natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Again in 1999, the last year of the Daphne initiative, the lessons learned through project visits, reports (including a «rstexternalevaluationreportbyanindependentteamofexpertsonthe1997 initiative) and selection and monitoring processes were built into the call for proposals and guidelines for applicants.
1999. aastal, mis oli Daphne algatuse viimaseks tegevusaastaks, koondati p r o j e k t i k Ÿ l a s t u s e d , aruanded (sealhulgas ka 1997. aasta algatuse sýltumatute ekspertide grupi esimene vêlishin-damisaruanne) ning nende vêljavaliku- ja seireprotsessid projektikonkursiks ja suunisteks taotluse esitajatele.
Additionally the Daphne website, which was launched in the
Soovitust ¶edasi arendadaƒ, mitte ¶uues-
It had been noted, when project submissions for 1998 were read, that many of the projects claimed to be suggesting activities that would be attempted `for the «rsttimeever'when,infact, such activities had already been undertaken in Europe or indeed even funded by the Daphne initiative itself.
A brief history of Daphne ti leiutadaƒ korrati igal aastal alates 1999. aastast, vaatamata sellele esitati projektides ikkagi palju selliseid tegevusi, mis ei arvestanud varasemat kogemust.
In 1999, a number of new issues also began to emerge, however.
1999. aastal hakkasid siiski esile kerkima ka uued teemad.
In particular, the focus on raising awareness of violence against women in Europe in 1999 prompted an increase in awareness-raising projects on gendered violence in general and on domestic violence in par-ticular.
Têpsemalt têhendas see, et teadlik-kuse týus naiste vastu suunatud vêgivalla suhtes 1999. aastal Euroopas týi kaasa selliste teadlik-kust týstvate projektide arvu kasvu, mis tegelesid Ÿldiselt soolise vêgivalla ja eriti perevêgival-laga.
Increasing public and political attention to the issue of migration into Europe, and concern that misunderstanding of this issue was giving rise to increasing discrimination and abuse of migrant people living and working in Europe, prompted a number of projects focus-ing on the rights of migrants and on support to victims of racism and discrimination.
Avalikkuse ja poliitilise têhelepanu týus migratsiooni k Ÿ s i m u s t e l e Euroopas ja mure selle pêrast, et k Ÿ s i m u s e vêêritimýistmine výiks kaasa tuua Euroopas elavate ja tûûtavate migrantide diskrimineerimise ja vêêrkohtlemise kasvu, týi kaasa arvukalt projekte, mille têhelepanu keskmes olid migrantide ýigused ning rassismi- ja diskrimineerimisohvrite toetamine.
Projects on the clandestine migration of unaccompanied minors, on the rights of migrant domestic workers, on support to victims of tra/ckingandtopreventexploitationofmigrantand tra/ckedwomen,wereforerunnersofa growingnumberofprojectsthat,inthefollow-ing years, r e ‹ e c t e d a n i m po r t a n t n e w w o r k l o a d f o r N G O s a n d p u b l i c a uijt h o r i t i e s i n E u r op e .
Saatjateta alaealiste salajase migratsiooni, teenindussfêêri výýrtûûliste ýiguste, inimkaubanduse ohvritele tuge pakkuvad ning migrantidest ja inimkaubanduse ohvritest naiste ekspluateerimist vêltivad projektid olid eelkêijateks nendele arvukatele projektidele, mis jêrgnevate aastate jooksul peegeldasid Euroopa valitsusvêliste organisatsioonide ja riigiasutuste olulist uut tegevusvêlja.
I m po r t a n t issues such as rape, female genital mutilation (FGM) and violence in the aftermath of cffo n ‹ i c t a l s o « g u r e d f o r t h e « r s t t i mffe a m o n g D a p h n e - f u n d e d p r o j e c t s .
Sel-lised olulised k Ÿ s i m u s e d nagu vêgistamine, naisgenitaalide vigastamine ja vêgivald kon‹iktitaga-jêrjel ilmusid siis samuti esmakordselt Daphne rahastatavate projektide hulka.
While Daphne projects continued, therefore, to re‹ectwellthenatureofdebateandneedsrelated to violence in Europe, some problems noted from the very beginning of the initiative persisted.
Kuigi Daphne projektid jêtkasid hêsti debattide olemuse ja vêgivallaga seotud vajaduste ka-jastamist Euroopas, jêid alles mýned probleemid, mida mêrgati juba algatuse alguses.
These related mostly to project design and management, and suggested a contin-ued need for improvements in the capacity of organisations, for the Commission to continue to monitor and provide technical advice to projects, and for ongoing work in the Daphne `team' itself to draw lessons, analyse trends and develop the initiative in the light of this re‹ec-tion.
Need olid seotud projektide kavandamise ja juhtimisega ning vajadusega parandada k Ÿ s i m u s e g a tegelevate organisatsioonide suutlikkust, komisjonipoolset jêrelevalvet ja projektidele tehni-lise abi andmist ning Daphne meeskonna jêtkuvat jêrelduste tegemist ýppetundidest, tren-dide a n a l Ÿ Ÿ s i m i s t ja algatuse arendamist seoses nende k Ÿ s i m u s t e g a .
In regard to project preparation and planning, there were still weaknesses in:
Projektide koostamise ja planeerimise osas ilmnesid jêrgmised puudused:
‡ preparatory research;
‡ ettevalmistavad uuringud;
‡ focusing on cause and e.ectandmatchingactionstotheproblemstheyaimedtosolve;
‡ têhelepanu pûûramine pýhjustele ja tagajêrgedele ning lahendamist vajavate probleemi-de sobilikele meetmetele;
‡ learning lessons and knowing how to share these with appropriate groups, and in particu-lar spreading these in appropriate form and with added value in other Member States;
‡ têhelepanu pûûramine saadud ýppetundidele ja kuidas vastavat kogemust edastada ko-hastele gruppidele ning eriti kuidas seda kohasel kujul levitada ja pakkuda lisavêêrtust teistele liikmesriikidele;
‡ using partnerships to improve coverage and e/ciency;
‡ partnerlusvýimaluste kasutamine tegevuse laiema ulatuse ja týhustamise eesmêrgil;
‡ using the budget to facilitate implementation and output, rather than as a simple `costing' exercise;
‡ eelarve kasutamine eelkýige millegi elluviimiseks ja tulemuse saamiseks, mitte ainult lihtsalt kulutuste katmiseks;
‡ evaluating results and performance.
‡ tulemuste ja toime hindamine.
Many submissions remained local, with token partnerships set up purely for the purpose of satisfying the Daphne selection criteria.
Jêtkates positiivsemas výtmes, tuleb mêrkida, et vêljavalitud projektid lýid uue aluse jêrgmi-selt:
A large number of projects did not seem to realise
‡ p Ÿ Ÿ t i tegelda k Ÿ s i m u s t e g a , mida varem polnud puudutatud;
‡ they tackled subjects not hitherto attempted;
Eesmêrgid ja prioriteedid
‡ they sometimes piloted new or variant methodologies, often across a number of d i . e r e n t Mffe m b e r States;
‡ teadustûû, uuringute ja andmekogumise abil saavutati uusi kêsitlusi, mis sageli haarasid výrdlevat a n a l Ÿ Ÿ s i kogu ELis;
‡ the support of the Commission opened doors for many organisations and enhanced their ability to function within their own environment and at European (and in some cases in-ternational) level.
‡ komisjoni toetus avas paljude organisatsioonide jaoks uksi ja týstis nende výimet tegut-seda oma keskkonnas ja Euroopa (mýnikord ka rahvusvahelisel) tasandil.
`Project coordinators judge that the label ``European Commission'' was decisive to add credibil-ity to their action „team members noticed an immediate change of attitude in school au-thorities.'
¶Projekti koordinaatorid leiavad, et mêrge ¶Euroopa Komisjonƒ oli otsustavaks teguriks, mis týstis nende tegevuse usaldusvêêrsust...
[External evaluation of Project 97/066/WC]
Meeskonnaliikmed tunnetasid kohest koolide juht-kondade suhtumise muutust.ƒ [Projekti 97/066/WC vêliseksperdi hinnangust]
By the time the Daphne programme 2000›03 was launched in 2000, an enormous amount of new work had emerged from the three-year experience of the Daphne initiative, and the Com-mission's commitment to this work was regularly talked about in international circles.
Daphne programmi 2000›03 kêivitamise ajaks 2000. aastal oli kolmeaastase Daphne alga-tuse kogemuse tulemusena lisandunud tohutul hulgal tûûd ning rahvusvahelistes ringkonda-des rêêgiti sageli komisjoni p Ÿ h e n d u m i s e s t sellele.
NGO support was solid and lessons from Daphne projects found their way into conferences and workshops in other regions as lead and partner organisations `spread the word'.
Valitsusvêliste organisatsioonide toetus oli tugev ja Daphne projektide kêigus saadud ýppe-tunnid leidsid tee teiste regioonide konverentsidele ja nýukodadesse, sest juht- ja partneror-ganisatsioonid kandsid sýnumit edasi. â R O laste ýiguste komitee sai kokkuvýtte Daphne te-gevusest 1999. aastal.
The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child received a b r i e « n g o n D a p h n e i n 1 9 9 9 ; t h e f o l l o w - up r e po r t to the World Congress against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children listed Daphne as an example of good regional practice.
Laste seksuaalse ekspluateerimise vastase maailmakongressi jêrelaru-anne nimetas Daphnet heaks regionaalse kogemuse nêiteks.
The `spirit' of Daphne, characterised as:
Daphne ¶vaimuƒ iseloomustati jêrgmiselt:
‡ taking calculated risks to break new ground,
‡ uutele tegevustele alusepanemisel kaalutakse riskid hêsti lêbi;
‡ learning and sharing,
‡ ýpitakse ja vahetatakse kogemusi;
‡ supporting partnerships both in projects and with the Commission,
‡ toetatakse partnerlust nii projektides kui komisjoniga;
‡ promoting added value across the Member States,
‡ edendatakse lisavêêrtuse andmist liikmesriikides;
‡ remaining focused on the victim,
‡ ohver on têhelepanu keskpunktis;
‡ seeking to empower protection structures, groups and individuals,
‡ p Ÿ Ÿ t a k s e tugevdada kaitsestruktuure, gruppe ja Ÿksikisikuid;
‡ tackling violence comprehensively from the angles of prevention, protection, support, re-habilitation and in the context of grassroots-level information about European and na-tional realities, was cited as a reason for the continued support of NGOs, public authorities and other players.
‡ v ê g i v a l l a k Ÿ s i m u s t e l e lêhenetakse laiaulatuslikult ennetustegevuse, kaitse, toetuse ja reha-bilitatsiooni vaatevinklist ning rohujuure tasandilt lêhtuvast teabest Euroopa ja riikide te-geliku olukorra kohta, ning seda peeti valitsusvêliste organisatsioonide, riigiasutuste ja teiste jêtkuva toetamise tu-lemuseks ning komisjoni seotust projektidega tervitati harva nêitena toetusest, mis ei vêljen-dunud mitte ainult rahastamise, vaid ka týelise p Ÿ h e n d u m u s e n a Ÿrituse elluviimisesse.
The Commission's close engagement with the projects was hailed as a rare example of sup-port that went beyond funding to real commitment.
Daphne programm jêrgis algatuse Ÿldjooni, kuid kolme suurema uuendusega: taotlusi said esitada EFTA/EMP ning Kesk- ja Ida-Euroopa maad, KŸpros, Malta ja TŸrgi; programm avati ka kohalikele omavalitsustele projektijuhina, mitte ainult partnerina; projektid výimaliku toimi-misajaga kuni kolm aastat. See týi kaasa mýned raskused.
The Daphne programme followed the general lines of the initiative, with three important in-novations: the ability for organisations from EFTA/EEA countries, central and east European countries, and Cyprus, Malta and Turkey to apply; the opening of the programme to local au-thorities as project leaders, not just partners; and the possibility of projects running for up to three years. This led to some complications.
Tagantjêrele tar-kusena oli see positiivne areng, sest projektide hindamiskomiteesse kuulusid erinevatel aegadel eksperdid sellistes sotsiaalse programmitûû valdkondades nagu metodoloogia, tea-dustûû ja andmekogumine, tervishoid, ýiguskaitse, ýigustel pýhinev programmitûû, koge-muste levitamine ja kommunikatsioon jne.
The « r s t w a s t h a t t h e i n c l u s i o nffo f t h e nffo n - mffe m b e r S t a t e cffo u n t r i e s d e p e n d e d o n f r a mffe w o r k a g r e e mffe n t s being in place between the EU and these States, and no agreement had as yet been « n a l i s e d b e t w e e n t h e E U a n d a p p l i c a n t S t a t e s . T h i s c a u s e d s o mffe cffo n f u s i o n a m o n g s t t h o s e submitting projects, since many projects went ahead and included full partners in the applicant States ̌ sometimes a clear programming imperative, especially in projects dealing with cross-border issues like tra/ckingandmigratioň andhadtobeaskedtorevisetheirprojects if they were to be recommended for funding.
Projektide Ÿlesehitust materiaalselt mýjutamata ýnnestus ekspertidel anda Daphne programmi koordinaatorile signaal selliste Ÿksikasjade suhtes, millele tuli juhtida projekti elluviiva organisatsiooni têhelepanu výi soovitada pro-jekti kêrpimist, kui tundus, et selle maht on liialt suur, výi vastupidiselt soovitada projekti-tegevust vêhesel mêêral têiendada, et týsta projekti mýju výi laiendada selle ulatust.
In hindsight, this was a positive advance, since the selection panel included, at various times, experts in methodology, research and data collection, health issues, law enforcement, rights-based programming, dissemination and communication, and other areas of social programming.
Teine uuendus, taotluste avamine kohalikele omavalitsustele projektijuhtidena, oli olemuselt lihtne ega pakkunud uusi vêljakutseid, kuigi tegelikkuses ei tulnud kohalikud omavalitsused kiiresti kaasa výimalusega hakata partneri asemel projektijuhiks.
The second innovation, the opening-up of the call to local authorities as project leaders, was straightforward and gave rise to no new challenges, although in practice local authorities were slow to come forward as project leaders rather than partners.
Kolmas muudatus, mitmeaastaste projektide lubamine, mýjutas mêrkimisvêêrselt kogu Daphne eelarve haldamist ja kaudselt ka projektide vêljavalimist.
The third change, however, the inclusion of multiannual projects, a.ectedthemanagementof the overall Daphne budget and, indirectly, the selection of projects signi«cantly.Inthe«rstyear of the Daphne programme, the funds for projects of more than 12 months' duration had to be allocated out of that single year's budget.
Daphne programmi esimesel aastal tuli enam kui 12 kuud kestvate projektide raha eraldada Ÿhe aasta eelarvest.
This could have seriously reduced the number of projects funded that year as, for example, one three-year project would take up the fund-ing for three one-year projects.
See oleks vêhendanud sellel aastal « n a n t s e e r i t a v a t e p r o j e k t i d e a r v u , s e s t n ê i t e k s v ý t a k s Ÿ k s k o l m e a a s t a n e p r o j e k t k o l - m e Ÿheaastase projekti vahendid.
This would risk discouraging applicants.
See mýjuks halvasti taotlejatele.
As a result, it was decided to limit the number of multiannual projects in order not to seriously disadvantage those who felt that their capacity did not allow them to manage multiannual projects (for example, because the size of the organisation did not allow it to bear the burden of expend-iture against delayed reimbursement for more than one year at a time).
Lýpuks otsustati piirata mit-meaastaste projektide arvu, et mitte seada mêrkimisvêêrselt halvemasse olukorda taotlejaid, kes arvasid, et nad ei ole piisavalt suutelised juhtima mitmeaastaseid projekte (nt organisatsiooni suurus ei výimalda neil kanda kulusid kauem kui aasta nende h Ÿ v i t a m i s e n i ) .
The Daphne programme was as over-subscribed as the initiative had been.
Daphne programmile esitati enam taotlusi kui algatuse aegadel.
In the «rstyear,415 submissions were received, totalling some EUR 40 million.
Esimesel aastal laekus 415 projektitaotlust, mille kogumaht oli umbes 40 miljonit eurot.
All of the activities recom-mended in the guidelines for applicants were covered in the project submissions, namely:
Kýik taotlussuunistes soovitatud tegevused kaeti projektitaotlustega, nimelt:
‡ production of common frameworks for violence;
‡ vêgivalla Ÿhisraamistiku loomine;
‡ measurement of the impact of di.erenttypesofviolencetoestablishappropriatere-sponse;
Projektid katsid selliseid valdkondi nagu vêgivald kodus, seksuaalne vêgivald, kaasa arvatud verepilastus, sooline vêgivald, vêgivald koolis, p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i l i n e vêgivald, vêgivalla mýju ter-visele, kaasa arvatud naisgenitaalide vigastamine, ýiguskaitse ning lastepornograa«avýrgus.Need on Ÿksikasjalikumalt liigitatud lisas.
‡ assessment of measures and practices to prevent and detect violence in order to prevent future exposure to violence;
¶Tegevusvaldkondade osas on selgelt esikohal seksuaalvêgivald oma erinevates vormides (sek-suaalvêgivald 17%, seksuaalne ekspluateerimine kasusaamise eesmêrgil 8%, inimkaubandus 7%).
‡ information campaigns to raise awareness in the public, media and/or targeted profes-sional groups;
Projektitaotlused jêid endiselt ebarahuldavaks, sest jêid kohalikule tasandile ega p Ÿ Ÿ d n u d k i muutuda Ÿleeuroopaliseks.
‡ the development of Community-wide information sources on the various «eldsofvio-lence;
‡ projektid olid výimelised kindlaks mêêrama mitte ainult probleemide, reaktsioonide ja tûûtavade erinevusi liikmesriikides, vaid ka Ÿhtelangevust, mis viis eduka metoodiliste výtete ja tûûvahendite vahetuseni;
‡ studies of di.erentaspectsofviolenceandhowtopreventthem;
¶Erinevatest riikidest pêrit ja erinevate tûûtavadega teadlased kohaldasid meetodeid lêhtuvalt oma eelistustest, seetýttu oli kogutud materjal suhteliselt halvasti liigitatud.
‡ identi«cationofwaystoimproverecognition,reportingandmanagementoftheconse-quences of violence.
Sellele vaatamata a n a l Ÿ Ÿ s i t i igal Ÿhiskohtumisel neid erinevusi ja kooskýlastati tûûtavaga ning teiselt poolt konteks-tiga, vastuvýtuga antud valdkonnas, ametiasutuste reageeringuga jne.ƒ [Projekt 99/025/C]
`Concerning the areas of activity: clearly sexual violence in all its forms comes top (sexual vio-lence 17 %, commercial sexual exploitation 8 %, tra/cking7 %).Thenexttopicintermsofim-portance is the gender-/family-related violence (gender violence 8 %, violence in the family 7 % and violence in domestic context 11 %). Internet and child pornography are also signi«cant,with6 % of the total.'
‡ teadmiste edastamise ja informatsiooni, metodoloogia ning tûûvahendite vahetamispo-tentsiaal muutus seda nêhtavamaks, mida enam organisatsioonid ýppisid Ÿksteist tundma ja suutsid paremini mýista konkreetseid olukordi ja vajadusi;
Commission report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the Daphne programme 2000›03, January 2002
‡ projektid olid výimelised Ÿletama keelebarjêêre ja vêlja arendama, mida mýned projektid nimetasid ¶Daphne keeleksƒ, st sellise kommunikatsiooni, mis pýhines Ÿhisel arusaamisel k Ÿ s i m u s t e s t ja reaktsioonidest.
Submissions continued to fail because they were local and did not attempt to explore the potential of `European-ness'.
¶Sellise mýiste nagu ¶kaitsetusƒ týlkimine on iseenesest keeruline Ÿlesanne.
However, those projects that did make e . o r t s t o ` b e E u r op e a n ' a c h i e v e d some success and, as monitoring visits, «nalreportsandevaluationsdemonstrated,there began to be a growing understanding of the value of truly `European' action. Projects reported that:
Avastasime selle probleemi, kui týlkisime ja kohandasime k Ÿ s i m u s t i k k e , ning sellest arusaamine oli probleemiks ka prantsuse keelt kýnelevatele lastele „ Kaitsetus on mýiste, mida on raske týlkida, sest see on seotud erinevate semantiliste (ja sotsiaalsete) valdkondadega, nagu ýigus, haridus, meditsiin, kriminoloogia, lastekaitse, sotsiaaltûû, p s Ÿ h h o l o o g i a ja kultuuriline antropoloogia„ Siiski ýp-pisid meeskonna liikmed seminaride meeskonnatûû tulemusel Ÿksteist tundma ja Ÿksteisest paremini aru saama.ƒ [Projekt 99/025/C]
‡ they were able to identify not only di.erencesbetweentheproblems,responsesandwaysof working among Member States but also points of convergence, leading to successful sharing of methodologies and tools;
Kuigi oli veel palju ýppida, mida ¶Euroopa projektƒ têhendab, hakkasid 2000. aastal ilmnema selged mêrgid, et paljud organisatsioonid olid Daphne programmi kêigus arenenud organi-satsioonideks, kelle tegevuse tulemus oli Euroopa, mitte riigi výi kohalikul tasandil.
‡ the value of comparative analysis ̌ for example of legal frameworks relating to sexual violence ̌ enhanced understanding and the ability to advocate for review and harmoni-sation;
Daphne programmi Ÿlejêênud aastate výtmesýnadeks kujunesid seetýttu areng, Ÿlesehita-mine, kohandamine ja laiendamine. Projektide hindamiskomitee keskendus projektidele, mis andsid juba tehtud tûûle lisavêêrtust jêrgmiselt:
‡ the potential for transfer of knowledge and the sharing of information, methodologies and tools was more evident as organisations got to know each other and understood better their speci«csituationsandneeds;
‡ andsid hinnanguid vêljunditele ja tulemustele ning katsetasid, kohandasid ja arendasid neid edasi;
‡ they were able to transcend language barriers and develop what some projects called `Daphne language', i.e. communication based on common understanding of the issues and responses.
‡ ajakohastasid uuringuid ja laiendasid neid kýigile liikmesriikidele, výimalusel ka kandidaat-riikidele ning EFTA/EMP riikidele (lisaks KŸpros, Malta, TŸrgi);
`The question of translating or interpreting a concept such as ``vulnerability'' is complex in itself.
‡ siirdusid uuringutelt ja andmekogumiselt a n a l Ÿ Ÿ s i l e ning selle alusel soovitustele ja ýp-petundidele Euroopa tasandil;
We encountered this problem when translating and adapting questionnaires, and it posed a problem even for French-speaking children.
‡ koolitus- ja ýppemoodulite, teadlikkust týstvate materjalide ja selliste tûûvahendite nagu k Ÿ s i m u s t i k u d laiem kohaldamine;
Although much remained to be learned about what being a `European project' entailed, there were clear signs by 2000 that many organisations had grown, as a result of Daphne support, into organisations whose impact was European rather than national or even local.
‡ Daphne poolt kêttesaadavaks tehtud vahendite ning muude allikate kokkukogumine ja dokumenteerimine (veebid, inimesed, publitsistika, audiovisuaalsed dokumendid, kooli-tusmeetodid ja -paketid jne).
There remained a concern, however, that the Daphne programme should not be just a short-term funding mechanism but a framework in which learning ̌ about violence and how to respond to it in terms of protection, prevention and support for victims ̌ might develop and build into a comprehensive response to this EU-wide problem.
Samuti korraldati uusi projektikonkursse, mis arendaksid vêlja hindamisnêitajaid, hea tava t o e t u s a n a l Ÿ Ÿ s i ja têielikku kaardistamist ning andmekogu-mist nii, et tekiks laiahaardeline Ÿlevaade Euroopas eksisteerivast vêgivallast kýigis selle vor-mides.
The key words for the remaining years of the Daphne programme, therefore, became `devel-opment', `building', `adapting' and `extending'.
Selle saavutamine projektide rahastamise piirides kujunes týeliseks vêljakutseks, sest Daphne programmi edasiarenemise kêigus taotluste arv suurenes vastavalt komisjoni Ÿleskutsele areneda edasi, eelarve muutus pingelisemaks ning mýnede organisatsiooni-de puhul oli reaalsuseks ka projekti ebaýnnestumine výi tegevuse poolelijêêmine.
The selection panel focused on projects that aimed to add value to work that had already been done, by:
See-týttu pûûrati komisjoni k o n t r o l l k Ÿ l a s t u s t e l têhelepanu enam organisatsioonide abistami-sele eelarve haldamisel ja uute lahenduste leidmisel, et saavutada eesmêrke eelarvet pingestamata.
‡ updating research and broadening it to cover all Member States and, where possible, can-didate countries and EFTA/EEA countries (plus Cyprus, Malta and Turkey);
‡ Daphne veebilehte uuendati eesmêrgiga luua kýigi projektiaruannete pikaajaline arhiiv;
‡ moving from studies and data collection to analysis and, on the basis of this, recommenda-tions and lessons at European level;
‡ 2002. aastal alustati elluviidud projektide alusel koostatud teadlikkust týstvate materjalide ¶raamatukoguƒ loomist, mis sisaldas nii t r Ÿ k i s e i d kui ka veebilehel sisalduvat elektroonilist materjali.
‡ broader application of training and education modules, awareness-raising materials, and operational tools such as questionnaires;
‡ tûûtati vêlja ¶nêitlikudƒ juhtumid, mille abil selgitati, milliseid projekte Daphne rahastas, kuidas need ýnnestusid ja millist mýju need avaldasid;