Evaluation of the 2nd Phase of the D7H-5P project
Polish participants
8 Polish delegates participated in study visits to the 5 cities, as foreseen by the project. 7
Polish delegates attended the final seminar in Berlin — 3 of them belonged to the visitors’
group, 2 were involved in the first phase of the project, and 2 were new to the project. Local
Coordinator participated in 2 study visits (the first and the last one) and the final seminar.
There was 1 user among the seminar participants. All in all 12 persons took part in the 2nd
phase of the project.
The participants were either employed in the non-governmental sector (7 persons), or were
seriously involved in it on a voluntary basis (4 persons). As mentioned, there was also 1 user
involved on account of the services received in the non-governmental sector. 3 participants
held key managerial positions in their respective NGO’s. 3 participants were employed in
public social services. 1 person represented scientific community (sociologist).
2 federative NGO’s were represented — Caritas and Coalition for Mental Health. Both are
serious agents with national status: Caritas — a federation of local Caritas organizations with
broad and locally diversified range of activities; Coalition for Mental Health — an umbrella
for various groups, initiatives and organizations in the psychiatric field. There were 7
participants from Caritas and 5 from the Coalition for Mental Health. The federative nature of
both organizations ensured the presence of people from differing situations and circumstances
of work. Besides, organizational bonding is a good basis for further contact and cooperation.
The study visits
Study visits to five capitals in Western Europe provided the participants with the opportunity
of direct encounters with a selection of social and health care services providers. SMES
members in respective countries were responsible for the selection of places to visit and the
whole organisational side of the enterprise. Consequently local visit co-ordinators highlighted
what in their opinion was the most useful and interesting methods of work in countering
marginalization. In accordance with SMES mission situations of psychiatric illness and
disorders were in the forefront but there were also visits to facilities where stress was on the
homelessness, drug-addiction and other problems.
The author of this evaluation participated in two study visits (Brussels and Copenhagen). On
the basis of his experience and the feedback from 7 others visitors the following observations
were made:
1. The schedules for visits were carefully planned by the local visit coordinators (SMES
representatives). They followed a packed timetable designed to make the maximum use of
the time. On the other hand space was provided for exchanges with people visited. These
people were well prepared for the reception of visitors (sometimes even offered formal
presentations), communicative and welcoming.
2. The selection of the facilities as far as the contents of their work was concerned was very
good indeed. Naturally not all expectations and interests of particular visitors could be
satisfied, but the organisers did an excellent job in presenting an assortment of places,
problems, methods of work that were representative of the best practices, diversified
(problems addressed, public vs. non-public) and relevant for the visitors. The members of
the Polish team were unanimous in stressing how enriched they felt  on both professional
and human plane  by the encounters.
3. The encounters provided by the study visits happened on several levels:
a. These were encounters with different social reality both as far social problems and the
structures of assistance were concerned. One basic aspect of the difference in question
was the fact that it was a reality more advanced than that in which they lived and
worked. In a way  and to an extent  they were given "a glimpse into their own social
future”  both as far as the problems and attempted solutions were concerned.
b. The were made aware that some solutions they only heard of or envisaged are actually
possible and working. Such awareness is a meaningful boost for motivation and
efficacy in work.
c. They made contact and acquaintance with concrete people and organisations opening
the way for future co-operation, partnership and support.
d. They came in contact with different ways of thinking, different philosophies and
approaches which prompted them to distance themselves from and question their own
attitudes. The distancing and questioning happened on different levels — beginning
with the work methods and reaching up to a very general one, like the view of the
other human person as such.
General country background after 1 year since the project's start
The general country background has changed little in the course of the last year. There was
more economic growth which however had little effect on unemployment statistics. The
official rate stands at almost 18%. It is a strong marginalizing factor affecting with special
force the smaller towns and rural regions. The “income scissors” continue to move apart.
Alcohol related problems furthermore affect significant segments of population constituting a
strong marginalizing factor. There is a constant pressure on the part of industry and trade
entities to dismantle and undermine the legal and organizational provisions introduced in the
1990-ties to counter the alcohol related problems.
The size of the homeless population is difficult to measure. Likewise no new hard figures can
be produced on mentally ill persons. Yet judging by the overall weakness of the public health
system as far specialist services are concerned where additionally the psychiatric field can be
said to be one of the weakest elements, no significant change occurred. The psychiatric
treatment continues generally to be difficult to obtain and very conservative in nature
(sedative drugs and hospitalization). Little is done in prevention field, community-based
services are scarce. The picture is not altogether black. There is movement both in the
governmental and non-governmental sector. For one thing there is a legal possibility
combined with budget line to create the Self-help Community Centers for mentally ill
persons. This opportunity is taken advantage of by some district (powiat) public welfare
centers as well as by some NGO’s. Such centers are however quite rare compared to the real
needs, their locations limited to the bigger towns. Secondly, there are attempts at professional
activation of people with psychic problems based on the law on social employment (training,
clubs, meetings tentative workplaces, social cooperatives). Such initiatives are in the initial
phase and mostly limited to the NGO sector.
Important observations made in the course of the visits
Brussels (visitors: A. Czarnocki, A. Kuczynska)
- Precisely defined fields of activity of NGO’s and public institutions. Example: a
scheme at night shelter of DHD according to which homeless people are “distributed”
among different kinds of shelters throughout Brussels;
- Higher levels of cooperation between various organizations (see example above);
- Significant public involvement on behalf of very specific groups of users, like juvenile
psychotic criminals (Centre Hospitalier Jean Titeca) or drug-addicted mothers (St.
Pierre Hospital);
- Public support for organization dealing with illegal immigrants (willingness on the
part of authorities to de facto recognize “the unrecognizable” by addressing the
problem in a non-repressive manner);
- Places like Poverello or La Fontaine offering besides some services a space for mutual
contact and support as well as opportunity to take care of oneself;
Rome (visitors: D. Mlynarczyk, E.Mochocka)
-
-
-
Integrated and monitored network of social agents cooperating to provide a “complete
service” without inefficiencies caused by doubled effort or lack of information;
Recognition and acceptance of actual external and internal conditioning of a person in
need, his/her freedom of choice, personal autonomy; assisting people as opposed to
“servicing” them;
Flexible adjustment to the specific health care needs of immigrants by Medecins sans
Frontiers: excellent information-communication network, using “cultural mediators”
in contact with the clients;
Caritas offer of basic and specialist health care for immigrants with no access to
public healthcare system;
Excellent cooperation between public, non-governmental and private agents in the
social field;
Successful deinstitutionalization of psychiatric care resulting in community-based
opportunities for healthcare, leisure and employment.
Paris (visitors: M. Medrek, A. Makowska)
-
advocacy on behalf of human rights of the users;
social workers’ levels of commitment and high number of volunteers
Madrid (visitors: A.Dabrowska, R. Cichon)
-
excellent coordination of emergency services at Samur Social
outreach work in the field of psychiatric care of the homeless
Copenhagen (visitor: A. Czarnocki)
-
treating a “problem person” as a real partner, trying to connect to them whatever their
actual situation (example: the Hottellet employing active drug users);
the position of a “bridge-builder” within a local government (eg. Ballerup)
maintaining a link to the most marginalized in order to involve them with the
mainstream society (“shelter for beer drinkers” in Ballerup as an example of a
seemingly successful empowerment initiative by the Ballerup bridge-building team);
What is and what is not so easily transferable to our countries
No particular activity seems to be of itself untransferable, while the attempt to introduce any
of them would encounter some problems. The general underlying reason is a certain cultural
and mental disparity between East and West. The participants were shown in the Western
countries probably the best (not the typical) practices  a result of a long unhampered
development of both the social reality and ways of facing it. These solutions are embedded in
the social and institutional structures that have had a time to grow and became interdependent.
They are also a produce of mentality and consciousness that enjoyed long periods of relative
stability and freedom. In Eastern countries the political, social and mental development has
undergone immense upheavals and dramatic pressures, not only in the Communist era but all
the way through the XIX and XX century. Democratic structures of the state and its
institutions, as well as of the civil society both have short traditions. Consequently mutual
partnership between public and non-public entities also has a very short history. In many
circles a mentality prevails that is not very conducive for the growth of efficient structures of
social action. This is a mentality characterised by the cleavage between individual and public,
as well as between individual and social spheres. Mistrust of authorities, reluctance to go out
and be active in the social sphere, withdrawal to the familial realm  such individual attitudes
do not contribute to the growth of the network of social assistance. This is now changing and
there are many examples of both courageous civil initiatives and fruitful publicnon-public
cooperation but it makes any transfer of social know-how slower. In many instances such
transfer is bound to be simultaneously a struggle against mental patterns.
Seen from another angle, this is however an additional reason to try and the only way
forward for our society. This is also the hope that accompanied Poland’s accession to EU 
to find ourselves in a broader context of greater social awareness, conducive and helpful for
the positive changes in the mental and social landscape of the country. This hope is still alive,
nourished by mutual contacts in the government and non-government sectors, as well as by
financing of social projects. It must be said however that it is suffering also some setbacks
owing to the troublesome procedures in acquiring European funds for social projects. Many
worthy initiatives have little chance in overcoming bureaucratic barriers set up by Brussels
and even more so by our native government agencies in charge of funds distribution.
The most practical way to proceed seems to be to start small projects in partnership
with Western public or non-public counterparts, who are actually doing it in their
respective locations. Involvement of an experienced Western partner has many advantages. It
lends credibility to the project strengthening both self-confidence of a local (basically nongovernmental) agent and its position in negotiations with public authorities who decide about
project’s financing. SMES study visits and seminars provided many opportunities to contact
organisations on interesting ways of dealing with social problems, especially as outreach (the
homeless) and community based assistance (mental health) are concerned. They should be
made use of. Otherwise the whole D&H – 5P experience will evaporate leaving behind little
more than good memories.
How to: improve the public-NGO partnership and co-working, promote the SMES
network and mental health issues
I believe the best way to improve anything is to start projects addressing real human need.
Then in course of the work contacts and exchanges arise, people get convinced not by words
but by facts, they combine with and inspire each other. So what I would propose is not any PR
campaign or general discussion (without denying the merits of it) but getting together and
starting something new. The ideal line of development would, in my opinion, be that:
Drawing on the contacts and experiences of SMES seminars a Polish NGO in co-operation
with its Western “model” counterpart defines a concrete, innovative project on behalf of
mentally ill, tailored to the Polish conditions, and makes an application for funding to the
local government and/or agency for European funds. If the project gathers momentum and
proves a success it will be:
-
imitated by others;
provide a set of topics for media coverage;
provide a platform for co-operation with public authorities first on local, then perhaps
even central level as they are interested in getting social problems solved.
If additionally a general SMES context is provided offering personal exchanges with SMES
and „SMES-like” people from around Europe (mini conferences, study visits etc.) a natural
promotion of the SMES network will be achieved as a by-product. The most important and
perhaps the only meaningful thing that we can do for this network is to show it at work,
creating new reality for the mentally ill and marginalized. No amount of talking will be nearly
as convincing.
The same applies to the promotion of mental health issues. If we can get media interested in
the actual project, problems and people involved, it will present us with the opportunity to
speak through them on more general issues.
The possibilities for further work in Poland
It seems  on the basis of contacts established in the course of the D&H-5P project, both
within and outside Poland  that a scenario drafted above can be attempted. On the Polish part
there is a stated interest from 3 Caritas regional organisations (Warsaw, Kielce, Sandomierz)
at least to explore seriously the possibilities of starting a project on behalf of mentally ill or
otherwise marginalized persons. The highlights are: the community care for the psychiatric
persons and reintegration of the marginalized persons into the job market. Vice-director of
Warsaw Caritas would like to visit in February a “PsyCoT” project in Brussels (coordination
of help for the outdoor psychiatric patients) with an intent to prepare a related proposal for
local governmental funding in Warsaw. Director of Caritas Kielce is seriously interested in
projects featuring reintegration of the marginalized persons into the job market. There is
interest of a more general nature from Caritas Sandomierz, which has not participated in
D&H-5P activities, and we have an open door to the Coalition for Mental Health and
particularly to the Fountain Houses in Warsaw and Kielce. On the Western part particularly
Berlin with its abundance of opportunities for community based care of psychiatric patients
(Prowo E.V., Die Reha, Weglaufhaus Villa Stoeckle, Unionhilfswerk) seems of interest, all
the more so that they expressed interest in cooperation with Polish partners.
There are, I’m sure, more possible paths of mutual cooperation to explore on the basis of the
D&H-5P experience. I have named those that seemed most promising to me considered the
interest and readiness on both sides. It is also my opinion, that at least in the initial phase a
coordinator/translator for any future working contacts would be of use. Having been a Local
Coordinator for the D&H-5P project for the last two years, I feel obliged and willing to serve
in this capacity.
Andrzej Czarnocki, 24.12.2005
The list of the Polish participants of the 2nd Phase of D&H-5 P project
Study visit
Brussels
18-23.1.2005
Rome
9-12.2.2005
Paris
15-20.3.2005
Madrid
20-24.4.2005
Copenhagen
24-29.5.2005
Participant
Andrzej Czarnocki
Contact
aczarnocki@caritas.pl
Field of activity
Local Coordinator
Anna Kuczynska, Warsaw
Public welfare social worker
Coalition for Mental Health
Danuta Mlynarczyk,Kielce
Public welfare social worker
Coalition for Mental Health
Ewa Mochocka, Kielce
Public welfare social worker
Coalition for Mental Health
Małgorzata Medrek
Caritas Wroclaw
Aneta Makowska
Caritas Elk
Anna Dabrowska
Caritas Wroclaw
Renata Cichon
Caritas Kielce
Andrzej Czarnocki
akuczynska@vp.pl
Psychiatric patients
d.mlynarczyk@mopr.kielce.pl Psychiatric patients
communikty care;
reinetgration
ewa.mochocka@op.pl
See above
mmedrek@op.pl
dzikielewska@yahoo.fr
andabrowska@hotmail.com
renia_c@poczta.onet.pl
See above
Activtion of the
homeless
Activation of the
marginalized
Psychiatric patients
Community care
Youth on the job
market
See above
Berlin
6-9.10.2005
Andrzej Czarnocki
See above
Barbara Czarnocka
Renata Cichon
Stanisław Słowik
Caritas Kielce
Anna Kuczynska
Joanna Kowalik
Coalition for Mental Health
Barbara Kiercz
warszawa@caritas.pl
See above
kielce@caritas.pl
See above
algiz@neostrada.pl
See above
Vice-director of
Warsaw Caritas
See above
Director of Kielce
Caritas
See above
Sociologist Kielce
Fountain House
User of the Kielce
Fountain House