NDev-09 031-09
Report from the EAPN Reflection meeting
Participation in National Networks and EAPN
3-4 April 2009
Brussels, Belgium
Evaluation
Most participants found the meeting evaluated the meeting positively. There has been no negative evaluation of the meeting. Below is a table of the evaluation results for the whole group:
Excellent / Good / Average / Bad- Preparation (including mailing of documents)
- Content and method of the meeting
- Your preparation and participation
- Logistics (including interpretation, room, other)
- Venue, accommodation, food
Did this meeting match your needs?
Yes, brought knowledge of participation and organization of other NNs; lots of group work; useful.
Yes.
Yes, good to focus on the theme.
Better idea of steps EAPN takes now.
Yes.
Yes, we really participated and felt our views were heard.
Yes, more interesting than thought it would be.
Yes, because I told my thoughts and heard others’ views.
Yes, useful and raised issues which apply at all levels.
Yes.
Yes, but we should dedicate much more attention to subsidiarity.
Yes.
I don’t really know as was there to learn.
The time spent translating was a good time to say the words and we can share much clearly.
Yes, well enough.
Yes! Me being new, the needs are great, now I begin to understand enough to bring the national delegation in relay and keep contact with NNs and I know how to work better.
Good to meet & share; hard to know what will be the outcomes in the long run.
I don’t bring home anything new.
It gave me a way to systemize my reflection; and new ground to work within the network.
Yes, it did in many ways.
Yes.
Yes, mostly.
Yes, in general; gives strength and self-confidence and allows for open direct contact with others.
Yes, I didn’t expect to hear so many proposition and good ideas which can be followed-up.
Good way to encourage exchanges between networks; allows better knowledge and establishment of relations.
Yes.
Replied to the “need” for “participation”; as for answers we’ll know them in the near future; good exchanges but need more time.
Yes, perfectly, & we hope to put in place one or two good practices in our network.
Yes.
Did it provide you with relevant knowledge and information?
Yes, especially the presentations and the book.
Yes.
Book provides information from other countries – important tool.
Yes although still a bit hungry for more info.
Useful for understanding the concept of participation and ways of implementing which will be a starting-point for own method.
Yes, learnt about others’ work and positive experience; information could have been more (on the academic side) to understand the issues better.
Informative and heard interesting views.
Yes understand more of EAPN’s role.
Yes.
Yes.
Somehow, maybe.
Partly, because we’d like to know more about the other networks but hopefully more opportunities in future.
Much info but not too much; most others had same problems and proposals.
Enough time to create my sentences and expressmyself much more clearly.
Yes.
Yes, opened the phenomenon – its difficulties and possibilities to work better – practical things and philosophy of whole thing.
For those with little knowledge of EAPN better to start with the program on day 2 as 1st day a bit technical & difficult to grasp the context of the network.
Opportunity to learn better EAPN’s mechanisms; and gave motivation.
Info & methodologies which can/could be transferred.
Better than before.
Yes.
Better knowledge of the NNs work on participation.
Yes.
Yes, am satisfied with the amount of knowledge I acquired.
Yes, subjects like the modes of functioning of other NNs brought ideas and answered the questions we had.
Yes it made a point of participation & I hope setting this base allows follow up of this work.
Yes.
Yes, but not everything of course! Participation implies daily questioning and renovation (rich number of propositions) & strengthens my will to join these meetings.
Yes perfectly, & we hope to put in place one or two good practices in our network, & the importance of participation.
Yes.
How will you be able to apply this knowledge and information in your future work?
Present knowledge to other ngos, then try to organize themed meeting; put report on website of my ngo and improve concept of participation in my country.
Good inspiration and well-prepared to start a group in Denmark.
Can be setting-up of groups & intake; information will impact my own self & organization.
Talk about steps EAPN takes to people in the scholarships I give and develop them in practice there too.
Try to improve participation as a rule & a right with the people I work with.
Identify groups of PEPs and provide information to help develop participation skills; Bring knowledge to own organization and try to change administration patterns.
First inform the others and those coming in May of what I’ve heard but need to think about this.
More experienced to make Roma women participate in our association.
Challenging topic but some pointers for making progress.
Organise meetings at national level to explain objectives of EAPN; PEPs have to participate and take initiatives; Exchange between NNs.
Promote harmonization and common projects with some partners from other countries maybe.
Share the information through coordinating committee of HAPN.
I work every day on it so with more info, I will be able to further my work.
Find more good decisions in the NN on support for people who can participate continuously.
Use this knowledge & info in our local work.
Better prepare the delegation; inform the NN and have give & take; suggest direct participation which might be lacking now; level of participation will be broadened.
Start training on the EU & EAPN if possible; agenda to make more people interested and willing to participate.
Include EAPN’s work in my communication on local & national levels.
A resource to have better understanding of possibilities of engaging PEPs in all our network’s activities; more eager to cooperate with researchers, politicians and professionals than with untrained poor people from the streets and poverty house.
Use knowledge and info in work at local and regional levels together with PEPs.
My group of 6 experts is only just started and not yet operational- so will put it to work in the future.
Transmit knowledge to NN, to experts, in preparation of meetings and follow-up.
Exchange of good practices will allow us to take these up in our network.
Can maybe apply the informations.(?)
As with all “good practices” we should study their implementation on some levels, including from which levels the good practice comes from; create new rich exchanges; discovery and therefore use of new “resources” people.
As we’re only just setting up our “experts council” (PEP) we should transmit the results of this conference to ‘CA’(?) and take a decision on which measures we want to take up.
Apply in the development of work on participation at NN level.
Comments and Recommendations in regard to future meetings of this type
All countries should present their organization.
Keep on building on the method of interpreting.
Structure (workshops-small groups) was really good but having to translate all the time was not the best for either of us! Froso felt “indebted” and not always comfortable and Ninetta felt like a “worker” and not a participant.
Methodology positives were the creative activities and the work in small groups; Challenges were how the feedback from the groups was given – possibly a need to do this in a way whereby EAPN gets all the info but takes much less time so that any issues raised can be progressed in the discussion.
More attention to synergy effects, real projects and combinations of activities of various member organizations.
Venue too good, we could have meetings in less luxury conditions; translation was v tiring; don’t like rooms with no windows; working method (around tables in small groups) very useful and comfortable- it made people mix with each other and facilitated discussion.
Worked this time at least- worth trying!
The language method is ok although it does not give time to reflect on things heard (the translator).
Have shorter sessions (small groups).
Important to translate into other languages other than the EU languages, not to exclude them.
No confirmation of registration (personalization of contact); Lots of discussions and little feedback to synthesize them.
This new method of interpreting allows us to formulate well, to reflect; allows a better participation between speakers; we had “TIME”; to be repeated!
Keep the form of exchange even if it takes more time; should be longer meetings maybe.
Keep the same translators and pay them more!!; there should be many more of these meetings with a well-defined subject; impose equality between PEPs and those paid by EAPN or volunteering for EAPN.
The workshops/small groups were very precious and fruitful!
The group methodology is v useful and more enriching than always working with the same people.
1