1 / 8

2 nd Project Transnational Meeting Valencia Ognian Drumev, ECIP Foundation (Bulgaria)

2 nd Project Transnational Meeting Valencia Ognian Drumev, ECIP Foundation (Bulgaria) 23-24 September, 2010. INTERVIEWS REALIZED. The study covered the two municipalities - Sofia and Bourgas.

penney
Download Presentation

2 nd Project Transnational Meeting Valencia Ognian Drumev, ECIP Foundation (Bulgaria)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 2nd Project Transnational Meeting Valencia Ognian Drumev, ECIP Foundation (Bulgaria) 23-24 September, 2010

  2. INTERVIEWS REALIZED • The study covered the two municipalities - Sofia and Bourgas. • Survey questionnaires were administered developed under the project.The total number of respondents was 20 people: - 11from Sofia - 9 from Burgas.Respondents are representatives of: • state institutions dealing with children - social, education and health. • NGOs - providers of social services for children.

  3. INTERVIEWS REALIZED All interviews were made before theMeeting in Valenciain July, August and September. The interviews were conducted by a team of experts under the project. They worked in the cities of Burgas and Sofia.

  4. INTERVIEWEES PROFILE • long experience in the field and those working on the problem in the past five years; • Four of the respondents were men - two policemen,one medical doctor, and one social worker. • In interviews, representatives were covered: • - Directorate of Social Assistance - 1 - Educational institutions - 2 - Hospitals - 3 - Police - 2 - Social service providers (NGOs) - 13

  5. IF THE INTERVIEWS REALIZED ARE EXHAUSTIVE • The interviews were complete. • Opinions, findings and allegations of respondents weresupported by facts and examples from their professionalpractice. • Some participants focused on difficultquestions, preferring to tell cases that met both ineveryday life and in work. • Another part preferred to answer "yes" and "no."

  6. STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS Strengths of the study Provides information base to make a comparative analysis of the phenomenon of violence against minors between the partners involved in the project Provides an opportunity for representatives of different professional communities to share opinions, observations and ideas. Allows "capture" the weaknesses in institutional arrangements for combating violence such as poor coordination between institutions, relatively low awareness of preventive measures and work with children survivors of violence.

  7. STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS • Strengths of the study (cont’d) • Allows sharing of best practices for prevention and reduction of violence in social and family environment of the child. • Existing stigma and provoke predrasadatsi related to violence against children by the respondents. • Makes it possible to assess needs for additional training of specialists with different professional profile.

  8. STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS • Weaknesses of the study • Relatively small number of the respondents, which may lead to subjectivity in interpretation of data and uncertainty in the analysis. • Limited opportunities to include clients of prevention and survivors of such violence in the interview. • Lack of an evaluation scale that measures the quantitative indicators.

More Related