L4D Learning for Democracy

"

TABLE OF CONTENTS
0. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 4
0.1. Research methodology ..................................................................................................... 4
0.2. Main findings ................................................................................................................... 4
0.3. Policy recommendations .................................................................................................. 5
1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 6
1.1.IPTS research on ICT for Inclusion and the MIREIA Project ........................................................ 6
1.2. Objectives of the Study .......................................................................................................... 6
1.3 .Structure of the Report .......................................................................................................... 7
1.4 Methodological approach ..................................................................................................... 8
1.5.Methodological challenges ................................................................................................... 10
2. CONTEXT OF THE LOCALITY ....................................................................................................... 13
2.1. Socio-Economic Landscape ..................................................................................................... 13
2.1.1. Brief introduction to mapping locality. ................................................................................. 13
2.1.2. Demographic composition of the locality ............................................................................. 14
2.1.3. Economic landscape of the locality ....................................................................................... 15
2.2. Digital Inclusion Policy, Strategy and Projects .......................................................................... 16
2.2.1 Digital inclusion policies and strategies ................................................................................. 16
2.2.2 Digital inclusion projects and activities .................................................................................. 17
2.3. Implications of the context in the composition of the typology e-Inclusion Intermediaries 19
3. MAPPING OF E-INCLUSION INTERMEDIARIES ............................................................................. 21
3.1. The landscape of eInclusion intermediaries in Zemgale region. ........................................ 21
3.1.1.Government institutions ...................................................................................................... 21
3.1.2.Third sector (NGO) organizations ......................................................................................... 24
3.1.3.Private organizations ..............................................................................................................25
3.2. Target groups of eInclusion intermediaries ..................................................................... 26
3.3. Organizational Structure ................................................................................................. 28
3.4. Main activities and outcomes ......................................................................................... 32
3.5. Complementary/Alternative classification of eInclusion intermediaries ........................... 36
3.5.1. E – Inclusion Intermediaries as public ICT and internet access points ................................... 36
3.5.2. E – Inclusion Intermediaries as e-Skills training centres .........................................................36
3.5.3. E–Inclusion Intermediaries as social advisers and consultants .............................................. 37
3.5.4. E-Inclusion intermediaries as awareness raisers and informators ......................................... 38
3.6. Impact Assessment Methods .......................................................................................... 39
4. POLICY IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MIREIA ............................................... 41
Annex 1 Common typologies for Analysis of Locality Mapping ........................................................44

LIST of Tables
Table 1. General population and survey sample- organizations by aggregated category 9
Table 2. Practices of recording outcomes per organization profile 11
Table 3. Basic statistics for mapping territory 14
Table 4. Resident population by statistical regions in Latvia. (Source CSB Latvia) 14
Table 5. Population distribution by age groups in Zemgale region (percentage). 15
Table 6. Population by labour status and regions. ( Source CSB Latvia ) . 15
Table 7. Access to a computer/internet by households of various types at the beginning of the year (Source: CSB Latvia) . 19
Table 8. Use of computers, internet and websites in enterprises with the number of employees 10 and more ( % from all in the group ). Source : CSB Latvia. 19
Table 9. Typology of eInclusion intermediaries by Organizational type ( aggregated ) 21
Table 10. Government organizations in general sample - disaggregated categories 21
Table 11. Target audiences for e-Inclusion intermediaries in Zemgale 26
Table 12. Correlation between organizations profile and target groups 27
Table 13. Organizational landscape of eInclusion intermediaries 28
Table 14. Number of paid staff 29
Table 15. Sources of financing 29
Table 16. Organisations yearly budget 30
Table 17. Summary of Cross relations between organization type, their outcomes and activities. (Based on common typologies presented in Annex 1) 33
Table 18. ICT training activities provided by organizations 36
Table 19. Correlations between organizations profile and trainings provided 37
Table 20. . Correlations between organizations profile and offered social advice on e-services 37
Table 21 Correlation between organizations profile and awareness rising activities 38
Table 22. Percentage of organizations collecting user’s data per indicator 39
Table 23. Percentage of organizations providing impact measurement (per category and intensity) 39
Table 24. Main barriers for impact measurement 40

LIST of Figures
Figure 1. Administrative regions in Latvia ............................................................................... 13
Figure 2 Network of Latvia@world training centres ................................................................ 18
Figure 3. Percentage of organizations providing different training activities ......................... 33
Figure 4. Percentage of organizations providing ICT access services ..................................... 34
Figure 5 Main purposes for impact measurement .................................................................. 40

0. Executive summary
0.1. Research methodology
A database of 160 organizations was created to list eInclusion intermediaries in Zemgale region. Several channels of information were exploited to create this mapping: web research, information from national agencies and networks, meetings with local municipalities. All of the organizations included in data base demonstrated an evidence to provide some form of ICT or e-Skills related services to communities: ICT access, ICT trainings and consultations, awareness rising about role of ICT and e-Skills.
An electronic survey form was developed for in-depth analysis of the eInclusion intermediaries and distributed by e-mails. The survey included 3 main blocks of information: the organizational structure and operational model of organization, ICT and e-Skills services provided by organization, impact and outcomes measurement policy and practice within the organization.
Answers were collected from 55 organizations which resulted in the response rate of 34%. Survey responses were electronically coded and data analysis performed on the basis of respondents answers.
0.2. Main findings
Zemgale rural region faces a number of socio-economic challenges, the most important among them are: comparatively high level of unemployment as a result of world-wide economic crisis; economic migration of citizens, especially young people from region to larger cities or abroad; comparatively low level of business activity based on the historical agriculture character of the region.
A great deal of attention has been paid to digital inclusion issues in the region over the last 10 years. State policies of digital inclusion and e-Skills development have been supported by local authorities, as well as by nationwide ICT associations and projects partnering with local organizations in the region. As a result the region is characterized by comparatively high level of e-Skills knowledge among the citizens, as well as by a relevant number of eInclusion intermediaries providing ICT access, training and consultation services.
The ultimate majority of the eInclusion intermediaries in the territory represent public sector, mostly libraries and schools.
There are 68 public libraries and additional 25 school libraries in the territory with 100 686 inhabitants. The libraries actually play the role of telecentres here offering a list of common digital inclusion services –public ICT Access, ICT training and consultations.
Formal education establishments make the second largest group of public sector eInclusion intermediaries, providing different digital inclusion services for 3 different target groups: students, teachers and wider community.
Municipal LLL Centres, although small in number, provide the widest range of e-Skills training activities as well as support and capacity building for other organizations in the area.
Third sector organizations or NGO’s are active to promote e-Skills and advocate the use of e-services and ICT tools within their communities and for their target groups. Due to very low budgets and
small or non-staff, NGO’s cooperate with other organizations – libraries, schools, LLL centres for actual provision of services.
Private organizations in the region are a relatively small group of eInclusion intermediaries and mostly involved in ICT training activities.
The major source of funding for organizations in area is municipal/state funding, followed by EU funds and self-generated income from services.
The major target groups are young adults, children and adults in general, including seniors.
The general policy in the region and implemented by eInclusion intermediaries is not only to support disadvantaged groups (unemployed, disabled, low income people etc. ) but to empower all community members by digital skills and e-services.
The activities and outcomes of organizations are provided in all 4 areas of common typology: Skilling, networking capabilities, empowerment and job placement capabilities, different types of organizations are more involved in one or another type of activities.
Organizations have some in-house practice of measuring their activities and outputs, but in most cases this is just a number of users of ICT access or number of people involved/graduated from different ICT related trainings. More advanced methodologies of output measurement are performed by libraries as well as by LLL centres and private training companies.
0.3. Policy recommendations
At the moment there are no indicators or methodology allowing summarizing or comparing outputs of different eInclusion intermediaries. Many organizations claim that impact evaluation is not performed because of non-existence of such methodology or set of indicators.
The importance of demonstration of eInclusion intermediary’s activities outputs and wider impact is well understood by eInclusion actors as well as by local municipalities; however development of a practically applicable measurement framework is required.
There is a principal possibility to build a framework which will be reliable not only to regions specific landscape, not just for separate country, but for EU27. This framework should be modular and include common typology of organizations, target groups and activities. Different organizations will be able to count and demonstrate the outputs and activities which are relevant to their profile and targets.
A particular attention should be paid to precise measurement scales development for different activities and outputs – like skilling, networking and empowerment. It has to be understood that the grassroots organizations in different countries use different terminology, reporting systems and measurement of their activities. To achieve good results the measurement framework should include detailed explanations and examples.
Introducing impact measurement framework will allow demonstrating the impact of digital inclusion activities and actors and evaluating the correlation between digital inclusion and social inclusion in specific regions and in Europe."