| Best Practices at a glance | Text |
| Name of the Best Practice | SEK Mitte 15 & Mein Leben im 15. |
| URL-Link | https://meinlebenim15.at/; https://www.mitte15.at/ |
| Focus Topic(s) of the Best Practice: describe, e.g. urban planning, environmental policies, social policies etc.; | urban planning, environmental policies, social policies (for everyday life support) |
| Involved Actors & Resources | |
| Governmental body: yes/no; | no, at least not directly |
| if yes, explain by filling in the name(s) of the governmental body; | |
| Other public actors: yes/no; | yes |
| if yes, explain by filling in the name(s) of the public actors and describe which sector and explain their role, briefly; | a) LOKALE AGENDA RUDOLFSHEIM-FÜNFHAUS consisting of Dialog Plus, Caritas Stadtteilarbeit und Gegenblick (commissioned by City of Vienna) b) Urban renewal office (commissioned by City of Vienna) |
| Private for-profit actors: yes/no; | no |
| if yes, explain by using types of private for-profit actors such as public engagement consultants, companies etc.; | n.a. |
| Private not-for-profit actors: yes/no; | yes |
| if yes, explain by using types of private not-for-profit actors such as associations, informal networks etc.; | a) association (Lokale Agenda) + Arbeitsgruppe (ARGE) consisting of non-for-profit and (for-profit) SME b) Arbeitsgruppe (ARGE) consisting of non-for-profit housing developer |
| Civic actors: yes/no; | yes |
| if yes, explain on the heterogeneity of the participants with respect to gender, age, educational qualification, place of residence etc. | all residents living in the 15th district / Rudolfsheim-Fünfhaus |
| Other actors: yes/no | yes |
| if yes, explain | public actors, for-profit, non-for-profit in joint alliances for small-scale neighbourhood projects |
| Funding/Financial resources for the particular best practice example: | |
| if yes, specify e.g. amount of funding/year | yes; a) 100k€/ year for the duration of 4 yrs. b) app. 1.8 mio EUR for the duration of 3 yrs. |
| and the source(s) of funding (if more sources, please specify) | a) 50% funded by the district, 50% by the Municipality. B) through MA25 |
| Type of Governance | |
| Participatory process: yes/no | yes |
| Deliberative process: yes/no | yes |
| Other forms: if yes, specify; | |
| Top-down | no |
| Bottom-up | yes |
| Others: if yes, specify; | through alliances and collaboration for small-scale projects; or, as first initiative to get started larger (municipality-run) participation and/or urban delevopment process |
| Special Features of the Best Practice which explain Practical Arrangements to Promote Inclusiveness | |
| Cost reimbursement (e.g., for public transport, compensation of working hours): if yes, describe | no |
| Provision of care services: if yes, describe | no |
| Provision of mediators (e.g., linguistic, cultural): if yes, describe/specify | yes; provided by the multi-disciplinary teams in a) and b) |
| 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)? | unknown |
| Target groups | |
| External inclusion referring to who is invited or allowed to take part from the invitation = ideal situation | everybody from the 15th district |
| Internal inclusion referring to the participation of all participants within = real situation | unknown |
| Internal exclusion referring to certain participants who are overly dominant | unknown |
| Vulnerable groups were specified in the designed plan of the best practice: yes/no | no |
| If yes: Who in particular, e.g. migrants, people in precarious work-situation etc.? Specify. | n.a. |
| If yes: Special attention towards young people, women, elderly people: yes/no. | n.a. |
| If yes, specify. | n.a. |
| Did vulnerable groups participate in the best practice: yes/no | unknown |
| If yes: Who in particular, e.g. migrants, people in precarious work-situation etc.? Specify. | unkown |
| If yes: Participation of young people, women, elderly people: yes/no. | unknown |
| If yes, specify. | n.a. |
| If yes: Did special training and empowerment activities support these groups within the participatory process? | unkown |
| Public Information Activities on the Best Practice | |
| Means of Information Provided | mostly on Website, Newsletter, Social Media |
| Information documents (e.g., flyer, brochures, invitation letters): yes/no; | sometimes for specific initiatives |
| If yes: multiple languages available: yes/no | depends |
| If yes: non-technical language used: yes/no | yes |
| Social Media (e.g., facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, websites, blog): yes/no | yes |
| If yes: please specify | https://www.facebook.com/Agenda15/ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCssFiTxq9XgZHgwbHFv7hkA https://www.instagram.com/meinlebenim15/ https://www.facebook.com/gbsternwien/?fref=ts https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7JJhYbNjMTHAK8yrbU5kdQ https://www.instagram.com/gbsternwien/ |
| Others (1-2 sentences) | n.a. |
| Way of Communication | |
| Website and social media postings: yes/no | yes |
| Information documents distributed in the post box: yes/no | unknown |
| Information documents distributed on streets and public spaces (during events): yes/no | depends |
| Press releases in “traditional” public media (e.g. linear TV, daily newspapers etc.): yes/no | yes |
| Special-target activities (e.g. through gate-openers, community workers etc.): yes/no | unknown |
| Monitoring | |
| Monitoring process on the best practice available? Yes/no | yes for a) and b); however: for internal purpose, only |
| If yes: Continuous information on monitoring results provided to the participants: yes/no | no |
| If yes: How? How often? | yearly + at the end of funding period |
| Integration of participants in the monitoring process? Yes/no | no |
| If yes: Did they have the opportunity to suggest changes to the process? Yes/no | no |
| Continuous information on monitoring results provided to network partners (public and non-public actors)? | no |
| If yes: How? How often? | no |
| Impact Assessment / Evaluation | |
| Did an impact assessment (e.g., achievements, challenges) or evaluation (standardized success measurement) take place: yes/no | unkown |
| If yes: Who evaluates? What? How? At which point of process? | unknown |
| Citizen Empowerment & Representation | |
| Structured Decision-Making | no |
| Explanation of objectives and methods, at the beginning of the process? Yes/no | no |
| Do the participants make final decisions? | unknown |
| If no: Why? Who decides instead? | alliance of municipal dep. + urban renewal office + other actors involved |
| If yes: What kinds of decisions? | unkown |
| If yes: Is there a veto right by the citizens (i.e. if they are against a specific option this is not implemented?)? yes/no | no |
| At the end of the participation process: Final document on the decisions that were taken? Yes/no | yes |
| If yes: publication of this document available? Yes/no | yes |
| If yes: publication of this document sent to participants and/or affected community? Yes/no. | no |
| Tools to Enhance Citizens’ Empowerment | |
| Clear definition and communication of mutual commitments, decision-making roles and any limits on the decisions? Yes/No | no |
| Are specific tools available to participants (e.g., regular meetings or trainings, apps)? | unknown |
| If yes: What kind of? | n.a. |
| If not: Why not? | n.a. |
| Integration of empowerment tools in multi-level-governance-system? | unknown |
| If yes: Where [in the sense of at which level in the multilevel-governance (vertical)]? | n.a. |
| If yes: For whom in particular (horizontal)? | n.a. |
| If not: Why not? What results from that (e.g., disconnection etc.) | n.a. |
| Involvement and Tasks of Participating Groups | |
| Which groups are involved at which stage of the participatory process? | unknown |
| What are the tasks of the groups? Describe for each group. | unknown |
| Which groups are underrepresented among the participants? Why? | unknown |