The project Tenants SOS aims to address the challenges faced by tenants in Slovenia. It recognizes the difficulties tenants encounter in the rental market, such as high costs, inadequate housing, and limited awareness of tenant rights. The project provides a comprehensive platform offering solutions to common rental issues and questions, compiled with the help of experts. Additionally, it advocates for systemic changes in the housing sector, emphasizing the need for a new housing system that prioritizes providing suitable homes over profit-making. The project serves as a support system for tenants, empowering them with information, resources, and advocacy for a fairer and more equitable rental environment.
©tbc
https://www.facebook.com/NajemniskiSOS
Involved Actors & Resources
| Governmental body: | No |
| Other public actors: | No |
| Private for-profit actors: | No |
| Private not-for-profit actors: | No |
| Civic actors: | Yes |
| . | |
| Institute for Housing and Spatial Studies, Today is a new day association. | Other actors: | If yes, explain
| Funding/Financial resources for the particular best practice example: | Active citizens fund Iceland, Lichtenstein, Norway |
| If yes, specify e.g. amount of funding/year | / |
Type of Governance
| Deliberative |
| , bottom-up participatory process |
Specific Features on the Practical Arrangements to Promote Inclusiveness
| Cost reimbursement (e.g., for public transport, compensation of working hours): |
| No | |
| Provision of care services: |
| No | |
| Provision of mediators (e.g., linguistic, cultural): if yes, describe/specify | No |
| Frequency of activities within the best practice: How often and for how long did participants involve in best practice (e.g., in general friendly towards employed people or people with care responsibilities)? | 2023: From 14 days to monthly. Depends on activities. |
Target Groups
| External inclusion referring to who is invited or allowed to take part from the invitation | |
| (in an ideal situation) | Tenants in Ljubljana | Internal inclusion referring to the participation of all participants within = real situation | Internal exclusion referring to certain participants who are overly dominant
| Vulnerable groups were specified in the designed plan of the best practice: | No | If yes: Who in particular, e.g. migrants, people in precarious work-situation etc.? Specify. | If yes: People
| Special attention towards young people, women, elderly people: | If yes, specify. |
| Yes, people with limited possibilities to find affordable accommodation in Ljubljana | |
| Did vulnerable groups participate in the best practice: | Yes, migrants, young professionals, tenants. |
| If yes: Who in particular, e.g. migrants, people in precarious work-situation etc.? Specify. | Migrants, young professionals, tenants |
| If yes: Participation of young people, women, elderly people: | Yes | If yes, specify. | Young
| , young people, women, migrants | |
| Did special training and empowerment activities support these groups within the participatory process? | No |
Public Information Activities
Means of Information provided: Multiple
| Information documents (e.g., flyer, brochures, invitation letters): |
| Yes |
| Multiple languages available: | No |
| Non-technical language used: | Yes |
| Social Media |
| : |
| Facebook, Instagram |
Ways of Communication
| Website and social media postings: | Yes |
| Information documents distributed in the post box: |
| Yes | |
| Information documents distributed on streets and public spaces (during events): | Yes |
| Press releases in “traditional” public media (e.g. linear TV, daily newspapers etc.): | No |
| Special-target activities (e.g. through gate-openers, community workers etc.): | Yes |
Monitoring
| Monitoring process on the best practice available? | Yes |
| Is there continuous information on monitoring results provided to the participants: | Yes |
| , yearly. |
| Integration of participants in the monitoring process? | Yes |
| Did they have the opportunity to suggest changes to the process? | Yes |
| Is there continuous information on monitoring results provided to network partners (public and non-public actors)? | Yes |
| If yes: How? How often? | Once every 6 months |
Impact Assessment and/or Evaluation
| Did an impact assessment (e.g., achievements, challenges) or evaluation (standardized success measurement) take place: | Yes |
| , Internal evaluation. |
Citizen Empowerment & Representation
Monitoring
| Explanation of objectives and methods, at the beginning of the process? | Yes |
| Do the participants make final decisions? | Yes |
| What kinds of decisions? | Selected ones. |
| Is there a veto right by the citizens (i.e. if they are against a specific option this is not implemented |
| )? | Its an assembly. No veto. |
| At the end of the participation process: Final document on the decisions that were taken? | Yes |
| Is there a publication of this document available? | Yes |
| Is the publication of this document sent to participants and/or affected community? | Yes |
Tools to Enhance Citizens’ Empowerment
| Clear definition and communication of mutual commitments, decision-making roles and any limits on the decisions? | Yes |
| Are specific tools available to participants (e.g., regular meetings or training, apps)? | Yes |
| , Meetings, assemblies |
| . |
Integration of empowerment tools in multi-level-governance-system
?Yes| If yes: Where [in the sense of at which level in the multilevel-governance (vertical)]? | Local level |
| If yes: For whom in particular (horizontal)? | Tenants |
Involvement and Tasks of Participating Groups
| Involvement and Tasks of Participating Groups |
| Which groups are involved at which stage of the participatory process? | Architects, urbanists, tenants (Horizontal non-hierarchically) |
| What are the tasks of the groups? Describe for each group. | Planning, researching, informing, lobbying, |
| Which groups are underrepresented among the participants? Why? |