EU-funded Roma programmes: Lessons from Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic

This report was commissioned by MRG in partnership with with four Roma NGOs: IQ Roma Servis, European Union Association for Roma Youth, Project Schola and the Wide Open School Foundation. We were aware that large amounts of funding had been allocated by the EU to projects targetting the Roma in accession states and at the same time we were aware that many Roma communities report little or no changes on the ground. Given that the accession process continues and that more funding will be allocated to Roma in the newly acceding states, we felt that it was important to independently research the impact of these programmes. Had positive impacts occurred but not reached all the Roma? Had changes begun but still needed more time to fully work through? Or were the funds, although seemingly large, still too small to really tackle the problem? Had the programmes failed? Or had they had temporary success but this was not sustained? We felt that lessons from this process could be used by Roma communities to lobby for new and different programmes in future. This report examines three Roma-oriented projects in the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia funded by the European Union's Phare programme between 1999 and 2003. The study employed methods of participatory evaluation to identify the experience of Roma beneficiaries and other stakeholders in the projects, and makes recommendations for improving the effectiveness and efficiency of future EU-funded initiatives aimed at improving the lives of Roma people in the Central and Eastern European region. The lessons learnt are relevant to a new wave of accession states with significant Roma populations as well as to other poor and excluded groups in such countries. The report is intended to be of use to the whole range of those involved in future initiatives to bring about the social inclusion of Roma communities, including politicians, policy makers, opinion formers, activists, NGOs, researchers at international, national and more local levels, particularly Roma themselves. In this spirit the evaluations were carried out in partnership with local Roma NGOs where the projects took place. There is one facet of this report which we feel could have been more developed; that of gender and the particular difficulties faced by Roma women. One of the three country sections has more mention of this, but otherwise the report is largely silent on gender. This is partly as a result of the participatory …