natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
V pﾖópadｸ projektヮ DAPHNE se v̅stupy sklèdajó ze vþech ｲinnostó, kterï partneﾖi bｸhem projektu vyvójeli, aby podporovali dosa™enó cólヮ pro-gramu DAPHNE a zajistili rozþóﾖenó v̅sledkヮ projektu.
In the case of Daphne projects, outputs consist of all the activities developed by the partners during the project in order to support the objectives of the Daphne programme and to ensure the dissemination of the project results.
Tato ｲèst se tak t̅kè 148 dokonｲen̅ch projektヮ «nancovan̅chodr.1997dor.2001,kterïbylyanalyzovèny(dalþóch74neodpovｸdｸ-lo nebo ji™ nebyly dosa™itelnï: bankrot, zènik apod.).
This section concerns thus the 148 completed projects funded from 1997 to 2001 and that were analysed (the other 74 did not answer or were no longer reachable: bank-rupt, disappeared, etc.).
Studie, zprèvy a knihy
Studies, reports and books
Nèvody, þkolicó sady, manuèly
Guidelines, training packages, manuals
Pﾖómè ｲinnost/zèsahy v terïnu, linky pomoci
Direct action/«eld interventions, helplines
Webovï strènky, CD disky & CD-Romy 8
Websites, CDs and CD-ROMs
Databèze, e-mailovï sótｸ
Videos, TV/radio spots and other audiovisual products
V̅stupy dosa™enï v rèmci projektヮ (699 v̅stupヮ)
Outputs achieved within the project (699 outputs)
Jin̅ pohled na vｸc; procenta projektヮ, kde vznikly v̅stupy, jsou nèsledujócó:
Presented di.erently,thepercentageofprojectshavinggeneratedoutputsareasfollows:
Pﾖómè ｲinnost /zèsahy v terïnu, linky pomoci
Direct action/«eld interventions, helplines
Rozlo™enó projektヮ podle dosa™en̅ch v̅stupヮ (148 projektヮ, a™ tﾖi mo™nosti na projekt)
Distribution of projects according to the outputs achieved (148 projects, up to three choices per project)
‡Vyhodnocenî sociâln┞ ekonomickþch program╉ƒ, Evropskâ komise, Gボ pro regionâlnî politiku, 1999.
) MEANS Collection ̋ Evaluation of socioeconomic programmes, European Commission, Regional Policy DG, 1999.
Naproti tomu v̅stupy, jako jsou ¶þkolicó sadyƒ, ¶studieƒ a ¶pﾖómï akceƒ, majó pﾖóm̅ vliv a dopad na cólovï skupiny a koncovï pﾖójemce.
The outputs `conferences/seminars', `information materials' and `audiovisual products' are those that contribute best to the raising of awareness.
Projekty, kterï vytvèﾖely þkolicó sady a manuèly, vyka-zujó ve skuteｲnosti vyþþó dopad ne™ ostatnó projekty, a to pokud jde o (viz takï kapitola 4.4 o dopadech):
The extent to which they produce a change of mentality and behaviour is not known precisely.
‡ ¶Zmｸnｸnï chovènó cólov̅ch skupin t̅kajócó se prevence nèsilóƒ (53 % tｸchto projektヮ ve srovnènó se 40 % z celïho vzorku)
On the other side, outputs such as `training packages', `studies' and `direct actions' are those that impact directly on the target groups and on the end-bene«ciaries.Infact,theprojectsthat produced training packages and manuals show a higher impact than the others (see also point 4.4 on impacts) in terms of:
‡ ¶Zlepþenï mo™nosti ﾖeþenó vlastnó situace koncov̅ch pﾖójemcヮ v̅hodƒ (70 % tｸchto projek-tヮ ve srovnènó s 55 % z celïho vzorku).
‡ `changed behaviour of target groups regarding prevention of violence' (53 % of these projects compared with 40 % for the entire sample);‡ `improved means for end-bene«ciariestotackletheirsituation'(70%oftheseprojectscompared with 55 % for the entire sample).
Tyto dva v̅þe uvedenï body, potvrzenï nèzorem nｸkter̅ch podólnókヮ, ukazujó, ™e informaｲnó kampanｸ jsou pﾖi pﾖedchèzenó nèsiló skuteｲnｸ u™iteｲnï.
The above two points, con«rmedbytheopinionofsomestakeholders,tendtoshowthatinformation campaigns are useful for actually preventing violence.
K tomu, aby se vþak zmｸnila samotnè situace koncov̅ch pﾖójemcヮ v̅hod, je pﾖómè obhajoba s podporou koncov̅ch pﾖójemcヮ mno-hem dヮle™itｸjþó ne™ obecnï informace a rヮst uvｸdomｸnó.
However, in order to im-prove the situation of the e n d - b e n e « c i a r i e s t h e m s e l v e s , d i r e c t a d v o c a c y w i t h a n d s up po r t t offe n d - b e n e « c i a r i e s a r e m o r e i m po r t a n t t h a n g e n e r a l i nfo r m a t i o n a n d a w a r e n e s s - r a i s i n g .
Þóﾖenó v̅sledkヮ
D i s s e m i n a t i o n
97 % dokonｲen̅ch projektヮ vyvójelo ｲinnost t̅kajócó se þóﾖenó v̅sledkヮ podle nèsledujócóch kategorió.
Of the completed projects, 97 % implemented dissemination activities along the following categories:
i"Distribuce materièlヮ i"Organizovènó akcó i"Distribuce materièlヮ a organizace akcó i"Distribuce materièlヮ a tｸsnï kontakty i"Distribuce materièlヮ, organizace akcó a tｸsnï kontakty
38 % i"Distribution of materiali"Organisation of events i"Distribution of materials and organisation of events i"Distribution of materials and close contacts i"Distribution of materials, organisa-tion of events and close contacts
Kdy™ budeme ka™d̅ zpヮsob uva™ovat samostatnｸ, ukè™e se, ™e 98 % projektヮ distribuovalo materièly, 90 % organizovalo akce a 42 % mｸlo tｸsnï kontakty.
By considering each way separately, it appears that 98 % of the projects have distributed materials, 90 % have organised events and 42 % have had close contacts.
Uvè™óme-li aktuèlnó rozþóﾖenó projektヮ, velkè vｸtþina si vedla lïpe, ne™ bylo plènovèno: vｸtþina projektヮ dosèhla stejnïho nebo lepþóho v̅konu, pokud jde o nèklady na þóﾖenó (89 % projek-tヮ), naｲasovènó þóﾖenó (80 %), publikum (96 %) a þóﾖenó (98 %).
Considering their actual dissemination, a large majority of projects performed better than planned: most of the projects had equal or better performance regarding dissemination ex-penditures (89 % of projects), timing of dissemination (80 %), audience (96 %) and dissemina-tion activities (98 %).
V rèmci naposledy jmenovanï ｲinnosti vznikly nèsledujócó materièly:
The latter produced the following materials:
Manuèly/nèvody/þkolicó sady
Manuals/guidelines/training packs
Rozlo™enó projektヮ podle produkce materièlヮ k þóﾖenó (144 projektヮ)
Distribution of projects according to their production of materials for dissemination (144 projects)
Za pﾖedpokladu, ™e vｸtþina projektヮ trvala jeden rok, mヮ™eme zjevnｸ prohlèsit, ™e partneﾖi bｸhem krètkï doby vytvoﾖili spoustu materièlヮ, jak je uvedeno nó™e:
Considering that most of the projects had a duration of one year, we can evidently state that partners have produced a lot of material over a short period, as indicated below:
̌ 227 966 plakètヮ ve 27 projektech ̌ 13 556 bulletinヮ v 9 projektech ̌ 297 160 bro™ur ve 27 projektech ̌ 77 272 zprèv ve 46 projektech ̌ 64 600 manuèlヮ v 7 projektech ̌ 27 700 knih v 19 projektech ̌ 370 triｲek ve 2 projektech ̌ 731 456 letèkヮ ve 36 projektech ̌ 21 553 ｲlènkヮ ve 14 projektech ̌ 2 000 slo™ek ve 2 projektech ̌ 1 770 videó v 5 projektech ̌ 5 000 nèlepek ve 2 projektech ̌ 6 000 pohlednic ve 4 projektech ̌ 16 152 CD-ROMヮ ve 12 projektech ̌ 2 000 vizitek ve 2 projektech ̌ 2 000 barevn̅ch kreslen̅ch vtipヮ v 1 projektu ̌ 500 protokolヮ v 1 projektu ̌ 200 þpendlókヮ/bro™ó v 1 projektu
227 966 posters by 27 projects 13 556 newsletters by 9 projects 297 160 brochures by 27 projects 77 272 reports by 46 projects 64 600 manuals by 7 projects 27 700 books by 19 projects 370 t-shirts by 2 projects 731 456 lea‹etsby36projects 21 553 articles by 14 projects 2 000 directories by 2 projects 1 770 videos by 5 projects 5 000 stickers by 2 projects 6 000 postcards by 4 projects 16 152 CD-ROMs by 12 projects 2 000 business cards by 2 projects 2 000 colour cartoons by 1 project 500 protocols by 1 project 200 pins by 1 project.
Z pﾖehledu byly zóskèny nèsledujócó ÿdaje o poｲtech organizovan̅ch akcó a jejich nèvþtｸvnó-cóch.
From the survey, the following «gureshavebeenextractedonthenumbersofeventsorgan-ised and their attendees:
̌ 56 prezentacó projektu organizovan̅ch v 6 projektech, celkem 3160 nèvþtｸvnókヮ ̌ 2 tiskovï konference organizovanï v jednom projektu, celkem 40 nèvþtｸvnókヮ ̌ 70 provèdｸcóch mótinkヮ organizovan̅ch v 1 projektu a zahrnujócóch 546 osob.
71 meetings organised for 19 projects, totalling 880 attendees 51 participations in conferences, for 6 projects, totalling 3 620 attendees 94 conferences organised for 62 projects, totalling 16 793 attendees 389 seminars organised for 64 projects, totalling 11 334 attendees245 workshops organised for 36 projects, totalling 4 356 attendees 56 project presentations organised for 6 projects, totalling 3 160 attendees 2 press conferences organised for 1 project, totalling 40 attendees 70 implementation meetings organised for 1 project and involving 546 persons.
Konference, seminèﾖe a workshopy jsou siln̅m nèstrojem sóﾝovï spoluprèce.
Conferences, seminars and workshops are strong instruments for networking.
Jejich pﾖidanè hodnota pro þóﾖenó a vytvèﾖenó dopadu je vþak mnohem diskutabilnｸjþó:
Their added value for dissemination and generation of impact is, however, more questionable.
‡ K organizovènó tｸchto akcó jsou zapotﾖebó velkï zdroje ve srovnènó s jin̅mi metodami þóﾖe-nó v̅sledkヮ, jako je napﾖ. þóﾖenó pﾖes webovï strènky.
‡ The resources required to organise such events are substantial, compared with other dis-semination activities such as dissemination through a website.‡ Dissemination mainly concerns the people attending.
‡ Þóﾖenó se t̅kè hlavnｸ pﾖótomn̅ch lidó. Konference, seminèﾖe a workshopy jsou u™iteｲnï za podmónky, ™e zasèhnou dalþó ｲleny cólov̅ch skupin a koncovï pﾖójemce v̅hod mimo tｸch, na nｸ™ je projekt pﾖómo zamｸﾖen, nebo pokud zasèhnou klóｲovï politiky, a zóskajó tak lepþó pozici, tak™e v̅sledky majó vｸtþó dopad.
Conferences, seminars and work-shops are useful on condition that they reach target group members and end-bene«ciariesbeyond those directly targeted by the project or that they reach key political people and thus better position the results to have a larger impact.‡ Most of the time, conferences are one-shot events: once they are «nished,thereisoftennofollow-up action with the aim of making things change.
‡ Konference jsou vｸtþinou jednorèzovï akce: jakmile skonｲó, vｸtþinou neexistujó ™èdnï na-vazujócó ｲinnosti, jejich™ cólem je dosèhnout zmｸny vｸcó.
They therefore conclude the project activities instead of being a link in the dissemination and impact chain.‡ They often take place at the end of the project, which is probably too late to have an impact.
Na cólovï skupiny, koncovï pﾖójemce v̅hod a veﾖejnou sprèvu mè ve skuteｲnosti vliv a dopad hlavnｸ to, kdy™ je do projektu zapojóme co nejdﾖóve.
In fact, having an impact on target groups, end-bene«ciariesandpublicauthoritiesimpliesengaging them earlier in the project.
Pﾖesto vþak konference, seminèﾖe a workshopy umo™ﾏujó kontakt s vｸtþóm publikem, ne™ je tomu pﾖi akcóch v terïnu nebo na speci«ckïmþkolenó.Abyseposólilvlivkonferencójakonè-stroje dalþóho þóﾖenó v̅sledkヮ a dopadヮ, doporuｲujeme:
Nevertheless, conferences, seminars and workshops allow contact with a larger audience than through «eldactionsorspeci«ctraining.Toreinforcetheconferencesasinstrumentsforfur-ther dissemination and impacts, it is suggested to:
‡ Zajistｸte, aby byli pozvèni klóｲovó ﾖódócó pracovnóci s rozhodovacó pravomocó a tvヮrci politik a aby se opravdu zÿｲastnili;
‡ make sure key decision-makers and policy-makers are invited and do attend;
‡ Po konferenci poﾖèdejte navazujócó akce, abyste problïm udr™eli v myslóch nèvþtｸvnókヮ.
‡ carry out follow-up actions after the conference to keep the issue in the minds of the at-tendees.
V 11. mｸsóci projektu byla zorganizovèna odbornè konference.
An expert meeting was organised at month 11 of the project.
Svedla dohromady 50 evropsk̅ch podólnókヮ FGM.
It brought together 50 European FGM stakeholders.
Projektu se podaﾖilo dèt dohromady odpovódajócó partnery z terïnu po celï Ev-ropｸ a vytvoﾖit prvnó odbornou sóﾝ v tomto dヮle™itïm oboru. Zmｸny, kterï to v reakci na FGM pﾖineslo do postupu Evropy, mohou b̅t z velkï móry vysledovèny zpｸt a™ k tomuto poｲèteｲnómu projektu, a pokud jde o reakce na FGM, lze shodu napﾖóｲ Evropou tïmｸﾖ zcela pﾖiｲótat tomuto projektu a jeho nèsledn̅m kapitolèm.
The project succeeded in bringing together relevant partners in the «eldacross Europe and establishing the «rstexpertnetworkinthisimportant«eld.Thechangesbrought about in European treatment of responses to FGM can largely be traced back from this initial project and the commonality across Europe of those responses to FGM is due almost en-tirely to this project and its subsequent chapters.
V̅voj diferencovanïho a integrovanïho þkolicóho systïmu oslovuje partnery v multidisciplinèr-nóm pﾖóstupu: orgèny socièlnó podpory jak z obecnóho, tak neziskovïho sektoru, soudnó repre-sivnó orgèny (policie) a soudnó systïm, hrèｲe na trhu prèce, móstnó politickï pﾖedstavitele. Tako-v̅to diferencovan̅ a integrovan̅ systïm zvyþuje odbornost rヮzn̅ch spolupracovnókヮ a vytvè-ﾖó dobrou sóﾝovou strategii a postupy.
[It fostered the] development of a di.erentiatedandintegratedtrainingsystemaddressingplay-ers in a multi-disciplinary approach: social intervention bodies both from the public and the non-pro«tsector,law-enforcementagenciesandthejudicialsystem,playersinthelabourmar-ket, local political representatives.
Kromｸ distribuce materièlヮ a organizovènó akcó mｸlo 60 projektヮ tｸsnï kontakty s cólov̅mi skupinami a/nebo koncov̅mi pﾖójemci. Takov̅mi kontakty byly hlavnｸ nèvþtｸvy a diskuse se ｲleny cólov̅ch skupin pracujócómi s koncov̅mi pﾖójemci, se samotn̅mi koncov̅mi pﾖójemci a takï s cólov̅mi skupinami, kterï s koncov̅mi pﾖójemci nepracovaly pﾖómo, jako jsou vnitro-stètnó orgèny, pracovnóci v soudnictvó a ｲlenovï Evropskïho parlamentu.
In addition to the distribution of materials and the organisation of events, 60 projects had close contacts with target groups and/or end-bene«ciaries.Suchcontactshavemainlybeenvisits and discussions with the members of target groups working with the end-bene«ciaries,with the e n d - b e n e « c i a r i e s t h e m s e l v e s a n d a l s o w i t h t a r g e t g r o up s nffo t w o r k i n g d i r e c t l y w i t h e n d - b e n e « c i a r i e s s u c h a s n a t i o n a l a uijt h o r i t i e s , ju d i c i a l s t a . a n d Mffe m b e r s o f t h e E u r op e a n P a r l i a mffe n t .
U 49 projektヮ tyto kontakty probｸhly bｸhem projektu. U 9 projektヮ probóhaly bｸhem projek-tu i po nｸm a u 2 projektヮ k nim doþlo po dokonｲenó projektu.
For 49 projects, those contacts took place during the project.
K tｸsn̅m kontaktヮm doþlo v rèmci tｸchto kategorió:
Close contacts occurred within the following categories.
‡ Vzdｸlèvacó pracovnóci (pedagogovï, rodiｲe): 12 projektヮ
‡ Local/national authorities, Members of Parliaments, deputies: 12 projects
‡ Zdravotnóci, psychologovï: 8 projektヮ‡ Nevlèdnó organizace: 8 projektヮ
‡ Medical sta.,psychologists:8projects‡ NGOs: 8 projects‡ EU authorities, MEPs, politicians: 12 projects‡ Judicial sta.:4projects
‡ Ostatnó: 14 projektヮ (asociace, charity, novinèﾖi, advokèti, dobrovolnóci, zpravodajovï Spojen̅ch nèrodヮ, odbornóci, odborèﾖi, organizace zamｸstnavatelヮ, zèstupci nèbo™ensk̅ch komunit).
‡ Other: 14 projects (associations, charities, journalists, practitioners, volunteers, rapporteur for United Nations, experts, trade unions, employers' organisations, representatives of religious communities).
Nｸkter̅m partnerヮm pomohla evropskè nèlepka navèzat tｸsn̅ kontakt s politick̅mi orgèny, jak je uvedeno dèle:
The European label helped some partners to get in close contact with political authorities, as illustrated below.
Kdy™ jsme pou™ili EU jako politickou pèteﾖ, otevﾖely se nèm dveﾖe, kterï byly dlouhou dobu za-vﾖenï.
Having the EU as a political backbone opened doors that had been closed for a long time.
Sóﾝovè spoluprèce na tomto poli uchopila fenomïn trestnïho ｲinu nenèvisti proti lesbic-k̅m ™enèm a domècóho nèsiló mnohem vè™nｸji.
Net-works working in those «eldstookthephenomenonofhatecrimesagainstlesbianwomenandof domestic violence more seriously.
Stèle bylo obtó™nï pﾖekonat ¶pﾖètelskïƒ naslou-chènó a zatèhnout je do akce.
Still it was di/culttoovercomethe`friendly'listeningandgetting them into action.
Nakonec vþak pﾖece naslouchali.
However, «nallytheydidlisten.
Pinnosti zab̅vajócó se þóﾖenóm probóhaly nejｲastｸji bｸhem projektu.
Dissemination activities were mainly carried out during the project.
Kolem 88 % koordinètorヮ projektヮ by velice rèdo pokraｲovalo v projektu i po jeho skonｲenó, ale jen 11 % zóskalo dalþó «nanｲnózdrojenajehoþóﾖenó,jakuvèdómedèle:
Some 88 % of the project coordinators were keen to continue the project after its end but only 11 % received addi-tional funds for dissemination, as illustrated below.
Katolickè córkev «nancovalav̅robu2000kopiónaþózprèvyveformｸknihy.
The Catholic Church funded the production of 2 000 copies of our report in book form.
Mo™nost zóskat «nancenapokraｲovènóprojektヮDAPHNE po jejich skonｲenó je kritickè.
Getting funds to continue the Daphne projects after closure is critical.
Fondy DAPHNE umo™nó, aby se zahèjily velkï vｸci, ale obecnｸ je zde nedostatek mo™nostó pokraｲovat, aby se zajistila kontinuita aktivit projektu, jeliko™ se tóm jak ES, tak móstnó vlèdy odmótly zab̅-vat.
Daphne funding al-lowed great things to start but there is a general lack of possibilities for follow-up to ensure continuity of project activities as both the EC and local governments refuse to take them in charge.
Napﾖóklad aktualizace webov̅ch strènek informacemi z evropskï ÿrovnｸ nebo ÿdr™ba evropskï sótｸ móstnóch krizov̅ch center vy™aduje ｲas a penóze.
For example, updating a website with information at European level or maintaining a European network of local crisis centres takes time and money.
Móstnó vlèda takovou nèslednou ｲinnost ｲasto odmótla « n a n c o v a t , p r o t o ™ e t o n e n ó m ó s t n ó p r o j e k t .
Often, local governments refuse to fund such follow-up activity because it is not a local project.
Z e s t r a n y E S j e D A P H N E je-din̅m ES programem pro tuto ｲinnost, ale nebere v potaz pokraｲovènó «nanｲnóchv̅dajヮspojen̅ch s aktualizacó webov̅ch strènek nebo ÿdr™bou sótｸ.
On the EC side, Daphne is the only EC programme for such actions but it does not consider continuing to fund ex-penses linked to the updating of a website or the maintaining of a network.
Jednóm z nejzajómavｸjþóch bodヮ v̅voje je prヮkopnick̅ zpヮsob, jak̅m se projekty zab̅vajó nｸ-kter̅mi kritick̅mi otèzkami.
One of the most exciting developments among these projects is the innovative ways in which they dealt with some of the critical issues.
V̅sledky sahajó od zalo™enó Evropskï charty operètorヮ dｸtsk̅ch
The results range from establishing a European Char-ter for Children's Helpline Operators, mapping the situation in Europe in relation to rape, and a multi-agency training programme working with perpetrators of domestic violence, to develop-
V̅sledky vypl̅vajócó ze zkuþenostó s DAPHNE linek dヮvｸry, mapovènó situace v Evropｸ t̅kajócó se ÿnosヮ a multi-agenturnóch þkolicóch progra-mヮ pracujócóch s pachateli domècóho nèsiló k v̅voji þkolicóch modulヮ pro lektory prevence nè-siló v chovènó dｸtó, zpracovènó v̅zkumnïho programu pro akademiky o mrzaｲenó ™ensk̅ch ge-nitèlió a mnohïmu dalþómu.
The results of the Daphne experience ing training modules for trainers on the prevention of violence in children's behaviour, elaborat-ing a research agenda for academics on female genital mutilation, and many others.
Metody nｸkter̅ch projektヮ jsou velmi novètorskï, jako napﾖ. pilot-nó v̅cvikov̅ modul postaven̅ na dramatickïm workshopu k sebeposólenó postavenó dóvek ve spoleｲnosti a prevenci sexuèlnóho zneu™óvènó a þkolicó zdrojovè sada k pou™itó na pracoviþti ke zv̅þenó povｸdomó o domècóm nèsiló.
Some project methods were innovative, such as a pilot training module based on a drama workshop for the self-empowerment of girls and preventing sexual abuse, and a training resource pack to be used within the workplace to increase awareness of domestic violence.
Nèsobócó efekty nov̅ch metodologió, multi-agenturnó spo-luprèce, þkolicó programy, audiovizuèlnó a informaｲnó materièly a dalþó v̅stupy/produkty nｸ-kter̅ch projektヮ majó dalekosèhl̅ dopad a jsou pヮsobivï.
The multiplier ef-fects of new methodologies, multi-agency cooperation, training programmes, audiovisual and information technology materials and other outcomes/products of some of the projects are far-reaching and impressive.
Koneｲnï hodnocenó se zab̅valo takï dopady programu. Jsou de«novènyjakolidskïasoci-èlnó zmｸny vyvolanï programem DAPHNE nebo jednóm z jeho projektヮ.
The «nalevaluationalsostudiedtheimpactsoftheprogramme.Theyarede«nedashumanand social changes brought about by Daphne or one of its projects.
Dopady byly hodnoceny podle tﾖó souﾖadnic: dopady na partnery, na cólovï skupiny a na kon-covï pﾖójemce. Kromｸ toho, aby se zlepþilo chèpènó mechanizmヮ vedoucóch ke vzniku dopadヮ, byly identi«kovènyfaktory,kterïdopadykladnｸnebozèpornｸovlivﾏujó.
These impacts were measured along three axes: impacts on the partners, on the target groups and on the end-bene«ciaries.Furthermore,thefactorsa.ecting,positivelyornegatively,theseimpactswere identi«edinordertoimprovetheunderstandingofthemechanismsleadingtoimpact.
Dopady na partnery
Impacts on partners
Nó™e uveden̅ graf uvèdó þest kategorió dopadヮ na partnery, podle jejich zkuþenostó
The graph below presents the six categories of impact on partners as experienced by them.
(N = 143 projektヮ, a™ tﾖi dopady na projekt)
(N = 143 projects, up to three impacts per project)
Zlepþenè odbornost
Improved expertise
Zlepþenè dヮvｸryhodnost a dosah
Adoption of good practices
Tïmｸﾖ vþechny projekty (97 %) mｸly dopady na partnery.
Nearly all the projects (97 %) have impacts on the partners.
Zlepþenè odbornost je spojena s pﾖónosy v chèpènó nebo nov̅m pochopenóm otèzky nèsiló, uｲenó se ze zkuþenostó jin̅ch partnerヮ a cólov̅ch skupin, se zlepþenóm zkuþenostó/chovènó a zv̅þenó znalostó o tom, jak se touto otèzkou zab̅vajó po celï Evropｸ.
`Improved expertise' is linked to gains in understanding or new understanding of the issue of vio-lence, learning from the experience of other partners and target groups, improved skills/perform-ance and increased knowledge of how an issue is addressed across Europe.
Zlepþenè odbornost musó b̅t spojena s nadnèrodnóm charakterem partnerstvó, musó partnerヮm umo™ﾏovat pracovat a vymｸﾏovat si vｸdomosti s doplﾏkov̅mi partnery s vysok̅mi odborn̅mi znalostmi.
Improved expertise must be linked to the transnational character of the partnerships, allowing partners to work and exchange knowledge with complementary partners with a high level of expertise.
76 % partnerヮ se projektu DAPHNE ÿｲastnilo poprvï: toto vysokï procento ¶novèｲkヮƒ ilustru-je prヮkopnickou roli DAPHNE pro dotyｲnï partnery.
For 76 % of the partners, it was the « r s t t i mffe t h e y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a D a p h n e p r o j e c t : t h i s i s a h i g hp e r c e n t a g e o f ` n e w cffo mffe r s ' , illustrating the pioneering role of Daphne for the partners concerned.
¶Pﾖijetó sprèvn̅ch postupヮƒ ukazuje na pﾖópady, kdy partneﾖi pﾖi prèci jednali rozdólnｸ, dóky projektu se stali profesionèlnｸjþómi, pﾖevzali sprèvnï postupy a zaｲali je sami pou™óvat.
`Adoption of good practices' refers to cases where, due to the project, partners acted di.er-ently in their work, became more professional and adapted good practices to their own use.
¶Zmｸna povahy prèceƒ odkazuje typicky na projekty s v̅zkumnou slo™kou, kde v̅sledky pro-jektu pﾖevrètily pﾖedchozó koncepci prèce.
`Change of the nature of work' refers typically to projects with a research component, where the results of the project overturn the previous conception of work.
Po projektu partneﾖi pracovali jinak dóky nov̅m informacóm a vｸdomostem, kterï vyvstaly z projektu.
After the project, partners operate di.erentlyduetonewinformationandunderstandingcomingfromtheproject.
(N = 137 projektヮ, kterï uvèdｸjó a™ 3 pﾖispóvajócó nebo omezujócó faktory dopadu)
Factors of impact on the partners(N = 137 projects having mentioned up to three contributing or limiting factors of impact)
Finanｲnó prostﾖedky/prostﾖedky pﾖidｸlenï projektu: 10 % àroveﾏ odborn̅ch znalostó partnerヮ projektu a jejich komplementarita: 69 % àroveﾏ odborn̅ch znalostó partnerヮ projektu a jejich komplementarita: 4 %
Level of expertise of the project partners and their complementarity: 69 %
Finanｲnó prostﾖedky/prostﾖedky pﾖidｸlenï projektu: 24 %
Resources/means allocated to the project: 24 %
Politick̅ zèjem/zviditelnｸnó: 1 %
Political interest/visibility: 1 %
Jinï (trvènó projektu; omezenó spojenè s evropsk̅mi projekty pro malï nevlèdnó organizace): 1 %
Other (project duration; for small NGOs, constraints linked to a European project): 1 %