Best Practices for Roma Integration Small Grants Programme Summary of the Implementation of Selected Projects

Best Practices for Roma IntegrationSmall Grants Programme 1 Small Grants Programme Summary of the Implementation of Selected Projects Funded by the EU Implemented by ODIHR This booklet was produced by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights as part of the Best Practices for Roma Integration Project (BPRI), with financial support from the European Union. Published by the OSCE’s Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Miodowa 10 00-557 Warsaw Poland www.osce.org/odihr Designed by Nona Reuter Printed by A R T G R A F I K A Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Project Details 8 Albania 8 Bosnia and Herzegovina 13 The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 17 Montenegro 20 3. Kosovo* Project Details 24 Kosovo 24 4. Conclusion 28 * This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/99 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence. Best Practices for Roma Integration Small Grants Programme Summary of the Implementation of Selected Projects December 2013 I. Introduction In 2011, ODIHR was awarded European Union (EU) funding for a regional project in the West- ern Balkans to strengthen the capacity of Background national and local governments and Roma civil As mandated by the 2003 Action Plan on society to promote social inclusion for Roma Improving the Situation of Roma and Sinti and combat the discrimination they face. The within the OSCE Area, the Organization’s Office regional project “Best Practices for Roma Inte- for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights gration” (BPRI) commenced on 1 January 2012, (ODIHR) works to address the situation of Roma and will continue for 27 months. and related groups in crisis and post-crisis sit- As a regional project in the Western Bal- uations. This is particularly true in the Western kans, BPRI aims to contribute to the integration Balkans region, which was affected by ethnic of Roma in the countries of the region, reflect- tension and conflict in the 1990s, and where ing commitments they have made as OSCE the members of Roma, Ashkali and Egyptian participating States and with a view to possi- communities, as displaced persons, still face bly joining the EU. This project is funded by the the challenges of reintegration. Many govern- European Union (90 per cent) and OSCE partic- ments in the region have developed Roma ipating States (10 per cent), and also works in integration strategies and action plans, but Kosovo. their implementation at the local level is a long- The EU’s Enlargement Directorate Gen- term process. The anticipated impact of these eral held a number of high-level conferences plans on the situation of the Roma people in on Roma involving all the governments in the the areas of education, employment, hous- region, and these produced a series of conclu- ing and access to services remains incomplete. sions and commitments. If Roma are to truly Governments in the Western Balkans have fre- benefit from these, governments will need to quently expressed their willingness to enhance increase their efforts and find innovative solu- efforts in the implementation of action plans tions. Civil society organizations, and especially to ensure that Roma are truly benefitting. The Roma NGOs, will need to continue advocating international community can play a key role in for reforms, proposing more inclusive solutions supporting governments, centrally and locally, and raising awareness about the status of the in this endeavour. Roma minority. Small Grants Programme 5 The BPRI project is supporting this process by Purpose and structure of the report promoting innovative programmes and facili- This report was commissioned within the tating co-operation between local and national framework of the project “Best Practices for governments, independent institutions and Roma Integration”. Large amounts of funding civil society. have been allocated in the past by the EU to projects targeting the Roma, but many Roma Objective of the Small Grants communities report little or no change in the Programme situation on the ground. Thus, it was import- The main objective of the small grants pro- ant to highight the positive changes brought gramme was to improve the quality of life and by the small grants programme and the multi- access to rights of the Roma communities in the plier effect it might have in generating further Western Balkans. The programme, throughout interest from the local self-governments or its implementation, paid particular attention donors. Despite the direct impact of small to the social inclusion of the Roma, Ashkali and grant projects at the local level, this type of Egyptian communities, while looking closely at sub-contracting is currently limited under Euro- gender, age, and urban/rural divisions. pean Commission rules and the regulations for The small grants programme aimed to sup- Instrument for Pre-Accession-funded projects. port small-scale projects at the municipal level that were put forward by local self-govern- Methodology ments in co-operation with Roma, Ashkali and In order for BPRI to enhance the accountabil- Egyptian NGOs. Each municipality or commune ity and transparency of the administration of in the region was eligible to receive grants of its small grants programme, a participatory 5,000 euros per project, with total project fund- evaluation methodology was used to provide ing of 100,000 euros available region-wide. information on the usefulness and efficacy of The small grants were meant to help local the programme. It was important for the stake- areas to meet their specific challenges. Rep- holders to share their concerns about the grants resentatives of Roma Ashkali and Egyptians they received and project implementation. communities said they felt that the small grant The specifics of the participatory evaluation projects allowed them to tackle a range of local methodology included a small grant selection issues, including the lack of appropriate infra- committee, consisting of government officials structure, social isolation, a lack of services for and BPRI and local OSCE field operation staff, the elderly, inclusion of young people and chil- followed by monitoring visits by BPRI National dren into the education system, and health Project Officers and the monitoring team, who care-related concerns. In these local develop- conducted interviews with direct beneficiaries. ment projects, communities were consulted on In September 2013, Ambassador Janez Lena- priority needs in their settlements and munici- rčič, Director of ODIHR, paid a monitoring palities. Local action plans were also taken into visit to the municipality of Gračanica/Graçan- consideration. In most cases, small-scale infra- icë, in central Kosovo, to meet with municipal structure projects were undertaken, such as the and Roma community representatives and dis- reconstruction of roads, the digging of wells cuss efforts to promote Roma integration and or repairs to schools, as well as educational improve access to public services. During the programmes. visit to the Brnješ/Bërnjesh settlement, Lenarčič also met with Roma families benefiting from a new wastewater collector built in the settlement with a small grant from the BPRI project. 6 Small Grants Programme Grant Selection Process reviewing and deciding on funding for the projects, the small grant commissions used the Municipal/Commune1 Selection following criteria: During the mapping of Roma integration by 4 How relevant is the proposal to the objec- local self-governments conducted from March tives and priorities of the BPRI project? to May 2012, five to eight local municipalities in 4 How relevant is the proposal to the cur- each jurisdiction were selected to participate rent or draft local Action Plans for Housing in the grants programme. The programme was of Roma, or to the National Action Plan for limited to local self-governments in Albania, Housing of Roma? Bosnia and Herzegovina, the former Yugoslav 4 How relevant to the particular needs and Republic of Macedonia and Montenegro. It was constraints of the target community is the also implemented in Kosovo. Small grants were proposal (including synergy with other simi- not awarded in Croatia and Serbia, as alterna- lar initiatives and avoidance of duplication)? tive grant resources exist in those countries 4 How clearly defined and strategically cho- and the amount available was comparatively sen are the target beneficiaries? Have their small. The call for proposals was opened for needs been clearly defined and does the 5,000 euro grants for each municipality, with a proposal address them appropriately? requirement that the municipalities contribute 4 Does the proposal contain specific add- 10 per cent of the total budget. ed-value elements, such as promotion of gender equality and equal opportunities, Submission of the Project Proposal meeting the needs of disabled people or In developing project proposals, most munici- identifying good practices? palities established local project review boards 4 How coherent is the overall design of the as a co-ordination mechanism for identifying project? In particular, does it reflect the anal- and prioritizing eligible grant projects. Roma ysis of the problems involved and take into NGOs were involved as members of the boards. account external factors and the relevant The aim of the boards was to enhance local stakeholders? ownership and community support. 4 Is the project feasible and consistent in rela- All the municipalities provided project tion

Load more