
levels: local, national (or regional) and transnational.
Each model action constitutes a programme based on a multi-objective integrated strategy. Some
of the specific initiatives gradually developed to implement the strategy can constitute small
experimental projects of a shorter duration.
4.2    Visibility
The programme will provide an opportunity to improve the visibility of actions to promote social
and economic integration and foster solidarity and active citizenship. In particular, it will offer an
opportunity to redress the balance of public awareness by highlighting the capacities of a wide
variety of social groups and organizations to respond jointly to new challenges in an inventive and
effective manner in a spirit of solidarity. The programme actions will therefore be required to
establish a systematic approach to external communication which will be coordinated at national and
European level.
4.3    Internal and external evaluation
 All elements of the programme will be subject to a process of evaluation. In particular, once an
explicit and coherent strategy has been established for each model action, the planning and
management of its implementation will include provision for an internal and external evaluation. The
internal evaluation (or self-evaluation) will assist in its management. The external evaluation will
                                                   11
 ---pagebreak--- assess its progress in the context of the local, national and European situation and relevant policy
developments.
4.4   Gradual implementation
During the action programme, the activities undertaken by model action partnerships and other
networks will gradually engender a dynamic process through which early achievements form the
basis of further priority-setting in the framework of the overall strategy. This will be reflected in the
operational and financial plans.
4.5   Human resources development
As demonstrated in previous programmes, improving the knowledge and skills of key persons and
the capacities of local organizations are an important way of enhancing the programme's
effectiveness. Such an investment can also play a key role in strengthening the ability of the
population groups concerned to sustain the momentum generated by the programme. Various
partners and participants will therefore be given an opportunity to extend their knowledge and skills
in terms of organization, development and management of actions to combat exclusion.
5.     RELATIONSHIP           TO    OTHER      EUROPEAN        COMMISSION           POLICIES        AND
       PROGRAMMES
5.1    Relationship to the structural Funds
The European Community structural Funds enter a new operational phase in January 1994. At
various levels in the hierarchy of plans and programmes through which structural Funds are
implemented, certain objectives are identified which mutually reinforce those of the action
programme activities. Operational arrangements, however, differ considerably.
A two-way information exchange will be promoted. For its part, the action programme will provide
information to its partners and encourage them to act as promoters of actions eligible under the
structural Funds as a means of extending the impact of model actions. Complementary structural
Funds will not, however, be integrated into the action programme. Particular attention will be paid
to opportunities for structural Funds support for:
       health, education and training or other essential infrastructures or basic amenities in
       Objective 1 areas;
       assistance to enterprise development;
       other Social Fund measures, including inter alia those under Objective 3, promoting integration
       of women, handicapped or migrants into the labour market and those promoting the integration
       of persons exposed to exclusion from the labour market;
       the possible new Community initiative "Employment and Human Resources" which promotes
       a transnational approach to:
              underpinning innovative approaches to increasing the employment-intensity of growth
              (including, for example, the development of actions to combat unemployment at local
              level and with particular reference to small and medium-size enterprises);
              facilitating the adaptation of the existing workforce to industrial and technological
              change with particular reference to the new Objective 4;
              promoting equal opportunities for men and women in respect of the labour market;
                                                    12
 ---pagebreak---              assisting those who for one reason or another are exposed to exclusion from the labour
             market (reflecting the new priority specifically identified under the new Objective 3);
             and
             promoting the transfer of innovation and the development of applied research, in
             particular in Objective 1 regions, including through the development of new
             qualifications and skills.
       programmes of technical assistance under Article 6 of the Social Fund regulation.
The action programme will seek to establish management coordination with the implementation of
the Community Initiative "Employment and Human Resources". Effective coordination should be
established among the management structures at different levels as appropriate. Where possible,
technical assistance or other forms of animation activities, information dissemination, as well as
monitoring and evaluation should be planned jointly and results shared to maximize efficiency. This
approach will take account of the specific objectives and eligibility rules of the structural Funds,
which of course apply to the Human Resources Initiative also. Coordination will also be established
with relevant activities carried out under the European Regional Development Fund.
52     Relationship to other policies and programmes
Similarly, the relationship between the programme and other European Commission policies and
programmes contributing to social and economic integration will be closely monitored by the
Interservice Group on Poverty and Social Exclusion in order to develop cooperation.
Indeed, many Community policies can make a relevant contribution to combating social exclusion.
Of particular relevance are certain Community actions in the areas of employment and working
conditions, the development of the small and medium-size enterprises, including associations,
cooperatives and friendly societies, education and training, transport, energy and other infrastructure
development, environment, rural development as well as equal opportunity, migration, free
circulation, public health, social protection, culture and communication, research and development.
On the basis of the range of activities in the new action programme to combat exclusion, the
Commission will identify and develop potential synergies. Regular exchanges of information within
the Interservice Group and, when possible, working links between the management structures, will
facilitate the maximization of mutual benefit and cooperation at operational level.
The Commission will also inform persons at project level of the developments in Community
policies. This should facilitate, where appropriate, their involvement in the policy networks to which
their activities are more directly relevant. It should also promote a greater awareness of other
possible Community initiatives including those from which they could seek financial support.
However, in no circumstances will the same activity be double-funded.
                                                    13
 ---pagebreak---                                  EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM                            .
                                                                          tttctCtC
                       Grounds for the Articles in the proposal for alDec
                                                                    alDecision
                                                                                        y
                                              Article 1
These are several reasons for launching this programme
1.    The most recent Community-wide estimate indicates that there were some 52 million(1) people
      living in poverty in the Member States. There are now 17 million unemployed persons, more
      than half of whom have been out of work for at least a year. Homeless people are estimated
      at around 3 million,
2.    In addition, new forms of social exclusion and their increasing visibility are prompting public
      and private bodies including some social partners to review traditional approaches to tackle
      the new problems and challenges. The need for coherence in approaches across the Member
      States is also increasing.
3.    Finally, assessments from previous Community action programmes (1985-1988) and the
      current specific action programme (1989-94) have shown the positive effects of measures to
      combat exclusion.
The need for a programme which would pursue and reinforce the earlier measures is therefore
evident.
The experience of previous programmes has illustrated the accumulated benefit of sustained action
over several years to obtain favourable results. Five and a half years (from July 1994 to December
1999) will therefore be required to draw maximum benefit from the new programme.
                                              Article 2
The proposed definition derives from that adopted by the Council in its Resolution of 29 September
1989 on combating social exclusion. The multi-faceted and relative nature of poverty is thereby
highlighted.
The definition makes it possible to target more than one of the processes of exclusion which may
affect an individual or groups and opens the way to cooperation with a variety of expert agencies.
                                              Article 3
The programme makes it possible to combine several objectives:
(a)   the two distinct forms of action referred to make it possible to tackle different categories of
      need, which can arise in varying sequence. High-risk groups which are the target groups of
      preventative strategies are mainly concentrated in areas requiring further economic
      development. Curative strategies require the development of new forms of solidarity between
      public and private bodies and groups.
0)    Eurostat latest estimate.
                                                  14
 ---pagebreak--- (b)   For transfer of innovation and good practice it is essential to encourage the recognition of both
      similarity and difference and stimulate inventive adaptations of best practice models. Regular
      exchanges of information between practitioners are an established means of developing
      common and sustained understandings of complex and fast evolving processes across the
      Member States. The creation and development of transnational networks of projects will
      establish more permanent structures and prolong the impact of the programme.
(c)   The programme is intended to develop coherence in the Member States' approach to combating
      social exclusion. The involvement and coordination of all the agencies and persons concerned
      should make it possible to develop dialogue and legitimize the transferability of approaches
      that applies either at local, regional or national level.
(d)   The specific action programme has shown that assessments can be more effective and form
      the basis of further action principles and priorities if they are planned and initiated as soon as
      the programme is launched.
(e)   The acknowledgment of the multi-faceted and dynamic nature of the process of social
      exclusion has led to a reorientation of statistical and other studies to permit the monitoring,
      both quantitative and qualitative, of the trends affecting various individuals groups and areas.
      The rapidity and extent of changes as well as the development of approaches based on planned
       strategies have intensified the need to coordinate European-wide studies to relate the
      programmes impact to the contexts in which they arise.
(f)   There is a need to counterbalance alarmist accounts of processes of social exclusion through
       a coordinated strategy of information and communication including media communication.
       Such information will outline innovative action and achievements for the interest of public
       opinion at large as well as specialists, bodies and groups directly concerned with the objectives
      of the programme.
                                                  Article 4
The Commission uses various means to achieve these aims. Measures will consist of a number of
large-scale innovatory actions known as "model actions" at both local and national (or regional)
level, support for transnational networks as well as study and information activities.
(a)    Model actions at local level
Model actions at local level make it possible to develop innovatory local approaches and initiatives
which are the subject of on-going assessment and can therefore serve as places of experimentation
leading to conclusions about the transferability of various aspects of such experiments. Experiments
can take place at the level of a district or region. Besides applying the principles of multi-
dimensionality, partnership and participation, they will exhibit the following common features.
Area focus
Focus on a small territorial area has proved a powerful way of identifying and tackling the
interrelated effects of economic and social disadvantage and of facilitating citizen participation. Each
selected area should constitute a cohesive entity, with a local identity, and with the potential to bring
together in partnership the types of persons, institutions and agencies which are essential to the
coordination of a local strategy.
Local partnership
A local partnership group will be established including all key persons, institutions and agencies
which are relevant to the preparation of a local comprehensive strategy. The partnership will be
responsible for the organization, development and management of the implementation of the action.
                                                     15
 ---pagebreak--- Specified goals
The partnership group will prepare an explicit local comprehensive strategy. Having reviewed
existing policies, programmes and provision, it will propose a coherent set of specific goals to be
pursued through interrelated new measures.
Specification of urban or rural character
Experience has shown that processes of integration and solidarity are generated in markedly different
circumstances in areas that are primarily urban or primarily rural.
The process of social exclusion tends result in a concentration of the least-privileged groups in
urban areas with relatively poor standards of amenities and equipment. The on-going process of
urban change affects the vast majority of European citizens and has an impact in both positive and
negative ways. Unequal urban development is at the root of the concentration of deprivation in
specific urban areas and leads to segregation. This spatial segregation hampers social integration.
Urban deprivation and segregation are therefore both the result and origin of social exclusion
processes. Moreover, approximately 70% of European citizens live in cities. Therefore, the
majority of the model actions need to address the problem of urban deprivation through a multi-
sectoral development strategy, where a commitment to the area's redevelopment is demonstrated by
both public institutions and economic operators.
However, a limited number of model actions at local level will be focused on rural areas where the
weakness of local labour markets combined with agricultural decline results in a high proportion of
low-income households. In such areas, the programme can complement the integrated rural
development policies which are required to counter population decline and a worsening of social
exclusion in a longer term perspective.
Evaluation and information
Each model action will be required to carry out an internal evaluation and to be willing to
communicate progress and results to wider audiences at national and transnational level.
(b)    Model actions at national (or regional) level
Similarly, model actions at national level make it possible to develop innovatory approaches and
initiatives which are enriched by a multi-objective strategy agreed by a partnership group and are
the subject of continuous assessments. They also constitute experiments in tackling a particular range
of issues, aspects of which may be transferable to other regions or Member States. They will exhibit
the following common features.
National issue focus
A number of model actions at national or regional level will stimulate innovatory multi-dimensional
approaches to certain key issues identified in national debates as central to the promotion of the
social and economic integration of the least-privileged groups and to the fostering of solidarity. The
model actions will be coordinated at national level, or, where national circumstances are such that
competency on key policy areas is primarily at subnational level, they may be coordinated at a
regional or multi-regional level (e.g. new Lander). By way of example, it is envisaged mat issues
such as access to health care services, illiteracy or indebtedness could be tackled by a group of
institutions, agencies and the population groups most concerned through the development of new
types of provision and experimentation with new economic, legal or administrative arrangements.
                                                  16
 ---pagebreak--- Multi-agencv partnerships
The model actions focusing on issues at national (or regional) level need to involve in partnership
appropriate public authorities, non-governmental organizations or representative residents groups
and, in some cases, both sides of industry or persons in the social economy. These multi-agency
partnerships would establish a common strategy of action which commits them to an innovatory
approach to combating social exclusion and fostering integration within the evolving national
economic and social context. They would be expected to establish a new legal entity to carry out
the programme of action.
Specified goals
The integrated strategy proposed by model actions at national (or regional) level will tackle a
selected number of issues and explicitly extend current public or private provision or citizen
initiatives in a manner considered innovatory in the national context.
Following an agreement reached on a common strategy, the partnership group will translate it into
a programme of development of the innovatory approach. These may include a preparatory phase
of awareness-raising or local pilot projects followed by internal evaluation leading to further
developments.
Evaluation and information
The evaluation of model actions at national (or regional) level will assess the roles of issue-based
initiatives in the wider context of policies to combat all aspects of social exclusion. Progress and
results will be communicated at regional, national and transnational levels.
Both types of model actions will be structured around priority axes taking into account the local
situation; they are likely to include the following:
       employment creation and education and vocational training (where possible linked to European
       Social Fund actions);
       coordination of services and institutions concerned with economic and social integration;
       facilitation of access by the least privileged to existing information services and activities in
       accordance with rights Of residence or citizenship;
       support for families and local communities to prevent them falling into situations of passive
       dependence;
       due account of actions for comprehensive development undertaken at the level at which the
       experiment takes place.
(c)    Transnational networks
The usefulness of transnational networks of projects is based on their ability to identify the specific
and changing needs of particular vulnerable groups and areas and to assess, on a continuing basis,
the practical effectiveness of policies, programmes and projects of the various agencies and groups
concerned . This pragmatic perspective can also permit the anticipation of difficulties in pursuing
a particular line of action.
Apart from the programme's model actions, there are of course other innovatory projects aimed at
combating social exclusion in operation throughout the Member States. The programme will support
the creation and development of new networks of existing action projects. They may include projects
funded or previously funded by the European Commission. Priority will be given to supporting new
networks involving the social partners. The action programme will finance exchanges of experience
                                                    17
 ---pagebreak---     and know-how and assistance will be conditional upon an initial assessment of the network's
    viability. In exchange, the networks will be expected to contribute to exchanges of experience and
    know-how relating to model actions.
    (d)    Statistical and other studies and transnational exchanges of experience and know-how
    The usefulness of statistical and other studies and transnational exchanges of experience and know-
    how has been demonstrated in the three previous programmes.
    Statistical and other studies
    The action programme will support studies and information activities which cannot be undertaken
    within Member States.
    With regard to research activities, the Commission's Fourth Framework Programme for Community
    RTD Actions (1994-1998) covers a specific axis for "Targeted socio-economic research", which
    includes "Research on problems related to social integration". This element of the new Framework
    Programme is expected to make relevant contributions to the various elements of the new action
    programme to combat exclusion and to the appraisal of its overall significance at European level.
    In parallel, the new action programme will carry out a number of studies which will provide an
    evaluation of the means of innovation in the development of policies and practices employed to
    combat the problems analysed by the research activities. They will be closely linked to the
    programme's operation and include:
           the analysis, comparison and recording of approaches, progress and results of model actions
           in various local, regional, national and transnational contexts with a view to identifying their
           relevance, relative effectiveness, efficiency, impact and potential transferability;
           the development of programme-relevant monetary and non-monetary indicators of social
           exclusion to establish a statistical basis for comparison at European and international level,
           in cooperation with Eurostat.
    These studies could combine some secondary research with analysis of evidence recorded through
    model actions and could include research grants for postgraduate students in cooperation with
    ERASMUS.
    The coherence and efficiency of the action programme will be promoted through the organization
    of opportunities for exchanges of experience and know-how at transnational levels among all key
    persons. These exchanges will be planned and organized at local, national and transnational levels
    by national correspondents of the programme, coordinated by a central Management and
    Coordination Unit, who also have responsibility for assisting the development of partnership and
    promoting effectiveness in the organization and development of model actions (see Article 5).
    Information activities will include the public presentation and publication of the programme's
    progress and results to various expert networks at local, regional, national and transnational levels
    and to the general public.
                                                     Article 5
    The Commission will subcontract the technical functions (administration and day-to-day monitoring
    of experiments) while itself playing a more direct supervisory role with regard to the general
    organization of the programme.
    The Commission will therefore be responsible for organizing the network of management,
    coordination and studies activity and ensuring the dissemination of the results among decision-
    makers, specialists and the general public.
                                                        18
(4)
 ---pagebreak--- This structure and organization will be characterized by the following features:
A structure adapted to objectives
The European Commission is responsible for the implementation of the programme. The action
programme will rely for its action, organization and development, studies and information activities
on the establishment of partnership processes between a wide range of public, private and
professional persons. The Commission will therefore coordinate such activities both vertically and
horizontally to facilitate effective decentralized decision-making processes within and between
elements of the programme.
The management of model actions
Each model action will be managed by a Steering Committee composed of representatives of all
partners with a stake in the development of the action programme and responsible for all decisions
in relation to the general management of the model action and its relationship to the overall
programme. One of the partners already existing as a legal entity will act as manager and contract-
holder with responsibility for the implementation of the model action until the partners have formed
a new legal entity which can itself be a contractual partner. The contract-holder will be expected
to keep separate accounts for the model action project.
The Commission will carry out occasional visits to the model actions as part of the activities to
support their organization and development.
The Commission will be assisted in the task of managing and coordinating the model actions by a
Management and Coordination Unit. This Unit will have a permanent core staff, carry out all tasks
related to the management of contracts and provide support to organizational development and
management of the programme - including through the training programme - as well as provide
coordination of the various parts of the programme.
Effective management of model actions also requires capacity building. The third action programme
has demonstrated that aspects of model actions constitute an apprenticeship of partnership and
participation whilst the day-to-day management of complex multi-objective multi-agency model
actions tends to generate demand for in-service training in relevant management and development
skills for the staff concerned. The action programme will ensure that an on-going training
programme offers opportunities for all key persons to develop their knowledge and skills in
organizational development and enhance the ability of their organizations to implement actions to
combat social exclusion. Linkages with European Social Fund actions may be possible if the
individuals involved wish to pursue a course of study towards a relevant qualification.
The management of studies, transnational networks and information
The studies, networks and exchange activities will be directed by the same Management and
Coordination Unit as described above. A programme of work will be established on an annual basis.
The Unit will be assisted by a team of European level experts to propose and give general guidance
on the work programme in terms of studies, transnational networks and other exchanges of
experience at transnational level. This programme will be administered by a core of permanent
 staff.
Coordination at national level
The Management and Coordination Unit will propose candidates as national correspondents and the
Commission will make appointments in each Member State after consultation with the Advisory
 Committee (see below).
                                                  19
 ---pagebreak--- These correspondents will be accountable to the Management and Coordination Unit. They will
ensure consistency in the European programme by providing organization and development advice
to model actions, organize national exchanges based on the experience of model actions and
contribute to transnational exchanges. A correspondent will be required to provide an opinion on
the operational plans, including financial plans of the model actions before they can be considered
by the Management and Coordination Unit.
Annex 1 shows the organizational chart.
                                                 Article 6
This Article determines the role of the Member States in the presentation and selection of model
actions.
Between the anticipated adoption of the Council Decision in December 1993 and 1 July 1994, the
Commission will call for and review the Member States' proposals for model actions. At the end
of the period, the Commission will decide on thefive-and-a-half-yearmodel actions of this new
action programme in accordance with the procedures defined in the attached Council Decision.
The previous programme has demonstrated the importance of devoting sufficient time to the initial
phases of preparation of strategies and definition of work programmes. Contractual periods and
financial arrangements will therefore be adapted to the requirement for gradual implementation.
Once model actions have been approved, negotiators will arrange for a preparatory phase to start
as soon as possible and last for a maximum of nine months. During this preparatory phase, the
partners will be expected to, at least, establish detailed management arrangements, define a strategy
and appoint a project manager. The European Commission contribution to this phase will not exceed
ECU 120 000. This period will be followed by the operational start of the project and a contractual
period of the year corresponding to a phase of definition of operational priorities and the beginning
of implementation of a work programme.
                                                 Article 7
 This Article sets out the composition, operation and relationship with the Commission of the
 Advisory Committee on which the governments of the Member States are represented.
This body will be consulted by the Commission on any important question relating to the
implementation of the programme.
                                                 Article 8
 This Article clarifies the Commission's role with regard to the dissemination and exchange of
information.
The action programme, through its various elements, will promote exchanges of experience and
know-how as well as more sustained dialogue between public authorities and bodies, non-
 governmental organizations and both sides of industry at three levels (local, national and European)
on mechanisms to combat exclusion and foster solidarity and active citizenship. It will support
 regular publications of results, and contribute to raising public awareness of the mechanisms to
tackle the multiple aspects of social exclusion through a coordinated approach to the use of the
 communications media.
                                                    20
 ---pagebreak--- The action programme will have sufficient means to ensure:
      the monitoring and evaluation of model actions giving rise to annual reports;
      the evaluation of programme impact at national level giving rise to annual reports and
       seminars;
       the evaluation of the overall programme leading to an interim review report to be presented
      to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee.
                                                Article 9
The Community contribution considered necessary amounts to ECU 121 million for the period
running from 1 July 1994 to 31 December 1999.
There is provision for the level of Community support for model actions to be increased from 50%
to 60% in exceptional cases, i.e. primarily in regions of Objectives 1, 2 and 5b. Community support
for transnational networks is set at a maximum of 90%. Other programme activities can be financed
in full by the European Commission.
Model actions will be expected to be funded jointly by the European Commission, public authorities
at national, regional or local level and also by at least one non-governmental organization.
The partners' contribution will normally be in cash. In exceptional circumstances, part of the budget
not exceeding 50% of the non-European Community contribution, may be contributed in kind,
provided that this has been negotiated in advance and that the elements so funded are clearly
identifiable and directly linked to the implementation of the work programme.
The contribution of non-European Commission partners must be directly relevant to the specified
goals of the model action.
Annual audits of model actions' implementation will be provided to the Commission by the
contractual partners. Similarly, an annual audit of the Management and Coordination Unit will cover
other programme activities. All financial records must be available for inspection by the European
Commission's Financial Control services which may carry out inspection visits.
                                          Articles 10 and 11
The customary final provisions.
                                                   21
 ---pagebreak--- ORGANISATIONAL CHART
                                                                                                           European
                                                                                                           Exper t
                                         European Commission (DGV/C/i)
       Consultatlve                                                                                        Suppor t
                                        Management S. C o o r d i n a t i o n u n i t
        CommIt t e e                                                                                       Group
                                                                ran s n a t i o n a l Transnational
                     National             Model
                  Correspondents  —      Act ions                 Networks             STUDIES               /
                                                                                        V i s i b i l i t y
          Management/Accountability Links
          Advisory/ConsuLtative Links
 ---pagebreak---                                           Proposal for a
                                      COUNCIL DECISION
    establishing a medium-term action programme to combat exclusion and promote solidarity:
                       a new programme to support and stimulate innovation
                                            (1994-1999)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular
Article 235 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal of the Commission (1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament^,
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(3),
Whereas the task of the Community is to provide throughout the Community a harmonious
development of economic activities, a continuous and balanced expansion, an increase in stability,
an accelerated raising of the standard of living and closer relations between the States belonging
to it;
Whereas the encouragement of solidarity with regard to the least-privileged and most vulnerable
people forms an integral part of economic and social cohesion;
Whereas, nevertheless, structural Fund assisted measures are not in themselves sufficient to promote
such a solidarity, and whereas it is expedient to develop specific measures to that effect;
Whereas respect for human dignity is one of the fundamental rights underlying Community law, as
recognized in the constitutions and laws of the Member States, in the European Convention for the
Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and in the European Social Charter as
recalled in the preamble to the Single European Act, and in Council Recommendation 92/441/EEC
of 24 June 1992 on common criteria concerning sufficient resources and social assistance in social
protection systems(4);
Whereas experience, particularly at Community level, has shown that the objective of preventing
and combating social exclusion is better achieved through partnership between all relevant persons,
particularly public and private bodies and including non-governmental organizations and the social
partners;
Whereas the issue of social exclusion is a major and growing challenge to European society which
calls for continuing and increasing the efforts undertaken at all levels in order to prevent and to
combat social exclusion, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and taking into account the
diversity of national situations;
0)
(2)
(3)
(4)
       OJ No L 245, 26.8.1992, p. 46.
                                                 23
 ---pagebreak--- Whereas on 29 September 1989 the Council and the Ministers for Social Affairs meeting within the
Council adopted a resolution0* on combating social exclusion which stressed that combating social
exclusion may be regarded as an important part of the social dimension of the internal market, and
which expressed their commitment to continue and as necessary to step up the efforts undertaken
in this respect in common, as well as those made by each Member State;
Whereas on 23 December 1992, the Council received a Communication from the Commission
entitled "Towards a Europe of Solidarity: intensifying the fight against social exclusion, fostering
integration"(6) which provides an account of initiatives developed by the Commission in recent years
and illustrates the countribution which the Community could make, respecting the principle of
subsidiarity, to the combined effort needed to combat social exclusion;
Whereas, the Commission was authorized, by Council Decision 89/457/EEC(7), to implement a
specific action programme concerning the economic and social integration of the economically and
socially least-privileged groups, and whereas that action programme will come to an end on 30 June
 1994 and should be pursued and broadened;
Whereas it is necessary to promote a comprehensive strategy to combat exclusion, with the
participation of all the persons including the people concerned;
Whereas it is necessary to encourage preventive measures vis-à-vis the risks of social exclusion as
well as curative measures to integrate excluded people in social and economic life;
Whereas a Community programme permits a contribution to the identification and stimulation of
good practices and policies, to the encouragement of innovation and to exchanges of experience
in this matter;
Whereas it is important to promote measures aimed at the development of synergy between local,
national or regional, and Community level;
Whereas exchanges of information, comparison of experience and consultation between the Member
States and the Commission on action to combat the exclusion of the least-privileged members of
society contribute to their economic and social integration;
Whereas this Community added value as well as the incidence and scale of situations and processes
of exclusion necessitate a more ambitious programme, requiring financial resources representing
approximately double the contribution allocated to the preceding programme;
Whereas the Treaty does not provide specific powers of action for the adoption of this Decision
other than those contained in Article 235,
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:
                                               Article 1
 A medium-term action programme to combat exclusion and promote solidarity is hereby established
 for the period from 1 July 1994 to 31 December 1999.
 The purpose of the programme is to contribute to the effective participation of the least-privileged
people in economic and social life.
(5)
       OJ No C 277, 31.10.1989, p. 1.
(6)
       Communication COM(92) 542 of 23 December 1992.
 (7)
       OJNoL224, 2.8.1989, p. 10.
                                                   24
 ---pagebreak---                                                  Article 2
For the purposes of the action programme, actions to combat exclusion and promote solidarity shall
be specifically aimed at the economic and social integration of the economically and socially least-
privileged groups and persons that are exposed to social exclusion especially in urban areas. Such
integration shall be ensured through multi-dimensional action covering all relevant fields in society,
an indicative list of which is contained in the Annex.
                                                 Article 3
The aims of the programme shall be to:
(a)    contribute to the development of preventive and curative measures at local and national (or
       regional) levels through model actions;
(b)    support the creation and development of transnational networks of partnership projects;
(c)    conduct information, coordination, assessment and exchange of experience operations at
       Community level;
(d)    stimulate experiment and analysis, and identify the best innovatory models of action, in terms
       of both their content and organization;
(e)    study the mechanisms of social exclusion;
(f)    provide information on the programme and disseminate results.
                                                 Article 4
The measures designed to attain the aims referred to in Article 3 shall be as follows:
(a)    the carrying-out of model actions at local level, in both rural and urban settings, undertaken
       in partnership between the public and private sectors - especially the social partners and
       professional and voluntary organizations, and the pursuit of economic and social integration
       of the least-privileged groups through a multi-dimensional strategy;
(b)    the carrying-out of model actions at national (or regional) level which support actions
       undertaken by public or private bodies in the framework of a partnership and a comprehensive
       strategy;
 (c)   assistance for the creation and development of transnational networks of projects, in particular
       through support for studies, publication, exchanges of experience and know-how;
 (d)   the compilation of statistics, data collection, and the conduct of comparative studies aimed at
       developing comparison of the phenomena of social exclusion and methods of tackling them.
                                                 Article 5
 1.    The Commission shall be responsible for the implementation of the action programme.
       It shall also ensure the necessary complementarity and synergy with other Community actions,
       especially those involving the structural Funds and research and development programmes.
 2.    Guidelines concerning the definition and selection of model actions and transnational networks
       are set out in the Annex.
                                                    25
 ---pagebreak---                                                     Article 6
    1.    Model actions shall be presented to the Commission by the Member States.
    2.    After consulting the Committee provided for in Article 7, the Commission shall take a
          decision on the selection and content of model actions.
    3.    The Commission shall also consult the Committee provided for in Article 7 on the other
          activities undertaken under this programme.
                                                    Article 7
    The Commission shall be assisted by a committee af an advisory nature, hereinafter referred to as
    "the Committee", composed of two representatives of the Member States and chaired by the
    representative of the Commission.
    The representative of the Commission shall submit to the Committee a draft of the measures to be
    taken. The Committee shall deliver its opinion on the draft, within a time-limit which the chairman
    may lay down according to the urgency of the matter, if necessary by taking a vote.
    The opinion shall be recorded in the minutes; in addition, each Member State shall have the right
    to ask to have its position recorded in the minutes.
    The Commission shall take the utmost account of the opinion delivered by the Committee. It shall
    inform the Committee of the manner in which its opinion has been taken into account.
                                                     Article 8
     1.   The dissemination and exchange of information and knowledge concerning the programme
          shall be organized under the responsibility of the Commission.
    2.    The Commission shall disseminate the results of operations systematically and widely.
                                                     Article 9
     1.   Community financial support shall be granted in theframeworkof the appropriations entered
          annually in the general budget of the European Communities for that purpose and in line with
          the financial perspectives, at the following rates:
          (a)    for model actions for which responsibility is borne by the public authorities of the
                 Member State concerned, the maximum rate shall be 50% of actual expenditure within
                 the limits of the assistance approved by the Commission; however, in exceptional cases
                 in the regions covered by Objectives 1, 2 and 5b of the structural Funds, this ceiling
                 may be raised to 60%;
          (b)    for direct subsidies to transnational networks for which responsibility is not borne by the
                 public authorities of the Member States concerned, the maximum rate shall be 90% of
                 actual expenditure within the limits of the assistance approved by the Commission.
    2.    The budgetary provision necessary to finance the Community contribution to the programme
          shall be determined in accordance with normal budgetary procedures.
                                                        26
(5)
 ---pagebreak---                                             Article 10
1.   Before 1 July 1997 the Commission shall present to the Council and the European Parliament
     an interim report on the implementation and results of the programme.
2.   Before 1 January 2001 the Commission shall present to the Council and the European
     Parliament a final report on the implementation and results of the programme.
                                            Article 11
This Decision shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.
Done at Brussels,                                         For the Council
                                                          The President
                                                 27
 ---pagebreak---                                                                                Annex 1
        Guidelines regarding the fields of action, definition and selection of model actions
                                       and transnational networks
FIELDS OF ACTION
Model actions and transnational networks should be multi-dimensional, i.e. they should relate to
several aspects of the processes of social exclusion and social integration. This includes income,
education, training, employment, accommodation, social and consumer protection, health, transport,
local development, freedom of movement, personal security, access to justice, access to public
services, culture and leisure.
DEFINITION
(1)   Model actions at local level
 1.   Each model action at local level should be implemented within one specific area, defined in
      terms of its size, social, cultural and economic characteristics, administrative boundaries and
      local identity.
2.    The area selected should lend itself to action in depth and, in particular, should enable all
      interested parties to work together.
3.    Model actions at local level should imply the commitment and involvement of partners
      concerned including private participants (employers, trade unions, voluntary organizations,
      residents groups, local development partnerships, organizations representing small and
      medium-size enterprises, associations, cooperatives, friendly societies and foundations) and
      public authorities (local, regional, national) and/or mixed public/private agencies.
4.    Model actions at local level should take steps to improve the participation of the population
      of the selected area in the preparation of a local strategy, in the implementation of the model
      action and in the programme as a whole.
 5.   Model actions should contain aspects that are innovatory compared to what is being done in
      the Member State, experimental in nature, testing the relevance and effectiveness of a
      particular approach to the broader debate on social exclusion; they should include
      arrangements for continuous assessment and for participation in the European programme as
      a whole.
 6.   Model actions at local level should be aimed in the first place at those who are experiencing
      greatest economic and social difficulty.
 (2)  Model actions at national (or regional) level
 7.   Model actions at national (or in appropriate cases at regional) level should focus on a specific
      issue faced by economically and socially disadvantaged people in relation to which innovation
      requires the cooperation of national (or regional) authorities.
 8.   In this programme, model actions at regional level should operate in a geographical area
      corresponding to the first manageable tier below national level (Autonomias, Belgian regions,
      Lander etc..) or a cross-regional group of such areas.
                                                   28
 ---pagebreak--- 9.  Model actions at national (or regional) level should contain aspects that are innovatory
    compared to what is being done in the Member State or in the Community as a whole.
10. Model actions at national (or regional) level should focus more on specific issues or situations
    than on area-based projects.
11. The issues or situations selected should lend themselves to innovatory approaches that can
    demonstrably be tested and/or developed during the period of the programme.
12. Model actions at national (or regional) level should aim to bring together partners with
    national (or regional) spheres of interest who have not previously tackled this particular issue
    jointly. The resulting partnership could include public agencies (national, regional, cross-
    regional authorities or associations of same) and private agencies (non-governmental
    organizations, associations and networks, employers associations, organizations representing
    small and medium-size enterprises, associations, friendly societies and charitable trusts and
    trade unions) as well as mixed public/private agencies at national or regional level.
13. Model actions at national (or regional) level should promote the participation of the population
    groups most concerned in the preparation, development and evaluation of the innovatory
    actions.
(3) Transnational networks
14. Proposals for the establishment of new transnational networks of action proj ects should involve
    existing projects in at least half of the Member States.
15. The existing projects proposed as members of the newly formalized network should have
    identifiable common objectives (for example reduction of overindebtedness, collaboration of
     trade unions with other agents of local development, work with children at risk of alienation
    from family and community, involvement of residents in environmental improvements, etc.).
16. Proposals for new networks should demonstrate the potential learning process resulting from
    the structuring of exchanges.
SELECTION
17.  In selecting model actions, account should be taken of the following criteria:
           they should be innovative, in terms of content and/or organization;
           they should be carried out by participants with appropriate qualifications and/or
           experience;
           they should devise effective ways of channelling aid to the population most concerned;
           they should encourage the independence and self-confidence of the persons concerned,
           including measures to promote self-sufficiency;
           they should enhance employment possibilities (e.g. improvement of vocational skills,
           employment counselling, promotion of self-employment);
           they should concentrate on socially and economically disadvantaged areas or key issues
           affecting the extent of economic and social exclusion.
                                                29
 ---pagebreak---                                                                               Annex 2
                                    FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
1.     TITLE OF THE OPERATION
Community action to combat exclusion and promote solidarity (1994-99)
2.     BUDGET HEADING CONCERNED
B3-4103: Actions to combat poverty
3.    LEGAL BASIS
Application of Article 235 of EEC Treaty. The Commission will introduce a proposition in
September 1993 which is expected to be followed by a new decision by the Council at the end of
1993.
4.    DESCRIPTION
4.1   The aims of the action programme are to foster the economic and social integration of the
      least-privileged groups, promote solidarity and active citizenship.
      Its objectives are:
      1.    to contribute to the development of preventative and curative strategies to meet the
            needs of the least-privileged groups through a series of innovatory model actions at local
             level;
      2.     to contribute to the development of preventive and curative strategies to meet the needs
            of the least-privileged groups through a series of innovatory model actions at national
             (or regional) level;
      3.    to contribute to the development of transnational networks of live projects acting to
            foster economic and social integration and solidarity;
      4.    to identify and publicize the scope and characteristics of processes and situations of
            social exclusion and generate specialized and public debates on the issues arising;
      5.    to ensure the overall coherence of the programme and its beneficial relationship to other
            European Community policies and programmes through overall coordination and
             management arrangements including organization and development support and
             assessment.
4.2   The duration of the action is five and a half years from 1 July 1994 to 31 December 1999.
5.     CLASSIFICATION OF EXPENDITURE
5.1. Non-compulsory expenditure
5.2. Dissociated credits
5.3   Types of revenue: none
                                                  30
 ---pagebreak--- 6.     NATURE OF EXPENDITURE OR REVENUE
6.1    100% expenditure: for activities connected with contracts for the provision of services
       (expenditure relative to studies, experts meetings, conferences and seminars, training,
       information and publications coordination, advice and support directly linked to the
       achievement of the action's objective of which they are an integral part, to the exclusion of
       expenditure relative to the management of these actions or to general administration). These
       are part of the Commission's management of the programme.
6.2    Subsidies for co-financing with other public and/or private sector sources
       For model actions in operational phase, Community co-financing representing 50% of
       expenditure (60% in regions of Objectives 1 or 2 and 5b of the structural Funds) to
       complement public and/or private financing. Transnational networks will be financed up to
       90% of eligible expenditure.
6.3    Interest subsidies: none
6.4    Other types of expenditure: none
6.5. In case of economic success of the action, is a partial or total reimbursement of the
       Community's financial contribution envisaged? No "economic success" possible. However,
       payment recovery will be demanded if necessary, should the action fail to meet the contract's
       objectives.
7.     FINANCIAL IMPACT ON FINANCIAL APPROPRIATIONS
7.1. Indicate the way in which the total cost has been calculated
The total cost of the action over five and a half years is ECU 121 million as compared with
ECU 55 million for five years of the third programme. These figures reflect the intention to double
the resources available since afive-yearprogramme would amount to ECU 110 million and a five-
and-a-half-year programme, permitting a financial planning to coincide with calendar year, will
require an additional one-tenth of the ECU 110 million to cover the extra six months.
The increase in total cost arises from the need to consolidate achievements and extend the number
of experiments to cover the increasing complexity of the phenomena under study and better to
integrate the outcome of experiments into the activities of Member States at local, regional and
national level.
1994
The first six months of the programme occur in 1994 and are therefore planned with reference to
the APB 1994 for Part B.
The APB 1994 indicates that ECU 16 million for line B3-4103 of which ECU 4 million are outside
any programme and cover exchange and support networks of NGOs whilst ECU 12 million are
expected to cover this phase of the new programme as well as consolidation of the achievements
of Poverty 3.
It is envisaged that expenditure on the new programme in 1994 will relate to the following:
(a)    Subsidies for model actions and transnational networks of up to a maximum of ECU 120 000
       each (for 44 local projects, 19 national projects and 7 transnational networks) or a total of
       approximately ECU 8 million.
                                                 31
 ---pagebreak---       This is to ensure the partnership agreement is turned into effective cooperation, that
      administrative, financial and evaluation mechanisms are established, that needs assessment
      studies are carried out, that a medium-term strategy is elaborated and staff recruitment is
      initiated. The experience in Poverty 3 was that this phase could last up to 16 months,
      especially were co-financing arrangements were particularly complex. On the basis of this
      experience, a period of six to nine months is considered essential to establish structures, roles
      and responsibilities effectively.
      The volume of subsidies to the new programme's actions therefore grows from ECU 8 million
      (for six months at 90% subsidy) to ECU 18 million for a year's co-financing in 1995.
 (b) ECU 1 million in subsidies for coordination, advice/support studies, meetings of experts,
      conferences and information and publications related to the actions or networks
      (N.B. 8+1= ECU 9 million leaving ECU 3 million for studies, evaluation reports, etc. relating
      to Poverty 3 in 1994 in Part B).
Total Part B expenditure for the new programme in 1994 therefore amounts to ECU 9 million.
1995-1999
The total cost will be distributed as follows:
Local model actions                                        ECU 70       million
National model actions                                     ECU 28.3 million
Transnational networks                                     ECU     4.2 million
Coordination as well as advice/support to the organization,
development and evaluation of actions and networks         ECU     3.7 million
Data collection, studies, exchanges of experience          ECU     4.8 million
Total 1995-99                                              ECU 112.0 million
The expenditure related to the development of model actions and networks was calculated as
follows:.
Implementation of multi-dimensional strategy
Local level              44 projects at average cost of ECU 250 000 per year
National level            19 projects at average cost of ECU 245 000 per year
Transnational level        7 networks at average cost of ECU 125 000 per year
Expenditure on studies, expert meetings, conferences and congresses, information and publications
directly linked to the achievement of the objectives of the measures of which they form an integral
part with the exception of those arising from the management of these measures or from general
administration (see the commentary on the budget line for the maximum amount applicable in the
current year).
                                                  32
 ---pagebreak--- 7.2     The Commitment appropriation requested includes:
                                                   At current prices
                                     1994*   1995 1996 1997 1998       1999   TOTAL
Model Action-Local level              5.0    12.1   13.2 14.3  14.9    15.5     75
Model Action-National level           2.2      5.0   5.3  5.8   6.0    6.2      30.5
Transnational network                 0.8     0.9    1.0  1.1   1.1    1.1       6.0
Coordination and support
development and evaluation            0.8     0.7    0.7  0.7   0.8    0.8       4.5
Data collection, studies,
exchanges of experience               0.2     0.8    0.9  1.0   1.0    1.1       5.0
TOTAL PROGRAMME                       9.0     19.5 21.1  22.9  23.8   24.7     121.0
* six months 1.7.94 to 31.12.94
7.3    Indicate timetable of commitment appropriations and payment appropriations
Primary concerns in phasing the budget have been:
       to demonstrate the continuity in the Community's commitment to combating social exclusion
       and, thus, the prevention of any gaps in funding between the two programmes for local
       projects which may be extended into the new programme (in particular, "projects in the New
      Lander that did not start until 1992 and are highly likely to be carried over into the new
       programme);
       to give support to the functioning of medium-term mùlti-dimensional strategies by providing
      for a progressive annual increase which permits the growth of new innovative activities in line
       with the lessons learned at earlier stages.
Besides these principles, the timetable and distribution of commitments follow the following
structure:
       in each financial year, expenditure relating to model actions and transnational networks
       represents 92%;
       in eachfinancialyear, expenditure relating to coordination, advice/support studies, information,
      training, seminars, meetings of experts, publications and information represents about 8% of
       Part B expenditure.
The year-on-year increases follow a simple logic. It is expected that model actions will increase
gradually for the first two full years at 9% a year, and, in the last year, cost increases will level out.
These rates of increase will lead to a doubling of programme expenditure whilst minimizing the risk
of co-financers being unable to follow suit. Other expenditure is not proportionate to the volume of
activities but to the number of actions undertaken.
                                                   33
 ---pagebreak---   New programme on Social Exclusion (ECU million)
                                     Likely schedule of payments compared with commitments
  APPROPRIATIONS          COMMITMENTS                                        PAYMENTS
                                                                                                    Fo!lowing
                                              995         1996         1997            1998    1999    years
 1995 approprI at Ions        19.5           11.7           3.9          1 .95        1 .95
 1996                         21.I                         12.66         4.22         2.11   2.11
 1997                        22.9                                       13.74         4.58   2.29    2.29
1998                         23.8                                                   14.28    4.76    4.76
1999                         24.7                                                           14.82    9.88
 ---pagebreak--- 8.    WHAT ANTI-FRAUD PROVISIONS ARE INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSAL?
On-going monitoring by technical assistance team coordinated at European level.This includes
interim and final financial reports to each contractual period of one year maximum. The second
payment is dependent upon receipt of a satisfactory interim report. Systematic and random on-the-
spot checks carried out by the Commission services (DGV and DGXX).
9.     COST EFFECTIVENESS
9.1    Specific aims
The action includes five specific aims as outlined in paragraph 4.
The targeted population is the least-privileged groups experiencing processes of social exclusion who
are the final beneficiaries. The intermediate beneficiaries are the partnership groups managing the
model actions or transnational networks.
9.2    Justification of the measure
According to the most recent estimates, there are over 52 million people in the Community living
in poverty, over 3 million homeless people and 17 million unemployed persons of which half have
been unemployed for more than a year. The current period of slow-down in economic growth has
further diversified the processes of social exclusion, endangering in particular the traditional
practices of concertation, solidarity and responsible citizenship. New forms of social exclusion and
their increasing visibility are prompting public and private agencies as well as the social partners
to reshape traditional approaches to the new challenges, to improve existing know-how and
experiment with innovative practices.
In this context, cross-fertilization by means of a European action programme and research work has
proved its effectiveness and needs further development. The specific added value of such a European
programme results from its derived effects. Moreover, a number of multiplier effects have been
shown to add to the programme's cost-effectiveness.
The new programme will be expected to build upon the work already carried out in the current
Poverty 3 programme as part of the Community's broader approach to social exclusion developed
over the last five years. Its derived effects should be of the same nature as those achieved in the
current programme, which have been described in the Report on its implementation. They include:
       the stimulation of debate on the question of social exclusion at local, regional, national and
       at Community level;
       the development by many projects of methodological instruments and good practices which
       have proved useful to practitioners in other localities and other Member States;
       the benefits of new exchange networks between local authorities, non-governemental
       organizations and social partners which go beyond the pooling of knowledge or awareness-
       raising activities to permit the formation of new solidarities and the establishment of new
       practices in combating exclusion.
Moreover, the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the Poverty 3 programme led to the
conclusion that:
       the noted contribution of the programme's ideas and experiences to the reflections of decision-
       makers in several Member States where national policies on combating exclusion have become
       more explicit over the period and where a number of expected synergies are emerging;
                                                   35
 ---pagebreak---        the contribution of the programme's ideas and projects' experiences to reflections at
       Community level especially with reference to enriching other Community initiatives: such an
       experimental programme was able to explore and assess the relevance of methods and
       approaches which could be effective as part of other Community initiatives including the
       structural Funds;
       the opportunities created for synergies to develop, in the context of the programme's multi-
       dimensional approach, between the growing number of Community-supported networks
       involving non-governmental organizations and social partners.
Based on experience to date, the new programme proposes to double the amount of Community
contributions. It seeks support for a level of activities which can create a genuine momentum of
policy and practice development and it embodies a timely and important political commitment for
the Community.
In view of the competencies and resources of the European Community, an action programme to
stimulate innovation and experimentation is bound to remain modest in relation to the scale of
poverty and social exclusion. Its scope should therefore be defined primarily according to the impact
and specific added value which can be expected from such a coherent programme of support and
stimulation of innovation.
The impact of the programme depends in part on its size. The current Poverty 3 programme has
shown mat impact is proportionate to the number of ambitious local projects making specific efforts
to carry out experiments relevant to national policies and debates. In particular, it is acknowledged
that a programme consisting of 40 projects, i.e. 3 or 4 per Member State, can hardly create the
momentum and have the multiplier effects that could be expected from a more significant number
of projects.
Finally, the programme constitutes a political signal of the Community which responds to the wishes
and expectations expressed by the participants in the current programme. Such wishes and
expectations were made explicit most recently at a conference on Combating Social Exclusion held
in Copenhagen in June 1993 and the European Parliament representatives have recommended a new
programme of ECU 200 million over five years.
The proposed costs reflect the continued rise in the scale of the problem of social exclusion, have
preventive as well as remedial effects, allow for the necessary extension of experimentation to
compare and contrast effectiveness in different types of areas (urban/rural), for different action
targets (areas/categories of people/new issues), at various administrative levels (local, national or
cross-regional) and with more active participation from the social partners than in the third
programme. In particular, the introduction of "national level" projects requires stronger linkages to
be established between local, national and transnational innovations and debates.
Factor of uncertainty
It is important to remember that the actual content of project strategies and the behaviour of key
persons in the programme will be conditioned by the evolution of the debate on exclusion. In this
respect, attention must be drawn to the general economic conditions and their consequences in the
Member States' employment and social policies, especially as they relate to combating social
exclusion.
93      Monitoring and evaluation
9.3.1 Selected performance indicators
In relation to thefirsttwo objectives of the programme (paragraph 4: "contribute to the development
of... strategies ... through a series of innovative model actions at local level" ... and ibidem" ... at
national or regional level"), monitoring and evaluation will take place at local level and will be both
internal and external. The performance indicators will be appropriate to the very specific nature of
                                                   36
 ---pagebreak--- each project strategy - constructed by the partnership - and will make use of previous research with
regard to assessing the effectiveness of the multi-dimensional integrated strategy in context.
Each project will carry out an internal evaluation (self)-evaluation: on-going monitoring
commissioned by each project Steering Committee will establish (i) a position statement of the
context of each project in terms of assessed needs, policies and practices, (ii) a set of operational
objectives explicitly related to expected outcomes, if possible quantified, (iii) a number of
organizational principles including a plan for record-keeping and a communication strategy, (iv) an
annual assessment of effectiveness and efficiency in relation to the agreed objectives and principles
and in view of the resources of the project.
In addition, an external evaluation will extract the relevant findings of the project and draw out any
implications for regional, national or Community policy development, with special attention being
geared to the impact of the programme's key principles.
In relation to the third objective of the programme (transnational networks of projects) performance
indicators will include fulfilment of the originally agreed programme of work, notably number and
quality of new membership, the number and quality of events or publications based in part on the
opinions of participants and key decision-makers in the policy field concerned.
The fourth objective (identify characteristics of social exclusion and generate specialized and public
debates) will be the object of evaluation at national and at Community level. Performance criteria
will be the amount and relevance of genuine new knowledge to the development of debates at
national and Community level (about both policy and practice) , the extent to which new thinking
penetrates other national and Community debates as evidenced by official documents or specialist
journals.
The fifth objective (programme coherence, programme coordination with other Community policies
and programmes) covers aspects of organizational development internal as well as external to the
programme. With respect to programme coherence, evaluators will review the impact of the project
selection criteria and procedures and a major performance indicator will be the quality of the
transnational linkages and exchanges within the programme and their ability to lead to a refining
of models and paradigms, to better comparability or transferability of experimental arrangements
and theoretical constructs. With respect to coordination, a major evaluation criteria will be the
development of a real synergy with other policies of the Community (especially structural policies)
either through practical cooperation or through cross-fertilization of methods and practice. The
evaluation will, in particular, highlight any relevant links established with other Community policy
areas (e.g. education, social protection, equality, consumer protection).
9.3.2 Procedures and frequency of evaluation
Monitoring and evaluation will be responsibilities at all three levels of the programme: project level,
national level, Community level and its execution will be shared between the model actions, the
networks, the national correspondents, the Management and Coordination Unit and additional
European-level experts as required. A detailedframeworkwill be elaborated by technical assistance
 staff to facilitate the dovetailing of various aspects of evaluation and the comparability of results.
Each model action and each transnational network of projects will prepare an annual report on its
implementation based on its internal evaluation.
National correspondents will prepare annual reports in relation to all programme objectives with
 respect to the elements of the programme in their Member State (including the external evaluations
of model actions).
 At European level, the Management Coordination Unit and other European-level experts as
 appropriate will be called upon to prepare an annual synthetic progress report based on the above
 reports, an assessment of the impact in relation to the fourth and fifth objectives of the programme,
 as well as an assessment of the impact of the programme overall. Their major reports will carry a
 limited number of recommendations for any necessary adjustment of priorities.
                                                    37
 ---pagebreak--- Before 1 July 1997, the Commission shall present to the Council and the European Parliament an
interim report on the implementation and progress of the programme as a whole.
Before 1 July 2000, the Commission shall present to the Council and the European Parliament a
final report on the implementation and progress of the programme.
9.4    Coherence with financial planning
The action is included in the financial programming of the DG.
The more general aim in the DG'sfinancialplanning which corresponds to the aim of the proposed
action is Chapter B3-41: Social Protection and Free Circulation.
 10.   ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE (PART Ai
 1.   DOES THE ACTION REQUIRE AN INCREASE IN COMMISSION PERSONNEL.
       IF SO, HOW MANY?
For line B3-4103 as a whole, the following additional staff is required in 1994: 1A, 1C.
Additional posts will come from resource programming for the year in question or by internal
redeployment.
2.     INDICATE THE AMOUNT OF PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE
       GENERATED BY THE ACTION PROPOSAL. EXPLAIN MODE OF CALCULATION.
       Personnel
       Estimated annual cost for 1A and 1C                                  ECU 108 000
Administrative expenditure
In the Draft Preliminary Budget for 1994, the Commission already presented a budget for
administrative expenditure for line B3-4103.
For 1994 and subsequent years, Part A administrative expenditure will remain at the same level.
                                               38
 ---pagebreak--- REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMUNITY
    PROGRAMME FOR THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC
  INTEGRATION OF THE LEAST-PRIVILEGED GROUPS
                  "Poverty 3" (1989-94)
       Council Decision 89/457/EEC of 18 July 1989
                (OJNoL224, 2.8.1989)
                            39
 ---pagebreak--- INTRODUCTION
The Commission is implementing a "Community programme for the economic and social integration
of the least-privileged groups in society" as provided for by Council Decision of 18 July 1989(1).
The programme is to run for a five-year period (1989-94) and extends and expands previous
Community action, known as the first and second European programmes to combat poverty (1975-80
and 1984-89)(2) which demonstrated the Community's intent to contribute, to the limits of its powers
and its resources, to the fight against poverty undertaken in the Member States.
The Poverty 3 programme forms part of the same approach. However, it is more ambitious than
earlier programmes: first in respect of the resources, which, although still modest, have been
increased to give a provisional budget totalling ECU 55 million for the five years of the programme,
compared with ECU 20 million and ECU 29 million for the first and second programmes
respectively, but more importantly it is more ambitious in respect of its contents: it was designed
in the light of the lessons drawn from the two earlier programmes and aims to give greater support
to innovation in the methods and policies implemented. It is intended to promote a multi-
dimensional approach to social exclusion and also gives pride of place to strategies which are aimed
at bom economic and social integration of the least-privileged groups in society, based on a
partnership between public and private institutions and conducted with the participation of the
groups concerned.
Obviously, Poverty 3 is neither intended nor able to tackle all aspects of poverty in the Community,
as the activities and policies to be pursued in mis field are the responsibility of the Member States
and their national, regional and local authorities. Its aim is to promote experimentation with new
strategies for fighting poverty, and thus to contribute to identifying good practice, encouraging
policy and stimulating public debate in this field. With this aim in view, it concentrates its resources
on some forty local projects throughout the Member States which are linked by means of a
transnational organizational structure created specifically for mis purpose to form a dynamic
European network. A very small percentage of its budget is also set aside for research work and
statistical studies to improve our grasp of the processes underlying social exclusion.
The local projects were selected by the Commission at the end of 1989 on the basis of proposals
submitted by the Member States. They will receive financial aid from the Community during the
five years of the programme on condition mat co-funding from public authorities or private
 associations at national, regional and/or local level is available. They will attend national and
transnational meetings regularly to pool experience and compare notes and they will be supported
 by technical assistance teams whose job it is to provide them with suitable help for project
 development and assessment.
 (,)
         Council Decision 89/457/EEC of 18 July 1989 establishing a "medium-term Community
         action programme concerning the economic and social integration of the least-privileged
         groups in society" (OJ No L 224, 2.8.1989).
 (2)
         Council Decisions 75/458/EEC of 22 July 1975 (OJ No L 199, 30.7.1975) and 85/8/EEC
         (OJ No L 2, 3.1.1985).
                                                   40
 ---pagebreak--- The practical experience acquired in these projects, the support activities and the various programme
publications will contribute to establishing the profile of Poverty 3 and the synergy between its
activities and those conducted elsewhere at national and Community level.
The thirty "pilot projects" are sizeable projects, bringing together the public and private partners at
local level who are resolved to implement jointly a coherent and coordinated strategy to fight
poverty. Each will receive from the Community an annual grant averaging between ECU 250 000
and ECU 300 000, i.e. almost ECU 1.5 million for the duration of the programme. A dozen projects
called "innovatory measures" are on a more modest scale: they are micro-projects which will explore
appropriate responses to the specific situations that isolated groups are in and each will receive an
annual grant of ECU 50 000, on average, i.e. around ECU 250 000 for the duration of the
programme.
Clearly these projects are very diverse. Nevertheless, what they have in common is that they reflect
the key principles of the programme - the multi-dimensional approach to social exclusion,
partnership anchored in the process of local development, and the participation of the most-
disadvantaged groups - and that they seek to translate them into practical and lasting action at local
level. They also share a common European profile, particularly as they are involved in the dynamics
of transnational exchanges implemented through the programme's organizational structure. They thus
illustrate the vital aim of the programme, which is to encourage debate and national and Community
policies on poverty and, in turn, to reinforce solidarity with the most disadvantaged groups by
providing support in the search for innovatory responses to social exclusion.
Poverty 3 actually began on 1 March 1990. In its Decision of 18 July 1989, the Council asked the
Commission to submit by 1 July 1993 at the latest, a report on the implementation and results of
the programme (Article 10). This is the purpose of this document, which reports on three years of
action under the programme and can be seen as an initial assessment of the programme. It falls into
five parts: the first reiterating what the programme sets out to do, the second describing its
implementation, the third describing the projects and what action they involve, the fourth analysing
the programme's dynamics and its strengths and weaknesses and the fifth identifying the lessons to
be learned and the impact made so far at the halfway stage.
                                                    41
 ---pagebreak--- PART I - What the Poverty 3 programme sets out to do
With over 50 million poor people, some three million homeless, and 17 million without jobs, half
of them for more than a year(3), social exclusion and poverty represent a major challenge for the
Member States and for their national, regional and local authorities. They are also a challenge for
the Community as a whole: the Community can not disregard situations which testify by their
existence and scale to the need to build a socially equitable Europe (paragraph 1).
Meeting this challenge will require increased solidarity. The Member States and their regional and
local authorities have strengthened various aspects of their policy to this end. The Community can
make a contribution within the constraints of its powers and its resources but this contribution will
be modest: in line with the principle of subsidiarity, Community action in this field is mainly
intended to support and supplement Member States' own measures (paragraph 2).
Implementing specific programmes is one of the ways in which the Community can take action.
Programmes of this type have limited scope and obviously cannot replace national policy: they are
intended to encourage innovation, mainly through the pooling of experience, and to promote the
widest possible public debate (paragraph 3).
The specific objectives of the Poverty 3 programme are a practical illustration of how this role of
support and encouragement, which is a feature of the specific programmes, can be used in the fight
against poverty. They represent the fruits of experience with previous Community programmes but
are also based on common features of a number of national policies in this field which emphasise
the overall coherence of an approach to economic and social integration of the least-privileged
groups (paragraph 4).
 1.    The challenge of poverty and social exclusion
 1.1   Poverty is nothing new and has long given rise to a great deal of scientific and political
       discussion and many public and private initiatives. However, public opinion and debate on
       these questions have undergone a profound transformation over the last 15 years in most of
       the Member States as the nature of poverty has changed and, in turn, the challenge facing
       European society.
       Urban crisis, the resurgence of homelessness, inter-racial tension and the increase of long-
       term unemployment, marginalization of young people who have never been able to gain
       access to the employment market, the persistence of poverty in certain rural areas and the
       slide into poverty of households in debt are new phenomena which are more visible and
       numerous than in the past and have contributed to this transformation of the debate on
       poverty and social exclusion.
(3)
       "Towards a Europe of solidarity - intensifying the fight against social exclusion and fostering
       integration" (COM(92) 542 final of 23 December 1992).
                                                   42
 ---pagebreak---     Poverty can today no longer be regarded as a residual state of affairs, a mere heritage of the
    past which will disappear with economic progress and growth. Moreover, it can no longer
    be regarded as merely an absence or insufficiency of financial resources affecting individuals.
    On the contrary, we must acknowledge the structural character of poverty and the
    mechanisms which lead to it and the multi-dimensional character of the processes by which
    persons, groups and sometimes urban or rural areas are excluded from the social exchanges,
    practices and rights which are an intrinsic part of social and economic integration.
    This explains the increasing use of the concept of social exclusion which, in the majority of
    the Member States and at Community level(4), is gradually replacing the concept of poverty.
    When we talk about social exclusion we are acknowledging that the problem is no longer
    simply one of inequity between the top and the bottom of the social scale (up/down), but also
    one of the distance within society between those who are active members and those who are
    forced towards the fringes (in/out). We are also highlighting the effects of the way society
    is developing and the concomitant risk of social disintegration and, finally, we are affirmimg
    that, for both the persons concerned and society itself, this is a process of change and not a
    set of fixed and static situations.
1.2 On 23 December 1992 the Commission adopted a Communication which set out the
    challenge that social exclusion represented for the Member States and the Community(5). This
    Communication underlines the fact that the situations and processes involved in social
    exclusion are largely the result of structural change in European economies and societies
    (technological change, changes in the labour market, increasing fragility of family structures,
    trends towards social fragmentation, development of migratory phenomena and changes in
    value systems). It draws attention to the increasing vulnerability of a large percentage of the
    population exposed to social exclusion, mainly due to changes in employment and family and
    social structures and explains that there is not only one group - and a small one at that - of
    people living in permanent poverty and exclusion but a variety of - increasingly large -
     groups whose economic and social integration is insecure, who experience periods of
     sporadic or recurrent poverty and who are threatened by the loss of the social ties which
     accompanies the process of social exclusion.
    These observations confirm the practical experience of the people most closely engaged in
     the fight against social exclusion - governments, local authorities, and NGOs in particular -
     who also stress the risk mat the situation and the processes involved might deteriorate further.
     This is sufficient evidence - even taking into account the diversity of local and national
     situations - to convince us of the scale of the challenge throughout Europe and the echo it
     strikes in public opinion.
     Community action
     The fight against social exclusion is mainly the responsibility of the Member States and their
     national, regional and local authorities. However, the Community has repeatedly expressed
     its desire to contribute, within the constraints of its powers and resources, to what the
(4)
     Resolution of the Council and the Social Affairs Ministers on combating social exclusion on
     29 September 1989 (OJ No C 277, 31.10.1989).
     Towards a Europe of solidarity - intensifying the fight against social exclusion and fostering
     integration" (COM(92) 542 final of 23 December 1992).
                                                 43
 ---pagebreak---     Member States are doing: its activities are thus limited but are indicative of its growing
    concern and the way they have evolved shows how the types of Community action, which
    have gradually been identified and accepted in conformity with the principle of subsidiarity,
    are best designed to make a specific additional contribution.
2.1 The Community has been concerned specifically with social exclusion since the mid-
    seventies. Its activities do not constitute so much a policy as a limited contribution, testifying
    to the concern for solidarity with the deprived in the process of building Europe. Its most
    favoured, and for a long time only, instrument has been the implementing of specific
    programmes with limited resources intended to support innovation and the pooling of
    experience.
    In 1975 the Community launched its first programme to combat poverty (1979-1980) which
    supported pilot projects throughout the nine Member States of the Community of that time.
    This programme, which was conceived in a period of growth and implemented during the
    crisis at the end of the seventies, prompted an administrative and political rethink in most
    Member States on the new aspects of the problem of poverty engendered by this new
    situation. This programme was followed by a second one (1985-1989), closely geared to the
    principle of transnational pooling of practices implemented in almost 100 local micro-
    projects. The Poverty 3 programme (1989-1994) is an extension of this but its resources are
    concentrated on a smaller number of more ambitious projects, the aim of which is to make
    the transition from the previous exploratory phase to a phase of selective development, i.e.
    "full-scale experimentation" with the principles of action identified in previous programmes.
2.2 Community action was gradually stepped up and diversified, especially towards the end of
    the eighties. This process contributed towards growing public awareness of the scale of the
    problem, partly because it stirred many people to action as poverty assumed ever greater
    proportions.
    The Commission has sought to devise a set of more ambitious and more coherent initiatives.
    Within the context of implementing the Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of
    Workers, it proposed a recommendation on the right to sufficient resources and benefits in
    social protection systems which was adopted by the Council on 24 June 1992(6). This
    recommendation not only affirms the right to sufficient resources to live in human dignity
    but also emphasizes the need to incorporate it in an overall approach to fighting social
     exclusion and thus to back it up with suitable measures to ensure integration in the fields of
    health, housing, education and training etc.^ in line with the Resolution of the Council and
    the Social Affairs Ministers meeting within the Council of 29 September 1989.
(6)
     Council Recommendation 92/441/EEC on common criteria concerning sufficient resources
     and assistance in social protection systems (OJ No L 245, 24.6.1992, pp. 46 to 48).
(7)
     Resolution of the Council and the Social Affairs ministers meeting within the Council on
     29 September 1993 concerning social exclusion (OJ No C 277, 31.10.1989).
                                                  44
 ---pagebreak---     In parallel with implementation of the Poverty 3 programme, the Commission has intensified
    its support of NGOs, particularly with a view to uniting them in a European network00. More
    recently, it has made arrangements for successful collaboration with management and labour,
    local authorities and their European organizations and town and housing organizations'
    networks.
    The Commission's structural policy has also included moves to examine the situation in crisis
    areas (ERDF) and within particularly vulnerable groups (Horizon and Now initiatives within
    the framework of the ESF).
    The Commission has also ensured that synergy develops between various networks involved
    in the fight against social exclusion in the Community, mainly by organizing a series of
    brainstorming seminars. It has formed an interdepartmental group responsible for coherence
    in Community policies which have an impact on social exclusion. It has also lent its support
    to studies and assessment work, creating an Observatory of policies for combating social
    exclusion, a move which reflects the Resolution of the Council and the Social Affairs
    Ministers meeting within the Council of 29 September 1989 referred to above. It has also
    backed work on urban social development.
     Finally, in its proposals for revision of the Treaties, the Commission stressed the need to
    intensify efforts to combat social exclusion, reference to which the Council then incorporated
     in the agreement on social policy attached to the Maastricht Treaty.
2.3 The Communication from the Commission of 23 December 1992 (COM(92) 542 final) takes
     account of the progressive diversification of Community initiatives and proposes that moves
    to tackle social exclusion should figure more prominently in the Community's general and
     structural policies. It recalls mat the value of Community action resides largely in its
     contribution to the pooling and transfer of experience. It underlines the fact that identifying
     this contribution is certainly one of the positive aspects of the Community's activities which
     will help to strengthen a pan-European approach to fighting social exclusion and to motivate
     all the players to make an active contribution. Henceforth, specific programmes such as the
     Poverty 3 programme will fit into this framework of diversification and will be at their most
     effective mere.
3.   The part played by specific programmes
3.1  The effects of implementing specific programmes are threefold.
     These programmes are first of all valuable in their own right, as they signal the Community's
     concern for the problem and thus promote indirectly other Community and national initiatives
     in this field (which is why the Commission is keen for these programmes to have a high
     profile both on the national and European stage, as this is one of the conditions of their
     acting as models).
     EAPN, European Anti-Poverty Network, European network of NGOs and voluntary groups
     engaged in the fight against poverty.
                                                45
 ---pagebreak---     The programmes are also valuable on account of their experimental character: their main
    objective is not to subsidize isolated activities, however useful these may be, but to
    contribute to identifying and validating suitable methods and policies for fighting current
    forms of social exclusion and, in particular, its multi-dimensional character (which explains
    why the Commission attaches such importance to the fact mat the projects should serve as
    models and be assessed).
    Finally, these programmes are also intended to contribute to the transfer of know-how and
    good practice and the building up of networks of players engaged in transnational exchanges
    on the basis of relatively comparable tangible experience (which accounts for the importance
    the Commission attaches to the coherence of the programme as a whole and its European
    organizational structure).
3.2 These functions set specific programmes quite clearly apart from funds. They require the
    Commission's active presence at grass roots level as partners to demonstrate the Community's
    commitment, to stress the coherence which is sought and to help reap the benefits of the
    experience of all.
    They also require that specific support and technical assistance structures be set up, especially
    to accentuate the projects' exemplary nature, the quality of their management, the rigour of
    their assessment and the relevance of their transnational exchanges. They involve sustained
    cooperation with the Member States, not only to ensure that the projects are run as efficiently
    as possible but also to maximize the impact of the projects and programmes in providing
    impetus for policies and in the transfer of good practice. The value of these programmes can
    thus not be measured by the yardstick of the resources, which are very modest and do not
    compare with those of the structural Funds, but by their contribution in terms of methodology
     and policy, which is why the people who participate in such programmes share a willingness
    to accept joint obligations and a scrupulous concern for the quality of the programme.
4.   The specific objectives of Poverty 3
4.1  The two first Community programmes to combat poverty were mainly of an exploratory
     nature: they comprised essentially a set of local micro-projects which were extremely diverse
     and uneven even when they were integrated in a national-level organizational structure (first
    programme) or a transnational one (second programme).
     Poverty 3 is built around the assumption that it is possible to make the transition from this
     exploratory phase to a phase of selective development, i.e. validation of the effectiveness of
     the principles based on previous experience. These principles are the multi-dimensional
     approach to poverty, partnership between institutions at local level and participation of the
     groups concerned. The challenge of the programme is to implement these locally by
     anchoring them in the dynamic development process of an area. Poverty 3 is thus made up
     of a limited number of pilot projects which are of a fair size, conducted on the initiative of
     local organizations and unified by a common set of principles for action. The contribution
     of Poverty 3 to defining suitable methods and policies assumes that the effectiveness of these
     principles of action will be demonstrated i.e. that the success of Poverty 3 largely resides
     in the demonstrative value of the projects selected.
                                                46
 ---pagebreak---     In line with this basic approach, Poverty 3 concentrates its resources on a limited number of
    projects. This option ties in well with the decision to take Community action in a phase of
    selective development. It also means that the Community is betting on local initiative and
    particularly on the capacity of local players to build an effective partnership, to work out a
    coherent strategy, maintain tight control of a relatively large budget and to serve as a
    valuable example on a national scale.
    The fact that the Community is taking this gamble illustrates its desire to enter into
    partnership with local and national authorities. And it clearly assumes that the players do not
    regard the programme as a simple means of financing local activities but that, on the
    contrary, they seek to use their experience to contribute to intensifying the national and
    Community debate on the subject and exploring the principles of the programme more
    deeply.
4.2 The three key principles of the Poverty 3 programme are as follows:
           the multi-dimensional approach: this principle is based on the observation that poverty
           and exclusion are multi-faceted phenomena which are not just a result of insufficient
           financial resources and which are evident in the fields of housing, training.
           employment, education, health, access to services, etc. This approach requires coherent
           strategy and synergism tailored to specific national and local situations and not a
           simple juxtaposition of isolated activities which have nothing in common or which are
           jumbled together in random groupings;
           partnership: mis principle is the institutional expression of the multi-dimensional
           approach and constitutes its practical tool: this is viable only if all the key players in
           the various areas mentioned above share a common approach. Partnership involves
           collective responsibility for the success of the entire project and assumes that the
           players are in a position to define a joint strategy based on a consensus which
           transcends their respective interests or differences;
           participation: this is based on the observation that social exclusion is also a condition
           of dependence or passivity vis-à-vis institutions and, in general, decisions taken by
           others. Accordingly, the active involvement of the groups concerned in the integration
           process is, at the same time, a prerequisite for, and a symbol of its success. In more
           general terms, it forms part of an approach which promotes citizenship and democracy
           and which wants the groups involved to be active partners in the policies being
           conducted.
    These three principles can be seen in various forms and to varying degrees in some of the
     innovatory social policies implemented in the Member States. Their relevance is pointed out
     in the Resolution of the Council and the Social Affairs Ministers meeting within the Council
    of 29 September 1989. The Poverty 3 programme does not have a monopoly on these
    principles but it does aim to apply them systematically at local level, without, however,
     underestimating the problems. It is for this reason mat the programme allocates not only
    financial aid but envisages also technical assistance and support for conducting activities and
     for continuous assessment. For this reason too, the programme intends to enable good
    practice to be identified, i.e. practical procedures by which these principles can be
     implemented permanently and effectively. Finally, it explains the programme's aim, which
     is to promote the transfer of know-how both at national and European level.
                                                  47
 ---pagebreak--- Part D - Implementation of the Poverty 3 programme
Responsibility for implementing the Poverty 3 programme lies with the Commission which has set
up appropriate decision-making, management and support structures to coordinate as efficiently as
possible the local, national and Community aspects of the programme (paragraph 1).
Implementation of Poverty 3 commenced as soon as the Council Decision was adopted so that the
projects could be selected and the programme and the structures set up in accordance with a
schedule which had maximum provision for continuity between the end of the second programme
(November 1989) and launching of the third programme (March 1990) (paragraph 2). The
Commission strove to ensure that the programme activities were implemented gradually within the
limit of the administrative and financial constraints resulting from the fact that the budgetary
commitments for the programme are made annually (paragraph 3).
1.     Decision-making, management and organizational structures for the programme
 1.1   The Commission is responsible for the programme. As provided for by the Council Decision,
       the Commission is assisted by an Advisory Committee, comprising a representative of each
        Member State (most of whom are representatives of the national Social Affairs Ministries),
       for monitoring the programme.
        The Commission has elicited the help of an international team of consultants which it has
        instructed to provide technical assistance in the management and organization of the
        programme. Under the direction of the Commission, this team deals with all the technical
        details associated with the administrative and financial management of the funds allocated
        under the terms of the programme. It is also responsible for European coordination of
        organizational aspects of the programme, particularly with respect to transnational exchanges,
        assessment, publications and research. Its management is based in Lille (France) and its
        members, who work part-time for the team, are based in Germany, France, Ireland and
        Portugal. Together they form the programme's Central Unit.
        This unit coordinates a network of national consultants responsible for providing the projects
        with technical assistance, helping to maintain the national impetus of the programme and
        contributing to the programme's organization at Community level. On average, there are two
        part-time national consultants per Member State, the number being determined by the size
        of the country and the number of projects. These consultants make up the programme's
        Research and Development Units(9).
        The Commission and the Central Unit hold very frequent working meetings, and bilateral
        meetings between Commission departments and some members of the Central Unit are held
        occasionally as the need arises. The Commission, the Central Unit and the Research and
        Development Units hold two-day workshops three times a year. Various meetings connected
        with the organization of the programme also ensure that the players remain in contact.
 (9)    The members of the research and development units are appointed by the Commission in
        consultation with the Member States concerned. In some cases they work in the same
        institute; in other cases they belong to different institutions.
                                                     48
 ---pagebreak--- 1.2 These structures reflect the way the Commission intends to develop its cooperation with the
    Member States in the decision-making process and, as regards implementation of the
    Poverty 3 programme, they mirror the specific objectives of the organizational structure
    which are to ensure that:
          the projects serve as models in terms of the quality of their management, by
          demonstrating the relevance of the programme's key principles and by contributing to
          the drawing up of political and methodological proposals;
          the programme itself and the European aspects of the programme form a coherent
          whole;
          it has a high profile on the national and European stage.
1.3 The strategy underlying the organizational structure is based on two principles:
          the first is to acknowledge the need to provide the project with solid technical support
          which includes help in self-assessment, definition of strategy, planning and
          management of activities and support for information and communication in order to
          maintain the national profile of the projects and the programme.
          This is the Research and Development Units' main task and their success will
          determine whether the political or methodological proposals expected from the
          programme can be drawn up on an empirical basis. In order to provide the projects
          with multi-disciplinary technical assistance, the Research and Development Units are
          designed as units combining theoretical and practical skills and experience.
          The second principle is to ensure that the programme's European dimension is seen as
          a key factor by all the parties involved.
          The European dimension is not confined to the arranging of transnational exchanges
          between projects: it is also evident in publications and activities intended to give the
          programme a high European profile, in bilateral exchanges between projects and direct
           communication between all the players and, finally, in the provisions for the internal
          cohesion of the programme, i.e. structuring the Research and Development Unit as a
           European network and structuring the programme itself as a network of initiatives,
          experiments and individual players.
    It is up to the Central Unit to coordinate organizational aspects at European level. The
    Research and Development Units are actively involved, especially since the second
    programme showed it to be necessary to promote the national and European profile of the
    programme in tandem.
                                                 49
 ---pagebreak--- 1.4 It should be emphasized that the programme implementation structures are highly
    decentralized in terms of resources, although from the point of view of decision-making at
    the Commission they are centralized. The programme funds are in fact distributed as follows
    (provisional budget):
    Global projects                                            ECU 41.05 million
    Studies and research                                       ECU 4.95 million
    Management, support and publications
    (ECU 3.5 million of which for the
    Research and Development Unit)                             ECU 9.0Ô million
    Total                                                      ECU 55.00 million
2.   The programme implementation schedule
     One of the concerns of the Commission and the Member States in 1989 was to avoid any
     interruption between the end of the second programme and the launching of the third. This
     was not just because they wished to prevent an interruption of Community financing for
     those projects from the second programme which had been selected for Poverty 3 (there
     were, after all, few of these, given the difference between the two programmes) but also
     because there was a desire to display continuity in the Community's activities on behalf of
     the deprived. It should be noted in this respect that four years lay between the end of the
     first programme and the start of the second and mis was seen as more of a retreat by the
     Community than the result of technical constraints.
     In parallel with the discussion process within the Council, the Commission had started
     practical preparations for the programme. As soon as the Council had adopted the decision,
     the Commission was able to start selecting projects and setting up the programme
     management structures at the same time.
2.1  The Council Decision stipulated that the project applications were to be submitted to the
     Commission by the Member States and mat they should be drawn up in close cooperation
     between the Member State concerned and the relevant public or private bodies designated
     by that Member State (Article 5). To this end, the Commission thus placed at the disposal
     of Member States in July 1989 a detailed document setting out the guidelines of the
     programme and as a guide for projects being considered for proposal an indication of the
     information mat applications should contain. It was decided that each Member State would
     preselect projects in accordance with its own procedures and would submit to the
     Commission no more than 6 to 8 projects.
                                               50
 ---pagebreak--- As a result of the date of the Decision and the time taken by selection and internal
cooperation procedures within the Member States, the Commission received the Member
States' proposals in the course of October 1989. It examined them with the help of
independent experts in November 1989. After consultation with the Member States at the
beginning of December 1989 it made its final selection. At the end of December 1989 it
contacted the projects which had been selected and advised them that the contracts covering
Community aid would be drawn up with effect from the beginning of March 1990 and
provided all the necessary information relating to the financial aspects of Community aid.
The final selection comprised 39 projects representing total provisional aid of
ECU 41 million distributed as follows:
Country        B      DK   D    EL     ES    FR   IRL   IT   LUX NL      P   UK TOTAL
Pilot
projects                                                                           27
Innovatory
measures              1   1   1    1            1     1    1    1   1     1  1      12
The map below shows where the projects are located. (Following the unification of Germany,
the programme accepted three projects from the new Lander in 1992 which are also included
on the map).
                                          51
 ---pagebreak--- < -
• D
    52
 ---pagebreak---     It should be stressed that distribution of the projects between the Member States takes
    account both of their size and the need to step up the Community's efforts on behalf of less
    developed countries. Moreover, for projects in disadvantaged regions, the Commission agreed
    to contribute 55% of expenditure for the projects and not 50% as is the general rule in the
    programme.
    It should also be stressed that the Commission had proposed that the Member States take
    account, when selecting, of the possible interaction between these projects and national
    policy. In several countries, the national selection also reflected the approach followed in
    certain national programmes to fight poverty and social exclusion, for example in Denmark,
    Spain, France, the Netherlands or Portugal.
2.2 The programme's organizational structures were set up during the second half of 1989 in two
    complementary phases. First, the Commission published in the Official Journal a call for
    tenders for the general task of technical assistance associated with implementing the
    programme at European level; recruitment of the Central Unit started December 1989 and
    it took charge of the ground work for the practical launch of the programme (administrative
    and contractual procedures, organization of a launch conference with the selected projects
    etc.). Second, the Commission, in close cooperation with each of the Member States, chose
    the consultants for the Research and Development Units which started work in March 1990,
    i.e. at the same time as project support activities got under way.
2.3 Poverty 3 is mainly an action programme but also has a "research" component, with a
    modest budget (not exceeding 9% of ihe total budget) which works to a separate schedule.
    The Commission has undertaken a definition of a programme of statistical work which has
    been discussed with the national statistical institutes and has also prepared a programme of
     transnational research, the guidelines for which have been discussed with the Member States
     and the national research councils in order to prepare a call for tenders covering the research
     priorities identified.
2.4  The programme was launched officially at a major seminar in Brussels at the end of March
     1990 to which project representatives, the Research and Development Units, the Central
     Unit, the Advisory Committee and the Commission were invited.
3.   Hie stages and critical junctures of the programme
     Poverty 3 is ambitious both in terms of the quality of the projects and the coherence of the
     programme. It was thus advisable for it to be implemented gradually. This is what the
     Commission has tried to do within the framework of the administrative procedures and by
     taking account of certain time constraints it was obliged to respect.
3.1  No matter how careful the Member Spates and the Commission were in ensuring the quality
     of the projects selected, the latter could clearly not be expected to be fully operational right
     from the start, i.e. to have sound partnership structures, appropriate and innovatory strategies,
     qualified teams and permanent financial agreements, etc. in place in March 1990.
                                                 53
 ---pagebreak--- Initially it was agreed with the Member States that the first year of the programme would
take the form of a project definition phase lasting a year. Owing to administrative constraints
associated with the schedule for budgetary commitments, the first contract offered to the
projects was for seven months and the second for nine months. The definition phase in fact
lasted 16 months for the majority of the projects, in particular for those whose co-funding
arrangements were least secure.
At the same time Close attention was paid to the structuring of each of these projects at local
level during this initial phase. The Research and Development Units were called upon to
provide vital support here, in particular to ensure that suitable decision-making, management
and assessment structures were set up and that project activity planning was as realistic as
possible. The Commission adjusted the administrative and financial management procedures
of the programme to the circumstances and difficulties encountered as far as possible in close
cooperation with the Central Unit. It also visited each project to help solve any
administrative or financial problems occurring but also to explain the objectives of the
programme and to assist in its implementation on a European scale.
         decision-making in each project, especially for pilot projects, lies in the hands of the
         partnership built up at local level; programme applicants were obliged to submit a
         memorandum of agreement between the project partners in advance; however, as this
         was drawn up within a very short period of time, it was important to have
         confirmation of the terms of the agreement and, above all, to convert it into effective
         procedures for cooperation between local players;
         in the administrative and financial management of the projects, Community rules,
         which were scarcely known or familiar to the players, despite the information
         campaigns undertaken, had to be adhered to. Several projects had clearly
         underestimated the problems involved in obtaining necessary co-funding in good
         time, and this slowed their progress considerably. Moreover, some project leaders did
         not have any previous experience of managing budgets as large as those for pilot
         projects and it was necessary to recruit somebody with better qualifications in this
         respect and, sometimes, to make arrangements for stricter management of expenditure
         or for more transparent financial procedures particularly with regard to co-funding
         requirements;
         assessment is a key component of the programme explicitly mentioned in the Council
         Decision. It was agreed that the projects would arrange their own self-assessment if
         necessary with the assistance of the Research and Development Units, this being a
         condition for taking part in the programme. It was thus important to make practical
         arrangements for self-assessment and also to determine the procedures for cooperation
         with the Research and Development Units which were also involved in assessing the
         programme;
         given the programme's principles of experimentation, it is vital for the project
         activities to be planned realistically. A coherent strategy must be defined, priorities
         identified to reflect the project's requirements and measures which are possibly at risk
         of drifting apart, duplicating one another or competing with each other or which are
         simply introduced alongside one another must be coordinated synergetically. The
         members of the Research and Development Units are often called upon to help here,
         particularly to ensure that the general objectives are set out in practical and precise
         terms and the players negotiate on their priorities.
                                               54
 ---pagebreak--- 3.2 The launch seminar in March 1990 was a key moment in affirming the identity of the
    Poverty 3 programme. It was then agreed that there should be a major annual meeting
    between the projects, the Advisory Committee, the Research and Development Units, the
    Central Unit and the Commission to examine certain key issues of the programme. The
    themes for discussion selected were local development (1991), involvement of labour and
    management (1992), and partnership and multi-dimensionality (1993).
    Apart from the organization for these large annual meetings, each of which were attended
    by between 150 and 250 participants, and a specific meeting on innovatory measures, the
    following practical arrangements have been made with regard to the organization of the
    programme:
            an internal bulletin (in two languages) and a magazine for large-scale distribution
            have been published (five languages) with regular increases in the circulation and the
            number of countries (the bulletin now has a circulation of 2 000 and the magazine
            a circulation of 5 000) and various other publications (project directory (in three
            languages), annual reports on developments in the programme (in two languages),
            documents for the annual meetings and documents on specific themes) and a
            programme presentation film;
            more technical meetings have been organized, especially transnational meetings for
            projects targeting a specific theme (housing, rural poverty, participation, economic
            integration, etc.) either associated with the bilateral visits between projects or not;
            national meetings have been organized on the initiative of the projects, the Research
            and Development Unit members and sometimes the member of the Advisory
            Committee concerned to build up progressively the national dimension and profile
            of the programme.
    These various aspects of Poverty 3 are implemented under the responsibility of the
    Commission by the Central Unit and by the members of the Research and Development
    Units. The projects, especially some of them, have gradually assumed an increasingly large
    role, not only in arranging certain meetings or events but also in launching certain initiatives.
    In this respect it is significant that all the parties involved in Poverty 3 lent their active
    support to ensure that the projects of the new Lander, which joined in 1992, were given the
    best possible reception.
                                                 55
 ---pagebreak--- PART in - The projects
The projects are the programme's basic components. Naturally, they are different from one another
(paragraph 1). They were built up step-by-step (paragraph 2), not without encountering some
difficulties, but these were mostly overcome gradually (paragraph 3).
1.      Overview of Ihe projects
 1.1    The Poverty 3 programme now comprises 41 local projects, 29 of which are pilot projects
        and 12 innovatory measures.
         (a)     In each pilot project a group of players and institutions team up to define and
                 implement jointly, in a fairly well-defined area, a coherent strategy for economic and
                 social integration of all the disadvantaged groups living in this area.
                 The practical operations of a pilot project are in the hands of a "steering committee"
                 made up of representatives of one or more local or regional authorities, one or more
                 public or quasi-public organizations active in areas such as training, housing health,
                 etc. and one or more NGOs; occasionally, trade union and employers' organizations
                 are also partners in local activities. An operating team of between 12 and 15 persons,
                 sometimes more, is responsible for implementing the project's strategy under the
                 auspices of the steering committee.
                 Partnership here is not merely an abstract principle: the on-going assessment of the
                 project's activities shows that some 300 local partners, i.e. an average of 12 per
                 project, were represented in the steering committees. 100 representatives of local and
                 regional authorities and 100 representatives of NGOs (see Annex 1) are thus involved
                 in overseeing the projects.
         (b)     Innovatory measures are generally implemented by a public institution or an
                 individual private organization with activities frequently targeting a specific social
                 problem or population group. Nevertheless, several of them model themselves on the
                 partnership principle - one of the key principles of the programme - and have much
                 in common with the pilot project, albeit on a smaller scale and with a more modest
                 budget.
 1.2     More than three quarters of the projects are located in urban areas. However, one project in
         five is in a rural area (or, perhaps, operates both in the country and in small rural towns).
         Most of the projects operate in a clearly defined area such as a district, municipality or
         adjacent districts, i.e. with a population of between 20 000 and 50 000 or, sometimes more
         (see Annex 1). In a few rare cases, the projects operate in two or three separate locations a
         fair distance apart.
         Virtually all the areas where the projects are located are facing great problems and have been
         hit by unemployment and a deteriorating economic and social environment, even if they are
         in a region or an urban area which is relatively well off.
                                                       56
 ---pagebreak---     In urban areas, the projects cover one (or more) disadvantaged districts where the
    unemployment rate is between 2 and 4 times higher than the average for the town or
    country, due mainly to a crisis in traditional industrial activity and a decline in small
    undertakings (Charleroi, Girona, Limerick, Hamburg, Antwerp, etc.). The level of
    qualification of the population is low. The surroundings are shabby, decrepit or in a state of
    decay (Calais, Liverpool and Oporto) or infrastructure and facilities are inadequate (Rome).
    Several of these districts or municipalities also have a high proportion of immigrants or
    ethnic minorities (Selonika and Liverpool) or an influx of asylum-seekers and refugees
    (Perama and Berlin). Many are facing problems with crime, drugs, alcoholism and
    prostitution (Copenhagen, Edinburgh, Porto, Huelva and Lisbon).
    In rural areas, the projects target localities where, generally, the outlook for local
    development is bleak. Traditional activities and production structures generate low incomes
    and too few jobs (Connemara). Migration, especially of young people and skilled workers,
    leads to a progressive ageing of the population (Burgos, Maniagua and Connemara). The
    drift from the land, isolation, retarded development or a decline in traditional activities are
    reflected in poor housing, infrastructure and communications and a lack of or inadequate
    social, health, educational and cultural services (Almeida and Palermo).
1.3 The majority of the projects conduct diversified activities - in line with the multi-dimensional
    approach of the programme - combining, for example, vocational training, help in starting
    up businesses or in local development, the improvement of housing or health conditions and
    the development of social services. Nevertheless, the respective priorities of these facets of
    the projects and the way in which the activities are combined vary greatly from one project
    to another. Several projects are thus implemented by one or more players who have
    considerable experience and influence in a specific field (such as housing or training) and
    who are trying to expand their activities by joining forces with other persons to enter other
    fields of activity (in the light of local requirements but also as dictated by the real scope for
    cooperation offered by the local situation). Other projects start off as teams of varying
    degrees of cohesion, comprising players and institutions, which all have their strengths which
     such teams seek to develop in preference to exploring new areas of activity.
    Vocational training, getting people back to work, creating jobs or local development
     constitute the areas of activity common to most of the pilot projects (including the
     innovatory measures, too). The scale of the operations in these key areas of economic
     integration is sometimes modest but their intensity is remarkable in most cases. Housing,
     education and health represent three other major fields of activity and approximately one
     project in two devotes much of its energy to at least one of these.
     These activities are combined in very different ways and, in some cases, they are still not
     geared very closely to one another. Sometimes they are conceived with a view to
     establishing an overall arrangement, scaled to the area concerned and its population. In other
     cases, the idea is to respond to the needs of specific population groups: the long-term
     unemployed, young people in difficult situations, lone-parent families, etc.
     The "territorial" approach targeting a specific area is more frequently seen in pilot projects
     which are planned around a specific locality even if they do take into account the special
     needs of various groups of inhabitants. The "target-group" approach is more frequent in
     innovatory measures which are devised in response to specific problems. However, they also
     reflect the various national traditions in social policy, especially in their degree of
     decentralization, their concern to target specific groups and their principles of territorial coordination.
                                                    57
 ---pagebreak--- 2.  A gradual build-up in coherent activity
    The programme has been supporting projects since March 1990. For the vast majority, the
    beginning of the programme was the start of a step-by-step build-up.The projects which
    existed already were few and far between and the majority were created from nothing (one
    in three) or were extensions of an existing partnership (approximately one case in two) to
    cover new activities (see Annex 1).
    In this build-up phase, the first principle to be implemented was the principle of partnership.
    This is the basis upon which the projects gradually defined and implemented overarching,
    coherent, i.e. multi-dimensional, strategies. The third key principle of the programme,
    participation, only really started to develop after the projects had been stabilized and the
    partnership and strategy firmly established.
2.1 Establishing of partnerships
    Right from the start, partnership at local level was put forward as one of the fundamental
    principles of Poverty 3, as it was seen as the most appropriate instrument for mounting a
    suitable response to the complex process of social exclusion. Applicants to the programme,
    in particular pilot projects, were required to devise and implement their project within the
    framework of a joint undertaking with both public and private partners.
    Making partnership the organizational model for local activities was no easy matter. In some
    countries, the word itself meant little or nothing to most of those involved and the idea of
    making all the public and private players work together constituted a major departure from
    traditional practice - a novelty and a challenge to administrative and regulatory arrangements.
    All the same, even in countries which already had the concept of partnership in their social
    policies, various problems such as institutional rivalry or administrative inflexibility at times
    caused practical difficulties.
    In some instances, partnership was regarded at first as a simple contractual obligation (to
    convene formally the partners in the steering committee in order to obtain or share
     Community financing) and not as a principle of institutional, financial and operational
    cooperation.     Pedagogical skills were required to convince the decision-makers and
     implementing bodies of the value of a partnership embracing the whole project and not
    merely its financial aspects. Imagination was also needed to devise suitable forms of
     cooperation at local and national level and obtain the agreement of the parties concerned.
    The Research and Development Units frequently played a vital part in preparing the ground
     for local partnerships and overcoming initial reluctance.
    The process of establishing partnerships intensified appreciably from 1991 onwards. The
     Commission and the Central Unit organized a series of visits to the projects, in conjunction
    with the Research and Development Units, to forge direct links with the local partners and
    to step up cooperation between them to achieve the programme's goals. Many projects
    immediately reorganized their partnership procedures, institutionalized their decision-making
     systems and at the same time, opened up new - sometimes unofficial - avenues for
    participation of associations, and, to a lesser extent, management and labour.
                                                 58
 ---pagebreak--- 2.2 Multi-dimensionality
    The principle of multi-dimensionality is based on the observation that social exclusion and
    poverty are complex and take many forms, and are the result of both of economic and social
    factors. Any action taken must seek to encourage comprehensive and coherent moves
    towards integration taking into consideration all aspects of the lives of the populations
    concerned.
    For the projects, this principle represented a real challenge, too: it meant that they had to aim
    for coherence and synergism in their activities rather than a proliferation of isolated activities
    conducted in parallel with each other.
    Here again, the principle was only gradually, and not always fully, understood and
    implemented. Initially, accumulating activities outweighed the integrated approach, and the
    profusion of activities in many of the projects sometimes gave the impression that the
    promoters were afraid of not doing enough in areas relevant to deprived populations or of
    not launching enough activities to justify the budgets allocated them.
    There were several reasons for this: the programme start-up conditions, the constraints
    attendant upon co-funding and difficulties encountered in partnerships.
    First of all, the majority of the projects started up their activities before having defined
    clearly their overall strategy. Firstly, this took time, in particular when it required a
    preliminary study or difficult negotiations between partners. Secondly, the availability of
    funds meant that many activities could be launched immediately and some of the partners
    were clearly ready to expand a number of their existing activities.
     Subsequently, the co-funding procedures led, initially at least, to inflexibility in setting
    priorities: the co-funding available to some projects was dedicated to specific action by the
     authorities granting it (e.g. training) or was sometimes partly in non-monetary form (such
     as making available personnel from a joint facility), and the projects mus had to make
     adjustments for human, material and financial resources which did not necessarily fit in with
     an integrated strategy.
     Finally, initial weaknesses in the partnership also made it difficult for some projects to define
     a coherent approach: this was particularly true when the initial partnership was confined to
     sharing the additional resources of the programme merely to fund traditional activities of the
     partner institutions, or when the institutions involved in the initial partnership were not
     effective in implementing a strategy matching local needs.
     Nevertheless, and mainly as a result of progress in the partnership, the projects improved
     both their grasp of their concept of multi-dimensionality and their procedures for putting it
     into practice. Moreover, it should be stressed that mis principle does not mean that projects
     are necessarily active in all the fields at the same time: every project has its strengths, which
     are inherent in the structure of the partnership and the skills of its operating team, and some
     activities need human resources or political back-up which some projects find difficult to
     obtain.
     Various approaches were pursued to increase the coherence of the projects' activities. In
     certain cases, particularly for innovatory measures, the projects concentrated their energy on
     sufficiently small groups to enable them to work in depth to seek solutions to the problems
                                                  59
 ---pagebreak---     they encountered (Berlin, Dublin, Lisbon and Valkenbourg). A similar approach was adopted
    by some pilot projects which relocated their activities (Almeida) or pinpointed the priority
    areas within the original zone of activities (Calais and Hamburg). In other cases the projects
    were mainly concerned with modifying traditional practices of all or some of the
    organizations active in the area so that the persons concerned could access services which
    were capable of mounting an overall response to their integration problems (Rome, Charleroi,
    Eindohoven, Hengelo, etc.).
    This process was made easier by the effort the project put into ascertaining more precisely
    the needs of the areas and groups on whose behalf they were working and assessing the
    possible impact of their activities. The contractual studies carried out at the beginning of the
    programme and constant self-assessment by the projects mus proved very useful, at least
    when they produced in-depth discussion with the players and decision-makers with a view
    to adjusting or reshaping strategy.
2.3 Participation
    Participation of the disadvantaged groups in the activities and decisions relevant to them
    constitutes the third key principle of the programme and one which was a major concern
    right from the start. Nevertheless, in the majority of the projects this principle was
    implemented later, as the projects' energy was initially concentrated on stabilizing their
    decision-making and management structures and defining their strategies.
    It should also be emphasized that the principle of participation can be interpreted in different
    ways, depending on cultural tradition and national policy and the ideas pursued by the
    projects' promoters. This results in a mixed bag of practices and levels of participation: apart
    from the "passive" forms of participation, i.e. being the target of an activity or die user of
    a service, several projects devised ways of co-opting the groups concerned and their
     representatives in the decision-making procedures (creating associations with a direct-voice
    or counterbalancing role; participating in the steering committee; involvement in action to
    reinforce solidarity within the groups concerned, etc.).
     Several projects reported that they had had problems implementing the principle of
     participation. Whilst the level of participation is largely a measure of the potential of the
     persons concerned, it also depends on the capacity of the institutions to share power and to
     make a real effort to help the groups break with the passivity and dependency induced by
     being targets for assistance.
2.4  On-going adjustment of strategy
     A project is made up of a group of various players, decision-making instances of varying
     degrees of stability, activities with a varying degree of coordination and a local context with
     a varying degree of promise. In short, it is a complex and shifting entity and for this reason
     it is important to stress that each project builds up its activities gradually throughout its
     duration and adapts constantly to the situations it encounters.
     There are two components which are central to this process of constant adjustment: first of
     all, skilled operating teams must be created which are sufficiently stable to ensure continuity
     in the activities conducted and secondly, the players themselves must adopt analysis and
     assessment procedures which can lead to a consensus, allow operating aims to be formulated
     and perhaps a change in strategy to be made in the light of experience or local developments.
                                                 60
 ---pagebreak--- (a) It took time to stabilize the operating teams. During the first three years of the
    programme, approximately half of the projects changed their project leaders (two or
    three times in some cases), and the operating teams were changed radically, inter alia
    to make them more professional and technically skilled both from the point of view
    of overall management and effective implementation of specific activities. These
    changes mostly came within the first 18 months, reflecting a gradual awareness on
    the part of the players and decision-makers of the need to increase their operational
    capacity.
    Amongst the operating teams this also engendered a keen desire for training and
    skills enhancement. The Central Unit thus arranged a training and exchange
    programme starting from 1992, for the project leaders and the members of their
    teams. Almost all of the projects took part regularly. It is certainly a pity that lack
    of funds delayed its introduction, even though the fluctuations in personnel would
    have reduced its impact had it been introduced at the start, and even though the
    success of the action was largely explained by a gradual development in the demand
    for training amongst people facing problems in the field.
     At any rate mere is no doubt that one of the programme's achievements has been to
    define a curriculum and method which meet the operating teams' expectations and are
     designed to prepare them for transnational exchanges.
(b) One of the prerequisites for the success of the programme is that situations are
     analysed and activities assessed continuously and, as a result, assessment was a
     contractual obligation for the projects right from the start. The option taken here was
     to encourage self-assessment on the initiative of the players themselves, it being
     understood that the Research and Development Unit could provide technical
     assistance in implementing it, if necessary (moreover, die Research and Development
     Units and the Central Unit contributed to external assessment of the projects activities
     and the programme as a whole). The approach that the project actually adopted
     varied. Either an external researcher was recruited with whom regular meetings were
     held (in two out of five cases), or a person was recruited from within the operating
     team specifically for the task of self-assessment (in one out of two cases) or the two
     options were combined. These arrangements were supplemented in the majority of
     the pilot projects by commissioning local studies, mostly by universities, to highlight
     the options that were open. Whatever arrangements were made, their effectiveness
     largely depends on the intensity with which the operating team and the decision-
     makers are involved in assessment. The members of the operating teams made the
     most active contribution to self-assessment and this confirms the keen desire of the
     teams to do a professional job. The members of the Steering Committees and the co-
     funding organizations largely remained in the background during the assessment
     procedure even though they did not contest its value. At any rate it should be stressed
     that for many projects, the strategies adopted evolved as the direct result of local
     studies and self-assessment: local studies revealed hidden needs of certain groups in
     certain areas (Connemara, Liverpool, Selonica, Alto Belie, and Calais) and self-
     assessment developed into a planning and monitoring tool closely integrated in the
     activities themselves (Doubs).
                                         61
 ---pagebreak--- 3. Pi TO blems encountered and responses to them
   The achievements of the projects and the programme should not blind us to the difficulties
   encountered, of which many were resolved but some still give cause for concern.
   (a)      Launching such a programme as Poverty 3 inevitably requires a delicate touch. It is
            important to secure the commitment of local projects, which are at very different
            stages of development and the impetus of the programme must be built up, striking
            a balance between each project's desire for maximum autonomy and the dictates of
            consistency within the programme. The difficulties attendant on the launch phase
            were often exacerbated in the case of the present programme by the fact that the
            implementation schedule was very tight.
            The appropriations for the programme were allotted on an annual basis. The date of
            the Council Decision (18 July 1989) and procedures for releasing the necessary
            appropriations for the first year of activity in the 1989 budget left very litttle time for
            the programme to be launched. Applications were prepared and projects selected
            within six months and the management and technical assistance procedures were
            established in the same period. The shortage of time meant that the first contractual
            period for the project had to be reduced to seven months which proved insufficient
            for the definition and organization phase - originally planned to last one year.
            The projects selected were at very different stages of readiness. Some applications
            had been drawn up without any real prior negotiation between the local partners or
            their differences having been settled. Several project promoters (or some of their
            local partners) had, moreover, seen in their application a means of obtaining a
            Community subsidy rather than an expression of a genuine involvement in a
            European programme with a totally new approach. And most of the pilot projects had
             underestimated the complexity of the administrative and financial management
             involved in administering large annual appropriations (between ECU 250 000 and
            ECU 300 000) and the obligation undertaken to obtain co-funding on a corresponding
             scale.
             The curtailed duration of the first contractual period meant that some projects did not
             use all the appropriations allotted. This was particularly true of projects which
             recruited their operating team late or had not obtained actual payment of the co-
             funding promised them within the allotted period, or again those whose budgetary
             planning was not realistic. Generally speaking, the Community rules on using the
             appropriations allotted, such as the strict limits imposed on investment, were seen by
             several projects as being a major or excessive constraint. In the first phase of the
             programme this led to frustration or incomprehension. However, the situation was
             eased gradually, by making some of the management procedures more flexible and
             endeavouring to explain the rules being applied. The projects also improved their
             management, mainly by recruiting qualified personnel.
    (b)      Although the teething troubles have been overcome, problems still remain with co-
             funding, which is one of the conditions of obtaining Community aid. In compliance
             with the Council Decision on implementing the programme, Community aid is
             subject to the projects obtaining co-funding from national, regional or local
             authorities and/or from private sources, the total sum of which is normally equivalent
             to Community aid (the contribution by the Community can be raised from 50 to 55%
                                                 62
 ---pagebreak---        in certain regions). As the rule is that appropriations are allocated annually for the
       programme and hence the project, the co-funding required must actually be paid to
       the project in the course of each of the successive contractual periods. In practical
       terms this means that the annual contracts for the project are drawn up after promises
       of co-funding have been received, authorizing payment of the first instalment of
       Community aid on the understanding that the other instalment will be paid upon
        receipt of confirmation that co-funding has actually been received. Co-funding is
       normally in the form of cash to be paid into an account opened specifically by the
        project for its activities. Under certain strict conditions the Commission will accept
        part of the co-funding being made up of contributions in kind, such as the making
        available of premises or staff actually used in the project to pursue its strategy.
        These provisions hardly pose a problem in projects where co-funding is granted by
        an authority which can actually transfer the promised funds to the projects within the
        period stipulated, especially projects whose co-funding is granted by national
        authorities under the terms of specific support programmes (Ireland, Portugal and
        Spain subject to certain procedural terms). The situation is more complex for
        projects whose co-funding comes from several different authorities whose decisions
        are not always taken in good time, and particularly for projects whose co-funding
        comes from authorities who are very late in actually paying the sums promised (or
        who do not confirm their promise of co-funding, as a result, for example, of conflict
        between local partners). This situation not only causes problems for the project's
        treasurers but also causes uncertainty as to the amount of appropriations which can
        actually be used and delays in implementing planned action. It brings about a
        reduction in Community aid and thus constitutes the main cause of underutilization
        of the appropriations allocated by the programme.
        The Commission has frequently drawn the Member States' attention to the problems
        of co-funding. It has sought to find administrative solutions where possible to
        prevent penalizing the projects concerned. The fact remains that the activity of
        several projects has been and sometimes still is impeded by recurring difficulties in
        this respect.
Conclusion
The projects are certainly on the right road: partnerships have been built up, the operating
teams have been stabilized, a large number of activities have been launched and a great
effort has been made to improve financial management and the planning of activities and to
enhance the operating teams' skills. The programme's teething troubles have been resolved,
which is reflected in the atmosphere of mutual trust which has gradually grown up between
the projects, the Research and Development Units, the Central Unit and the Commission.
The Member States have, through their representative on the Advisory Committee, often
helped to find solutions to the problems which have cropped up. The problems with co-
funding are still worrying, at least for certain projects.
The projects do, of course, have some weaknesses. Local activities sometimes lack
coherence, the active participation of the target populations must be secured to a greater
extent and the self-assessment procedures are still not all up to the same standard. However,
a certain amount of momentum has been achieved and the activities offer fair prospects of
success.
                                             63
 ---pagebreak--- PART IV - Progress made in the programme
After its first tentative steps, Poverty 3 is now displaying a certain amount of vitality. The project
organizers have built up cooperation at local level and have also mobilized the decision-makers, the
workers in the field and the target populations themselves. They are also committed to national and
transnational exchanges as well as to their local activities. In so doing they are contributing to
defining and consolidating the identity of the programme as such.
It has taken some time for the programme to achieve this progress which means that the decision
for the programme to run for five years was sound. The effects are already discernible at local
(paragraph 1), national (paragraph 2) and European (paragraph 3) level.
        Local level
        As the projects have consolidated and organized their activities, they have both attracted and
        mobilized local players and local resources.
        Generally speaking - and the majority of the projects have reported as much - the aims of
        the programme attract a certain amount of interest at local level and the European label acts
        as a magnet, easing recognition of its activities. The name normally given to the
        programme, which proclaims the notion of poverty, is a problem for some projects, at least
        in countries where the concept has negative associations. Clearly, the reference to a
        European programme has less of an effect in countries where public opinion thinks it has
        little to learn from Europe in matters of social policy. Nevertheless, and in general terms,
        identifying with the programme is a powerful incentive: local partnerships are more
        convincing, researchers are intrigued by the programme, public authorities open their doors,
        the operating teams feel they are getting more recognition, the media provide more publicity
        and many projects gain a higher profile, etc.
        Some illustrations of the programme's attraction suggest that the projects' local action could
        be expanded to take in other organizations and contribute to die debate or innovations on a
        larger scale. In the Mantois-Val-de-Seine project, in France, for example, six municipalities
        have joined forces in an education programme which offers an alternative to mainstream
        education and which is attracting a great deal of interest; in Ireland the Limerick project has
        carried out a local study which has encouraged public authorities to re-examine the problem
        of school fees as an obstacle for deprived persons. In the Netherlands, the Valkenbourg
        project has set up a promising cooperation agreement with the regional office for aid for
        handicapped persons and the latter has decided to inform all its beneficiaries of the services
         and activities offered by the project with effect from the beginning of 1993.
        As regards the two sides of industry, there are two experiments which merit a closer look.
        In Antwerp, the project succeeded in launching a debate with the Flemish Employers
        Organization on the employers' responsibility for their social environment and, at the same
        time, persuaded the local employers to take an interest in the programme's organizational set-
        up. In Spain the projects, the Research and Development Units and the Member of the
        Advisory Committee joined the employers and trade union organizations and NGOs to lay
        the foundations of a dialogue, discussion and pressure forum to consider the main issues
         involved in the fight against social exclusion.
                                                     64
 ---pagebreak--- These are only a few of many examples but they show that the projects can gain recognition
for their ability to prompt debate and deeds in the fight against social exclusion which
exceeds by far their immediate impact or the services which they can actually offer to the
populations on behalf of whom and with whom they are working.
National level
This programme stakes its success on local initiative. This success largely lies in the ability
of local players to devise projects which can serve as an example or a model. However, the
programme also aims to enhance national policy and it is vital for proven "good practice"
for the projects to be relayed and transferred to the central players and decision-makers in
each country involved in the effort to combat exclusion.
When the programme was being prepared, the Commission invited the Member States to
submit projects whose aims reflected innovatory national activities or, possibly, dovetailed
with the national programmes for combating poverty. In several countries at least there was
potential for this type of interaction - with the national programmes in Ireland, Spain and
Portugal; with urban policy and the minimum integration income in France; with the social
renewal policy; and with national measures for supporting innovation and local partnerships,
etc. in Denmark. Such interaction has doubtlessly helped to involve national authorities more
directly in the monitoring of the programme and to raise the profile of the projects at
national level. However, it has not always been enough, at least at this stage, to trigger the
knock-on effect hoped for.
 There are several reasons for this. First of all, some projects inevitably had internal problems
 which held back or interfered with what were initially promising activities. Secondly, the
 scale of some national policies meant mat some projects only figured as a set of local
 activities like any others, which did not merit any particular effort, particularly as they were
 few in number (three or four in each country, sometimes fewer).
 Finally, the projects were sometimes forced to devote less attention to their national impact
 because of die other priorities that they had: they were concerned first to consolidate their
 organization and men their local image and subsequently to enter into transnational
 cooperation and thus accorded less priority to active participation in discussion at national
 level. Or, again, if they were mainly concerned with remedying their weak points to be
 better equipped to meet the demands of multi-dimensionality, they were not able to maintain
 the profile warranted by their strengths with resultant considerable national impact.
 However, several projects achieved encouraging results. In France, the activities of the
 project on "Economic initiative development aid" resulted in aid to unemployed persons who
 were creating or restarting a business being extended to include the beneficiaries of the
 minimum integration income; in Greece, the Kallithea project influenced new legislation on
 drugs and on the creation of rehabilitation centres for addicts; in Greece, too, the programme
 helped to reveal the sort of legal obstacles encountered in creating partnerships between
 public authorities and private organizations and a bill was submitted to the Greek Parliament
 as a result. In Germany, the projects sought to activate public debate on poverty. In
 Denmark, the programme influenced governmental commissions' work. In Belgium, ideas and
 proposals from the Antwerp and Charleroi project were adopted by the public authorities of
 their respective municipalities. In Italy, the national heads of three large trade union
                                             65
 ---pagebreak---     organizations will henceforth cooperate on the promotion of regional projects built around
    the programme's principles. In the United Kingdom, where the problem of poverty is
    controversial, local projects took an active part in the discussion, etc. Where the projects
    have attained local, and in some cases national, recognition it was primarily due to the
    quality of their work. But it is also a result of their efforts to publicize their activities,
    inter alia by producing information bulletins or video cassettes and films and through
    participation in or organization of information activities. Furthermore, the Research and
    Development Units and the national representatives in the Advisory Committee played an
    important part in concerting activities at national level but these are still too isolated or
    disparate for us to be able to state that the programme has yet made an appreciable impact
    on the national stage in all the Member States.
3.   European level
    By supporting local experiments, the programme intends to contribute to the transfer of good
    practice at national and also at European level and to promote Community discussion on the
    fight against social exclusion. Transnational exchanges between the projects, research work
     and the programme's publications are the main elements in this process.
3.1  Activities and exchanges with the programme
     Several networks of exchanges have grown up between the projects, their partners, the
     Research and Development Units, the Central Unit and the Commission. Some have
     expanded to take in players outside the programme, in particular with a view to creating
     synergism with local initiatives or Community initiatives. They have now become key factors
     in providing the impetus of Poverty 3.
     These exchanges can take several forms. Annual conferences are the main forums for
     motivating players to address major themes for discussion and action which would benefit
     from being brought into the focus of the programme. Local development was the theme
     chosen for the conference in Edinburgh in 1991, demonstrating the importance the
     programme attached to the economic dimension of integration. Involving management and
     labour was the subject of the Alborg conference in 1992 and expressed the programme's
     desire to extend local cooperation to the business community. The theme of interplay
     between partnership and multi-dimensionality chosen for the Huelva conference in 1993 was
     aimed at capitalizing upon the programme's achievements in terms of these two key
     principles.
     These conferences, whose contents and contribution are key elements in consolidating the
     programme's identity, are complemented by a set of other exchanges. The programme has
     set up several transnational groups, each bringing together seven or eight projects and
     representing genuine think-tanks. Each group concentrates on the experience the projects
     have acquired in specific areas to see what methodological and political lessons have been
     learned ("housing and poverty", "poverty in a rural environment", "participation" and
      "integration by economic means"). Two transnational conferences were also organized in
     Calais in November 1992, one on what self-assessment can contribute to strategy and another
     on local research. More recently the training programme for project leaders has intensified
     the process of pooling experience and finally, a large number of exchanges are carried out
     bilaterally in the form of visits between projects.
                                                66
 ---pagebreak---      Meetings on specific themes and annual seminars take place on the project sites. They
     provide the host projects with an opportunity to demonstrate their participation in a European
     programme and to involve all the partners and the members of their operating teams in the
     European aspects of the programme. Both for the projects and the programme these are key
     events, the impact of which can be felt subsequently at local, regional, national and European
     level.
     European support for the programme is based on motivating the parties involved in the
     projects but also on the quality of the technical assistance provided. Although the members
     of the Research and Development Units are mainly concerned with helping the projects to
     flourish locally and contributing to the impact of the programme at national level, they are,
     together with the Central Unit, part of the European-level organizational structure of
     Poverty 3.
     Several members of the Research and Development Units are, for example, actively involved
     in the work of thematic groups formed in association with the projects and, of course, in the
     preparation of annual conferences. The Research and Development Units generally meet the
     Central Unit and the Commission regularly to discuss the management and support of the
     programme, especially at the three annual workshops organized specifically for this purpose.
3.2  Research work
     Research work forms another component of the European approach of the programme. As
     Poverty 3 is an action programme, the research work has deliberately been limited. Apart
     from the local studies conducted on the initiative of the projects, the research component was
     made up of two sections, one statistical and the other economic and sociological.
     The statistical work was conducted in cooperation with Eurostat. The main idea was to
     devise a system for analysing national surveys on family budgets, mainly to update and
      refine measurement of poverty in terms of income. This has led to real progress, especially
     as microdata from national surveys have been used. However, it has also confirmed the
      methodological problems in measuring poverty and, in particular, the unreliability of
     comparing or aggregating data based on definitions which are not yet sufficiently
     harmonized. Subject to these constraints, the work confirmed mat mere were an estimated
      50 million persons on low income, i.e. poor in accordance with the commonly used
      definition00) (Annex 2) in the Community at the end of the 80s. The methodology used in
     the research will produce more accurate analysis of recent trends in poverty, the results of
      which ought to be available by the end of the programme. Exploratory work on the non-
      monetary aspects of poverty has also been started.
      Economic and sociological research was also undertaken, concentrating on purely
     transnational aspects. The themes were determined in consultation with the representatives
      of the national research committees and the members of the Advisory Committee and the
      research teams, each covering between six and eight countries, were selected after two
      successive calls for tender. As this work is still in progress it is too early to make any
(10)
      Persons living in a household whose average disposable income per consumer unit
      (calculated on the basis of the expenditure declared in the survey) is less man half the
      average disposable income per consumer unit in the Member State in which the household
      lives.
                                                67
 ---pagebreak---      advance judgment on the results. However, it ought to shed more light on the situation, as
     it involves some international comparisons focusing on the following themes: the process of
     disengagement from the labour market, the role of regional development policy in the fight
     against poverty, the links between poverty and migration, the involvement of management
     and labour in the fight against exclusion, moves to bring poverty within the province of
     social policy, and the effects of active employment policy in the fight against social
     exclusion. The reports on this research will be available in mid-1994.
3.3  Raising the profile of the programme and its results
     The way the programme's profile is raised is based partly on its publications policy and
     partly on its communications strategy.
     Considerable energy was devoted to publications. What should be emphasized first is that
     the quarterly magazine (5 000 copies) and the monthly bulletin (2 000 copies) now have a
     readership extending well beyond the parties involved in the programme. The same is true
     of other publications which offer information to a wide public on work currently in progress
     (the Central Unit's annual activity report, minutes of transnational seminars, descriptive
     directory of the projects, etc.).
     The following activities have figured prominently in the communications strategy:
               an electronic mailing service was instituted, a rapid and functional tool which speeds
               up interaction between the programme's various partners (projects, Central Unit,
               Research and Development Units and Commission). Every week 61 sites establish
               250 connections. The system is now also being used to create SPES, a
               bibliographical and statistical data base covering Poverty 3;
               public awareness has been raised through specific events such as the competition
               organized for students at schools of journalism, with the best report on social
               exclusion and poverty being published in 12 major European dailies (the report
               described the Perama project);
               a European network was set up comprising journalists interested in the problems
               connected with poverty and social exclusion and two-monthly press bulletins are
               issued. The regular contact with these journalists improved media coverage of the
               annual conferences and generally helped to publicize the programme's results.
      Coordination between the participants and the various levels of intervention
      As the Commission indicated in its Communication of 23 December 1992(11), social
      exclusion can not be combated without the active participation of everybody with political,
      institutional, vocational, associative and civic responsibility and, as far as possible, that of
      the target groups themselves.
(11)
      COM(92) 542 final, p. 25.
                                                    68
 ---pagebreak--- Whilst the programme stakes its success on local initiative it also intends to contribute to
national and European-level discussion. Although it is based on a small number of projects,
the intention is to mobilize directly and indirectly as many people as possible. It is thus one
of the vital components of the Community's activities for combating social exclusion.
Its contribution is, admittedly, modest but it does represent a major effort to secure proper
coordination - both vertical and horizontal - between the competent organizations, within the
scope of their own responsibilities, in the promotion of values and policies which engender
solidarity: public authorities (local, regional, national and Community) and private bodies
(associations, voluntary groups, management and labour, etc.). The aim was to create with
them and between them a synergy which would allow each and every one of them to devise
and implement the principles and means of preventing and combating social exclusion in a
spirit of partnership, all the while respecting the identity of each body.
The programme thus combines the Commission's efforts to promote cooperation between all
the players involved in social exclusion. Noteworthy, too, is the fact mat the Commission
lends its support, in parallel with Poverty 3, to European NGO networks, some of which are
also directly associated with the programme as partners or operators of local projects.
It is also worth mentioning that the Commission has encouraged Poverty 3 programme
projects to participate in other Community activities, particularly the programmes run by the
European Social Fund (especially Now and Horizon). This will certainly boost the synergy
between the programme and these other initiatives, even though the objectives and rules of
the programme are separate from those applicable to the structural Funds. The experience
of Poverty 3 certainly confirms that the programmes can, as a result of their experimental
nature and their highly organized structure, provide a powerful stimulus here.
                                             69
 ---pagebreak--- PART V - The lessons drawn from the programme and its impact
In preparing this report, the Commission conducted extensive discussions with all the people
involved in the programme. The projects, the Research and Development Units and the Central Unit
made an active contribution to assessing progress, in particular through their respective annual
reports and by attending the Huelva conference. The members of the Advisory Committee were
invited to express the Member States' views on the strengths and weaknesses of the programme. The
preparations for the Copenhagen conference and the workshop on the possible thrust of a new
programme also contributed to assessing Poverty 3 in more general terms.
A broad consensus has emerged from these exchanges and discussions on the main lessons which
can already be drawn from Poverty 3. These relate to the validity of the principles of the programme
(paragraph 1), the efficiency of the management and organization procedures (paragraph 2), and
finally the impact of the programme, i.e. the specific added value of a programme of this type
(paragraph 3).
        The validity of the programme's key principles
        The projects share an approach to fighting poverty based on the principles of partnership,
        multi-dimensionality and participation. In the first place, these principles were implemented
        in the pilot projects but many of the innovatory measures have also incorporated them. The
        programme as a whole can already be regarded as an experiment for the validity of these
        principles and the possibility of applying them in the light of specific local and national
        contexts.
        Partnership is one of the programme's strengths. It is certainly the aspect which has attracted
        most attention, even if mis was sometimes to the detriment of the other two key principles.
        The projects have built up new organizational structures and forms of intervention which in
        themselves are an inducement for the institutions and associations involved in combating
        social exclusion to propagate them (national and local authorities, NGOs, management and
        labour organizations, etc.).
        Partnership has proved to be an instrument with fair prospects of ensuring that the
        programme will have an impact which outlasts the five years of its duration. It had already
        been adopted in other national programmes, sometimes well in advance of Poverty 3, and
        has attracted a great deal of interest in countries where it was not a familiar concept. It is,
        of course, important for the the full scope of the principle to apply and its demotion to a
        mere slogan the aim of which is simply to give a new look to traditional organizational
        procedures must be eschewed. But it is precisely die Poverty 3 programme which has
        enabled the relevance of mis principle in decision-making and implementation processes to
        be enhanced progressively through experience.
        There is no doubt that, in the course of the programme, attention has been focused
        increasingly on the multi-dimensionality of social exclusion and poverty, albeit to varying
        degrees. Whilst all the projects aim to encourage the social and economic integration of
        deprived persons and whilst they are aware of the various dimensions of social exclusion,
        they are not always able to define or implement activities with the desired coherence or
         scope. Here, it should be stressed mat a coherent approach can only be devised for
         sufficiently well-defined entities: projects operating in a large area with a disparate social
                                                     70
 ---pagebreak--- structure and/or without an administrative unit are more exposed to the risk of their efforts
being scattered and their activities becoming too fragmented. Although there is agreement
on the validity of the principle of multi-dimensional action, more thought should be given,
in the light of the experience gleaned from the projects, to its practical application, in
particular to make greater allowance for specific local (rural or urban environment) and
national (northern or southern countries) conditions.
Participation - i.e. breaking with the "assistance" mentality and policies and making the
deprived participate fully in the programme - is as much a challenge for the projects and the
programme as a principle of action. That it is difficult to put into practice is hardly
surprising. It is certainly easier to create facilities or services than to strengthen
disadvantaged groups' capacity for self-organization. The people engaged in the project are
inevitably tempted to regard it as "their" project, and run the risk of forgetting the people
to which it is addressed and whose expectations never coincide precisely with their own.
Although participation is still restricted in practice in many of the projects, considerable
progress has been made, in particular when the projects have been working with small
groups, and have been able to motivate the target groups to pursue practical and tangible
aims. These has been the case morefrequentlywhere there are national traditions which are
conducive to self-organization and where institutions have set aside their rivalry and power
 struggles. Besides, more appreciable progress has been made in projects which acknowledge
in their own organization (i.e. in the operating teams and in the relations between the teams
 and the partner institutions) that participation is a key factor in determining the quality of
their work.
The fact that the programme's principles have, on the whole, confirmed their validity is
partly due to the fact that the programme's own approach has gradually been accepted by all
 the parties involved. In other words, it is due to the fact that the parties have accepted a
 commitment to a joint dynamic process which requires the will to innovate and experiment,
 a concern for quality in designing and planning activities and close attention to assessment
 and transfer of experience.
 This was of course not an immediate or universal process and needs to be consolidated
 constantly. Most of the projects applied to participate in the programme mainly because they
 were seeking financial support, which is a legitimate reason and not all the parties were
 involved were initially prepared to commit themselves to the programme's dynamic concept.
 This explains to a certain extent the difficulties projects encountered in building up
partnerships, obtaining co-funding or carrying out effective self-assessment. It also accounts
 for the enormous amount of explanation, persuasion and support which the project leaders,
 technical assistance units and the Commission had to invest in persuading some of the
 institutional partners. These problems should not be under-estimated: some projects are still
 shaky, some have suspended or greatly scaled down their activities for several months and
 one of them had to be discontinued. However, we should not exaggerate their importance
 either: the overall quality of the projects is very widely acknowledged and there is great
 commitment to the programme's dynamic concept, as is demonstrated by the contributions
 to European-level activities and the Community debate on the fight against social exclusion.
                                             71
 ---pagebreak--- Management and support procedures
The Commission set up technical assistance units at national level (Research and
Development Units) and at European level (Central Unit), in order to implement the
programme. Their tasks were mainly the administrative and financial management of the
subsidies allocated, support in the development of the projects and self-assessment, general
organization of the programme and coordination of its components and activities (assessment,
transnational exchanges, research and publications). Taking into account the constraints
which the schedule, management and cost imposed on the programme, these tasks have, in
the main, been carried out satisfactorily. Nevertheless, improvements could be made to
streamline procedures.
The technical support activities are highly varied and require great flexibility, a variety of
skills and a wealth of experience on the part of the technical assistance teams. Moreover, the
work evolves as the programme continues. In the start-up phase attention was largely focused
on resolving administrative and financial management problems which were hindering the
projects' organization and on establishing the coherence and the image of the programme.
In the consolidation phase, which is now in progress; transnational exchanges have been
intensified and the need to examine the programme's principles in more depth has been felt
more keenly. In the final phase of the programme, the question of extending the projects and
producing a rigorous assessment of them will no doubt figure more prominently.
The arrangements made for the administrative and financial management of the programme
have enabled the Commission to stay abreast of die progress of projects and any difficulties
which they encounter, in particular with co-funding. Apart from these problems, and as a
result of the effort the projects and the Commission and Central Unit have put into it, the
quality of the management has been gready improved in the projects and has emerged as one
of the keys to and hallmarks of the quality of the work the projects are doing.
The members of the Research and Development Units provided a great deal of direct support
 which in several countries led to remarkable progress in self-assessment and coordination
between the projects and national initiatives. Support was not always as effective in the case
of projects facing major internal problems or chronic co-funding problems and it would have
been useful if the members of the Research and Development Units could have been
 involved more actively in their solution.
 The strength of the programme's European-level organizational structure are mainly that it
 endorsed the coherence of the programme and focused attention on its achievements. The
 success of the annual conferences and the quality of the publications are a good illustration
 of this. Moreover, substantial progress was made in preparing and monitoring transnational
 exchanges and the training programme for project leaders was a promising initiative. By
 contrast, assessment of the programme as a whole suffered from the fact that priority was
 given to self-assessment by the projects, as did the job of summarizing the self-assessments,
 which is currently under way, mainly to explore the programme's principles and concepts in
 more depth. More must also be done to make research an active component of the
programme. It was limited deliberately as a result of the priorities established by the Council
 but everybody involved in the programme sees a need for it to be stepped up.
                                           72
 ---pagebreak---    The above tasks involved both the Central Unit and the members of the Research and
   Development Units. The geographical dispersion of the units' members and the fact that they
   were mostly recruited to work part-time sometimes detracted from the cohesion and the
   efficiency of the Technical Assistance Units and it might be useful to look at alternatives for
   a further programme, even if they are more expensive, in particular as regards the Central
   Unit. Apart from this, the diversity of the projects and the complexity of the programme
   itself sometimes put the technical assistance teams in a position where expectations or
   requirements were difficult to reconcile with one another. Nevertheless, the cooperation
   between all the players enabled the problems to be overcome. The Commission helped to
   strengthen this cooperation, particularly by its active role in the management and support of
   the programme.
3. Conclusion: the programme's impact
   This report has highlighted several aspects of the programme's impact and, in particular, the
   benefits of the specific programmes, through which the Community supports social
   innovation, have been confirmed.
   Generally speaking, the programme has stimulated the debate on social exclusion in the
   Member States and in the Community. The extent varies from one Member State to another,
   at least for the moment, but the programme has received wide recognition. Some projects
   have devised methodological instruments of use to workers in other fields. Several have
   contributed to creating exchange networks linking local authorities, NGOs and management
   and labour organizations. Others have contributed to the debate in government in favour of
   reforming certain aspects of social policy. Generally speaking, the principles of the
   programme are being echoed in the approaches adopted in the national policies of several
   Member States and there are promising instances of synergy, at least in the countries Where
   the programme's aims have been introduced or transferred to the national stage by the
   government organizations or by the steering committees of the projects themselves. This is
   all encouraging. We should bear in mind that the scale of the programme is modest with
   what were initially fairly tenuous or random links with discussion or policy moves at
   national level.
   For the Community, the programme is also a practical illustration of what it can do in the
   fight against social exclusion. The experience accruing from the projects has certainly
   nurtured several Community moves in this field, in particular the preparation of the
   communication adopted by the Commission on 23 December 1992 which also figures in the
    discussion surrounding the contribution of the structural Funds to the fight against social
   exclusion. In many ways this combines the concerns expressed in the permanent dialogue
    which the Commission is cultivating with NGOs and, more recently, management and labour
   organizations.
                                              73
 ---pagebreak---      As things stand, the benefits of the programme are likely to increase. When Poverty 3 was
     conceived, it was practically the only Community initiative specifically covering poverty and
     social exclusion(12) and, as it followed immediately on the heels of the second European
     programme, its very existence constituted a political symbol of the Community's desire to
     make a modest but continuous contribution to the Member States' own measures. Today, the
     programme forms part of a compendium of initiatives and it is expected to make a greater
     contribution in terms of building up know-how and good practice which can be transferred
     elsewhere. It is important for the many people involved in the programme to focus their
     attention on conceptual and methodological refinements to these practices. In the same vein,
     the way that the programme can best contribute to fostering the prospects of solidarity in
     Europe is for it to consolidate its achievements.
(12)
      Except for food aid granted during winter.
                                                 74
 ---pagebreak---                                                                                      Annex 1
                        Statistical synopsis of the Poverty 3 programme projects
The Poverty 3 publications, particularly the Central Unit's reports and working documents, contain
a good deal of information on the scale and quality of the projects. A descriptive directory of the
projects is also published and updated regularly. The tables shown below merely illustrate some of
their main features.
                       Main features of the fields of activity of the pilot projects
  Number of              Fewer than       Between         50 000          Total
  inhabitants              20 000       20 000 and      inhabitants
                         inhabitants       50 000        and more
                                         inhabitants
  Rural area                                  2                             6
  Urban area                                  10                           26
  Region combining                                                          4
  rural and urban
  areas
  Total                       13              12            11              36
Source: Poverty 3 programme Central Unit
N.B.:      The total number of pilot projects (36 not 29) takes account of the fact that three pilot
           projects are active in several areas.
                                                     75
 ---pagebreak---               Figures to indicate the scale of social exclusion encountered in the fields
                                      of activities of the projects
 Problem encountered                Number of projects       Number of projects
                                    where this problem        where activity is
                                       is particularly         focused on this
                                           severe                  problem
 Youth unemployment                          37                       23
 Long-term unemployment                      37                       27
 Inner-city crisis                           19                       12
 Poor and ill-equipped urban                 25                       17
 environments and housing
 Rural underdevelopment                       8                        8
 Emigration                                  12                        4
 Immigration                                  19                       9
 Racial discrimination                       20                       13
 Industrial decline, economic                26                       17
 redevelopment
Source: Poverty 3 programme Central Unit
N.B.:     The data cover all the projects, i.e. 48 areas and take account of the projects which are
          active in several separate areas. Some innovatory measures do not pursue their activities
          with reference to a specific area.
                                                     76
 ---pagebreak---                        Nature and origin of the Poverty 3 programme projects
 On-going activities dating from 1990, involving the same (or            5
 almost the same) partners
 Development of new activities by the same (or almost the same           5
 partners
 Extension of an existing partnership, with participation of new        18
 partners and launching of new activities
 Creation of a totally new partnership to develop new activities         16
 No reply                                                                 1
 Total                                                                  45
Source: Poverty 3 programme Central Unit
N.B.:     The total of 45 projects takes account of the fact that some projects pursue their activities
          in two or three separate areas.
                        Partners with a seat on the project steering committees
 Local and regional activities                                          116
 National activities and government organizations                        35
 NGOs                                                                   108
 (of which community organizations and local groups)          (53)
 Management and labour organizations                                     31
 (of which employers' organizations)                          (21)
 (of which trade union organizations)                         (10)
 Miscellaneous                                                           48
 (of which universities, research bodies, etc.)               (21)
 Total                                                                  338
Source: Poverty 3 programme Central Unit
NB.:      This table was drawn up from information on all the projects. However, not all the
          innovatory measures have formed a steering committee with several partners.
                                                   77
 ---pagebreak---                                                                               Annex 2
           Statistical work conducted under the terms of the Poverty 3 programme
1. One of the objectives of Poverty 3 is to help to find out more about poverty, in particular
   by regularly producing comparable data on its scale, main features and trends in the Member
   States. To this end and within the constraints of the limited resources granted by the Council,
   the programme thus provides aid for research on poverty and social exclusion.
   The Commission lent its support to statistical research with a provisional budget of
   ECU 2.75 million for the total duration of the programme (1989 to 1994).
2. This research work pursues two essential aims: first, to help analyse poverty from the point
   of view of financial resources in order to establish comparable data for all the Member States
   and to shed some light on trends responsible for recent and current developments; second,
   to help analyse poverty from a multi-dimensional point of view, mainly to overcome the
   limitations inherent in the approach which considers only its financial aspects.
3. To a large extent this research aims to improve the methodology used in the statistical
   analysis of poverty, especially with respect to the harmonization required to make data
   comparable, the significance and implications of various conventions and definitions for units
   of measurements and quantitive indicators of poverty, the benefits of bringing statistical and
   administrative sources closer together and the possibilities of devising econometric models
   of the developments observed.
4. This research work forms part of a medium-term programme and cannot be regarded as
   complete. Apart from the methodological work as such, it has also produced some results
   but these are still subject to shortcomings and uncertainties which are now being worked on.
   The strictly methodological proposals also need some refinement, especially to determine the
   respective advantages of alternatives to the sources of information, statistical indicators and
    data processing procedures.
5.  In the period between 1989 and 1993, priority was given to analysing poverty in terms of
    financial resources. In compliance with the conclusions of earlier research and, in particular,
    die work of an international conference on this issue in 1989 at Noordwijk, in the
    Netherlands, the researchers concentrated on enhancing analysis of the household budget
    surveys carried out periodically by the national statistical institutes. These surveys, which
    were devised to provide more information on price indices, were not designed specifically
    for analysing poverty and have considerable failings in this respect. Moreover, they are
    carried out at varying intervals, usually every five years. However, at present, they represent
    the least unreliable of the sources of comparable data available.
6.  The researchers and statisticians engaged in this work have had access to the surveys'
    microdata. This is a great advantage and represents real progress in terms of analysis: earlier
    comparative work was based on aggregated data, combined at statistical distribution decile
    level, which involved some hazardous approximations. What is more, surveys carried out in
    the same year (1988) or almost the same year (1987, 1989 or 1990), were available and this
    obviated the need for unreliable extrapolations. Nevertheless, it should be stressed that the
    quality of national household budget surveys is very uneven, especially as regards the size
                                                78
 ---pagebreak---     and representativeness of their samples and that the definitions used in these surveys,
    especially for expenditure on or linked with housing, are not sufficiently harmonized to
    ensure that data are comparable or congruent with those used in administrative surveys and
    national accounts statistics.
7.  Apart from data production operations, the period 1989-1993 also saw completion of:
    (a) a study on poverty in the Member States around 1988 with regard to "objective" relative
         poverty thresholds, i.e. derived from the statistical distribution based on analysis of
         household budget survey microdata;
    (b) a study on the methodological advantages of "subjective" approaches to poverty, i.e.
         those which take account of the opinion of the households on what constitutes a decent
         standard of living;
    (c) an exploratory study on matching data from statistical and administrative surveys;
    (d) a feasibility study on direct measurement of poverty in terms of consumption of certain
         goods and services which represents an initial consumption-based contribution to
         defining non-monetary poverty indicators.
8.  The scope of these studies is largely (in the case of the first one) or exclusively (in the case
    of the three others) methodological. Their results are being discussed with independent
    experts, governmental experts and representatives of the national statistical institutes in order
    to determine how the proposals made might be applied and disseminated. However, the first
    study also produced figures on the scale of poverty in the Community in 1988. These are
    given here even though they are still provisional.
9.  This study was conducted by a research team at the Erasmus University of Rotterdam
    (Netherlands). Its aims were:
    (a) to establish, on the basis of the national household budget surveys and after discussing
         the relevance of various methodological conventions, an estimate of the extent of
         poverty in each of the Member States and in the Community for as recent a year as
         possible;
    b)   to examine, using the same methodological options, poverty trends in the 80s;
    (c) to examine the possibility of econometric modelling of these developments to devise
          a simulation method which would enable reliable estimates to be made on a permanent
         basis, of the scale of poverty in years in which household budget surveys were not
         conducted.
10. Not all these aims have yet been achieved, mainly because the microdata from the national
    surveys were made accessible for research later than planned. National provisions on the
    confidentiality of the surveys called for highly complex negotiations with some of the
    national statistical institutes, particularly in Germany. All 12 series of national microdata for
    the years around 1998 were not made available until the beginning of 1993. Series of
    microdata for national surveys before 1988 - which are indispensable for trend analysis and
    econometric simulation - are now available for some Member States only.
                                                   79
 ---pagebreak--- 11. As the researchers had access to microdata they could carry out various checks on the quality
    of the information and, in certain cases, adjust it to correct for sampling distortions or
    disparities in the definitions used. It should, however, be stressed that it was not always
    possible to make adjustments and that there are still considerable uncertainties as to the
    reliability of some of the data on which the research was based. Moreover, Denmark reported
    that it had reservations about the quality of its national household budget survey for the year
    in question. The Commission is pursuing its consultations with the national statistical
    institutes to ensure that the results of the analyses are as reliable as possible.
12. The results presented below are provisional and are the sole responsibility of the researchers.
    Moreover, they cannot be compared with those produced earlier by another research team
    for the year 1985. Earlier estimates were made on the basis of aggregated data and not
    microdata, which could not be and therefore were not adjusted; besides, for some countries,
    the researchers based their work on extrapolations from data from the earlier 80s as more
    recent surveys were not available. The results for the year 1988 are incontestably more
    reliable man earlier results - and demonstrate their limitations and shortcomings - but some
    uncertainty persists.
13. The table shows the extent of poverty in the Member States around the year 1988 in
    accordance with the following methodological conventions:
    (a) poverty is seen here as a relative insufficiency of financial resources, with reference to
          the national context at a given moment (see paragraph 14);
     (b) as poverty is defined in terms of unequal distribution of financial resources, several
          poverty thresholds can be envisaged (40%, 50% and 60% of average income). In
           accordance with this approach, households are considered poor whose average
           disposable income per adult equivalent is lower by a specific fraction (usually 50%)
           than the average figure for all households in the same Member State (see paragraph 15);
    (c) poverty is measured at household level; however, the statistical definitions of a
           household are not entirely harmonized and several conventions can be adopted to take
           into account the size and structure of the household (scales of equivalence)
           (see paragraph 16). The data for households are subsequently calculated per person,
           regarding poor persons as persons living in poor households (internal inequities in
           households are ignored and the method adopted assumes implicitly that each person in
          the household has access to a fraction of the household resources corresponding to the
           scale of equivalence);
     (d) For tfie requirements of the study, resources are calculated from available information
           in national surveys on the expenditure of households, which is assumed to be more
           reliable (see paragraph 17).
14.  Without entering into a detailed discussion on these methodological conventions, it should
     be stressed that they all need refining. There is no need to reiterate the limitations of an
     approach to poverty based on the sole criterion of financial resources. However, we should
     bear in mind that the standard of living of a household does not depend solely on the level
     of its income but also - when the average income remains unchanged - on its regularity,
     reliability and nature. Besides, the effects of inadequate income vary, depending on whether
     it is regular or not, or sporadic or recurrent. These distinctions cannot, of course, be taken
     into consideration here.
                                                  80
 ---pagebreak--- 15. The choice of thresholds derived from one of the central values of statistical distribution
    (here a fraction of average income) is inevitably arbitrary: at most, its arbitrary nature can
    be reduced by putting forward several thresholds (here 40%, 50% and 60%), which
    emphasizes the relative nature of the poverty as it is viewed here. Nevertheless, what we
    need is information indicating precisely what standards of living and consumption are
    reflected in the thresholds used; it would also be useful to discuss to what extent a given
    threshold - i.e. 50% - has the same meaning in all the Member States, as there are are
    varying degrees of unevenness in the distribution of income. Finally, the extreme sensitivity
    of the thresholds should not be underestimated: it is sufficient to add or subtract one ecu a
    month per person to increase or reduce by several tens of thousands the number of persons
    affected.
16. The purpose of the scales of equivalence is to enable households of various size and
    composition to be compared. The need for a scale of equivalence is universally
    acknowledged but the one it should be is the subject of much debate in all the countries.
    Besides, the same scale of equivalence can have different implications in countries where
    the population structures and cultural practices differ. The empirical results given in the table
    were arrived at with a scale of equivalence used by the OECD, i.e. one for the head of
    household, 0.74 each of the other adults (14 and over) 0.5 for each of the children
    (under 14).
17. The research team carried out a series of exercises to examine the sensitivity of the results
    to various methodological options. Apart from the discussion on the choice of the scales of
     equivalence, these also included a study of the effects of alternative use of the survey data
    on the declared resources for households or information on the declared expenditure for these
    households. The problem here is mainly that of the reliability of the declarations collected
    for this purpose by the surveys, especially in some categories of the population
     (e.g. fanners). Whereas the researchers used the sum of expenditure as an indicator, the
     sensitivity analyses did not confirm this indicator to be the most reliable, illustrating once
     again the need for an in-depth discussion on the quality of the survey data used. The choice
    of one particular indicator in preference to another can, after all, affect the results relating
     to the characteristics of poor households: using the "expenditure" indicator, for example,
    probably tends to overestimate slightly the property of elderly persons who use less of their
     income.
18.  The number of poor persons in the Community as a whole is most often quoted as being
    some 50 million in the 80s. Subject to the methodological uncertainty mentioned above, this
     figure is confirmed by the results in the table which postulates a total of 52 million poor
    persons and 17.6 poor households in the period around 1988 (with a threshold of 50%). It
     should be stressed that this information was prepared before the unification of Germany and
     for years in which there was economic growth and jobs were being created. Since this date,
     poverty has certainly increased and figures quoted are minimum estimates.
19.  As explained above, it was not possible to analyse the trends in poverty during the 80s as
     there were no series of microdata for earlier years and the results prepared in the past on the
     basis of aggregated data (particularly for some countries) are subject to substantial
     reservations. The fragmentary information available for some countries suggest that the trend
     is towards a slight increase in poverty but confirmation is needed.
                                                81
 ---pagebreak---  Estimates of poverty in the Member States around the year 1988.
 Percentages and absolute figures (thousands) of poor households and person in accordance with the conventions used with thresholds of 40%, 50%
 and 60% of average income (OECD scale of equivalence)
                           AVERAOE                                 HOUSEHOLDS                                                      PERSONS
     COUNTRY     YEAR        INCOME
                              100% (I)      THRESHOLD 40%          THRESHOLD 50%         THRESHOLD 60%      THRESHOLD 40%       THRESHOLD 50%         THRESHOLD 60%
                                          H         • b (1000)  %        «bf (1000)   %        abt (1000) %       abt (1000)  %         abt (1000)   %      abt (1000)
     B             88          327.058     2.6             103    6.7           265    15.3           605  3.8           373   9.4             928   19.6         1932
     DK(2)         87           80.570      U               30    3.6            84    10.1           235   1.5           77   4.3             220   12.0          615
     D(3)          88           22.782     4.7            1278   10.8          2938    19.7          5358  3.0          3062  11.9            7287   21.3        13044
    EL             88          832.188    13.0             445  20.6            706   29.7           1017 12.8          1279  20.5            2048   30.1         3007
    ES             88          674.331     8.6             944  16.7           1833   26.2           2875  9.2          3564  17.7            6856   27.7        10730
    F              89           73.084     6.5            1412  14.0          3042    23.1           5019  7.7          4313  16.5            9243   26.7        14957
    IRL            88            5.130     8.4              85  16.9            171   27.0            273 10.1           358  19.4             687   30.3         1073
    IT             88       11.548.338    1U             2288   20.6          4208    30.4          6209  12.0         6888   22.0           12628  32.3        18540
   •LUX            87          516.846     3.5               4    8.8            11   17.2             22  5.4            20  11.5              42  21.1            78
    NL             88           20.736     1.1              64    4.3           232   12.1            709  1.3           191   4.8             706   13.8         2031
    P              90          556.118    15.7             498  25.2            799   34.4           1091 15.5          1602  25.1            2594  34.6          3576
    UK             88            5.683     5.8            1307  14.2          3289    25.2          5677   6.7         3819   15.3            8721  26.7        15218
    EUR 12                                               8459                17596                 29092              25547                 51960               84800
 Source: Erasmus University Rotterdam "Living conditions of the least priviliged in the European Community; research on poverty statistics based on micro-data for the Member States of the European Community", research
report submitted to the Commission, April 1993
(1)        Annual average expenditure per adult equivalent in national currency for the survey year (consumption units in accordance with the OECD scale of equivalence)
(2)        Subject to uncertainty as to the quality of the data
(3)        Data for 1988, i.e. before the unification of Germany
                                                                                                              82
 ---pagebreak---                                                                      ISSN 0254-1475
                                                              COM(93) 435 final
EN                                                                              05
                                 Catalogue number : CB-CO-93-495-EN-C
                                                             ISBN 92-77-59499-3
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
Lr2985 Luxembourg
                                              83