1. Landscape of social innovation in Poland Brussels, May 2014

2. EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT

3. Support for social innovation Social innovation is not a crucial issue in a public debate Interest on political and private level rather limited to some individual initiatives Some increase of interest in the recent months observed but in the area of technological innovations and cooperation between science and business European Social Fund not visible enough in the debate In consequence: No systemic and coordinated approach Lack of supporting infrastructure (hubs, incubators)

4. Actors involved in social innovation 1. No institutions appointed exclusively to support social innovation (social innovation as one of their different tasks) 2. Activity through individual initiatives – rather new, scattered and limited PUBLIC SECTOR: - The National Centre for Research and Development (call for proposal for innovative technical solutions allowing for solving social problems) PRIVATE SECTOR: - Project of PwC Poland, Ministry of Economy and Responsible Business Forum (encourage enterprises to use social innovation in the business activity) - Pomeranian Science and Technology Park in Pomorskie region (different initiatives) - Cooperation of NGOs and municipal authorities (Lodz - Social Innovation Fund) - The Unit for Social Innovation and Research – Shipyard (different initiatives) - Ashoka Poland (individual social innovators) - Individual researchers NETWORKS, PLATFORMS - No such initiatives as formal structures

5. PROGRAMME VIEW ON SOCIAL INNOVATION 2007-2013

6. Definition of social innovation within ESF Main assumptions: As broad as possible in order not to exclude any idea at the stage of application – the assessment of innovation during selection process Definition as a general hint for project promoters & experts assessing the project DEFINITION: New, more effective solutions of the problems identified in the area of ESF intervention 3 dimensions of social innovation possible: 1.New target groups not supported before / supported differently 2.New problems not included enough in the policy of the state 3.New instruments in solving current problems Not a revolution and looking for a new wheel – adaptation of different solutions accepted Social innovation within ESF needs testing at smaller scale before implementation at larger scale

7. Social innovation within the ESF OP 2007-2013 HORIZONTAL APPROACH – innovative projects implemented: In all ESF areas of intervention In all priorities of the operational programme (OP) On national and regional level By large number of different institutions (more than 40) Within the themes updated twice during the programming period MAIN FEATURES OF IMPLEMENTATION: Based on EQUAL experience 3 main stages of project implementation: 1. Additional diagnosis + working the draft version of the instrument (max 8 months) → strategy of project implementation 2. Testing → external evaluation + validation 3. Mainstreaming The same selection procedure as for standard projects with 2 additional moments of assessment: 1) strategy of project implementation, 2) validation of the solution worked out The involvement of the thematic networks in the additional assessment and support of mainstreaming 1 grant agreement with possibility to dissolve it if the strategy was not accepted or the product was not validated Mandatory external evaluation of the solution worked out after the testing phase More than 360 projects implemented in different areas (50+, 25-, social economy, early intervention, people with disabilities, vocational education)

8. CHANGES IN 2014-2020

9. What do we want to do differently? Social innovation within ESF 2014-2020 Dedicated approach → one priority axis within the OP More coordination → implementation only on national level 3 objectives: 1.Increasing the number of social innovations 2.Enhancing the use of social innovations in practice 3.Creating the system of social innovation incubation

10. 2 schemes of implementation Focus on incubation of new ideas Small changes, more owners of the problems or difficult to be defined, need for cooperation Two-stages in the selection process: 1) selection of the operators by the MA / IB, 2) selection of grants by the operator Smaller scale The provisions of the implementation similar to those used within EQUAL and the current programming period (2007-2013) Focus on policy innovations, social experimentation, systemic influence Direct selection of the project promoters by the MA / IB Larger scale

11. Issues to be decided for the future programming period How to select the themes for social innovation in order to have a short list of narrow areas? How to change the assessment procedure in order to catch good ideas all of from those which were presented? How to avoid administrative burden when financing social innovation according to the ESF rules? How to use simplified costs? How to ensure sustainability of the solutions developed? How to involve effectively policy makers in the whole process (selection of themes and projects, mainstreaming)? How to build a brand of social innovation within ESF? How the process of validation should be organised? What should be the responsibility of the project promoters in terms of mainstreaming? Should the work of thematic networks be continued? How to ensure active involvement of the members?

12. Thank you for your attention!