You are on page 1of 38

Final Report

Action 1 - Youth for Europe
Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects
Version valid as of 1st of January 2013

Part I. Project identification and summary

Project number
Please insert the reference as indicated in your agreement: Postmark/Date of receipt

GEAI TD-IE-13-E3-2013-R3

Name of the beneficiary
Please indicate the name and acronym of the beneficiary Good Energies Alliance Ireland Limited
organisation/group:

Title of the project
Please insert the project title as indicated in your agreement:

Democratic Energies

Duration of the project
Please indicate the total duration of the project from preparation to evaluation.

Start date of the project: End date of the project:
(date when the first costs incurred) 01/ 03 /2014 (date when the last costs 12/12/2014
incurred)
Total duration of the project (in months): 9
Venue(s): Leitrim, Sligo, Libiaz, Krakow
Signature of the legal representative
I the undersigned hereby certify that all the information and financial data contained in this final report are accurate and have
been supplied to the persons in charge at each of the partner promoters involved in the described Activity.

The beneficiary allows the European Commission, the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency and the National
Agencies to make available and use all data provided in this report for the purposes of managing and evaluating the Youth in
Action Programme. All personal data collected for the purpose of this project shall be processed in accordance with Regulation
(EC) N° 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing
of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies.

Data subjects may, on written request, gain access to their personal data. They should address any questions regarding the
processing of their personal data to the Agency (National or Executive) in charge of the management of their application. For
projects selected at national level, data subjects may lodge a complaint against the processing of their personal data with the
authority in charge of data protection in their country at any time. For projects selected at European level, complaints may be
lodged with the European Data Protection Supervisor at any time.

The beneficiary declares having informed the promoters and participants in its project on the provisions and practices
regarding data protection applied under the Youth in Action programme.

Beneficiary
Name, stamp (if applicable):
Legal representative
Name in capital letters: Mr. Edward Mitchell

Place: Manorhamilton, County Leitrim Signature:
Date:

Part I. Project identification and summary (cont.)

Relevance to the general objectives of the Youth in Action Programme
Please tick relevant box(es).

The project:

promotes young people’s active citizenship in general and their European citizenship in particular;
develops solidarity and promote tolerance among young people, in particular in order to foster social
cohesion in the European Union;
fosters mutual understanding between young people in different countries;
contributes to developing the quality of support systems for youth activities and the capabilities of civil
society organisations in the youth field;
promotes European cooperation in the youth field.

Relevance to the priorities of the Youth in Action Programme
Please tick relevant box(es).

Permanent thematic priorities Annual priorities
European Citizenship Young people's active participation in the European Parliament
elections
Participation of young people
Promoting healthy lifestyles through physical activities including
Cultural diversity sport
Youth unemployment
Inclusion of young people with fewer
Commitment to a more inclusive growth: fight against poverty
opportunities
and marginalisation
Creativity and entrepreneurship
EU citizenship and the rights that go with it
National priorities
If so, please specify:

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 2
Summary of the project
33Please, give a brief summary of your project. Please note that this paragraph may be used for publication. Therefore be
accurate and include the venue(s), the type of project, the theme, the objectives, the duration (in months), the countries
involved, the number of participants, the implemented activities, the methods applied and the amount of the EU grant. The
summary should be written in English, French or German, regardless of which language you use to fill in the rest of this report.
Please be concise and clear.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 3
The context of this project is the current EU debate around the use and exploitation of fossil fuels
and renewable energy sources at a time when over 90% of scientists agree that climate change and
global warming are realities. In particular, there is a debate at present on the environmental and
health impacts of fracking. Both in Poland and in Ireland, there are proposals to develop this
industry - in Ireland, the proposals are at the planning stage; in Poland, projects have already
commenced. Poland has vast coal reserves and a huge industry based on these. The Polish
government has as policy the exploitation of their fossil fuel reserves, including shale gas. Major
studies are being done on these issues by the EU Commission and EPA Ireland at the moment.
Aims:
1. To explore how young people can influence decisions at national and EU levels
2. To use Sustainable Energy and Climate Change issues as the subject of this exploration
Objectives
1. Create opportunities for participants to explore and become informed on Sustainable Energy and
Climate Change issues
2. Create space to talk, interact with each other, discover that they are not alone
3. Dialogue with local, regional and national authorities
4. Explore policies of M.E.P.s and candidates for the next election
The participants explored how decisions were made in their own countries and got an opportunity
to engage with this decision-making process through dialogue with local and national decision-
makers and by exploring the issues around energy choices and engaging with decision-makers
They also got the opportunity to make their own views known through art, performance and
presentation.
Through the development of a questionnaire for EP candidates, the delivery of this and examination
and publication of results, the young people's participation in the system of representative
democracy was increased. The EP elections were held in May 2014 and every candidate in Ireland
and Poland was sent a copy of the questionnaire. The young people, through this questionnaire,
had the opportunity to become more engaged with those elections. Through this exercise, they also
became aware of the policies of the candidates in their own electoral areas and what their policies
are. It was most unfortunate that the response rate from the EP candidates was so poor.
This project explored how important policies are made, who makes the decisions and how those
decisions are made. Young people are very concerned about the environment and the issue of
climate change is very important to them. Accordingly, this project recognised that young people’s
concern for the Environment can be heard and recognised through Democratic Processes
This project facilitated joint activities of young people from Ireland and Poland - different cultural,
ethnic and religious backgrounds. In Ireland, the project increased the young people’s positive
awareness of other cultures as they worked in a group that had not only Irish nationals, but
nationals from many European countries as well. .
During the project non formal and formal trainings were put in place, using role play, workshops,
music, arts and film to combat prejudice, racism, and all attitudes leading to exclusion. This allowed
the participants to develop sensitivity to local, regional , and European issues regarding prejudice,
racism and exclusion. The participants met a cross section of people from all backgrounds,
specialities, political persuasion, and both proponents and opponents of the contentious issue of
fracking and other environmental issues. .
The project stimulated young people's spirit of initiative and creativity through looking at choices
facing European societies in the context of climate change. Big changes are on the way; through
exploration of what those changes might include and what measures are required to deal with the
challenges facing us, the project stimulated new ways of looking at the world, stimulated debate and
exploration of methods of counteracting climate change, and encouraged new thinking around
enterprise creation.
Important milestones throughout the project were:
 A number of seminars in both countries to build relationships between participants and
explore the issues that were at the core of this project.
 Visit to each other’s countries and experience social, political and learning opportunities,
delivered in a way that encouraged creativity and challenged stereotypes.
 Some of the participants visited Brussels and experienced first hand the operations of the EU
Parliament and how lobbying is an important feature of environmental organisations in
Brussels.
Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 4
.

Please, indicate and explain the reasons for eventual changes between your initial application and
the activities finally implemented, e.g. composition of partner promoters and/or participants, duration
of the Activity, Activity programme
Original Planned activities
• The working methods will be twice monthly interface meetings with the groups. There
will be video chat once a month with youth representatives of each group, and the
Polish groups. The groups will be flexible enough to change plans and meet in
another town or venue to co incide with a presentation or event that is pertinent to this
project. Achieved
 The planned activities and working methods will contribute to the process of non
formal learning and to the promotion of social and personal development of the
young people involved in the project as the project will include mobility, - travel from
Poland to Ireland and Brussels (to the EU), and travel from Ireland to Poland and
Brussels. The project will involve the youth creaating a level platform from which
they can engage with community, political, civic, and European decision and policy
makers, as well as people leading NGOs in Ireland and Europe. Achieved
 Methodologies for exploring and sharing relevant issues in the two countries agreed.
Achieved
• Participants build relationships and share information through email, Skype etc.
Achieved
 National seminars to explore national and EU decision-making structures
Achieved
• Questionnaire for MEPs and candidates leading up to EU election designed, sent and
analysed Achieved
• Visit to partner organisation in Poland. Exploration of the situation and policies there
Achieved
• Visit to partner organisations in Ireland. To include meeting with Local Authority
members, local TDs, visit to Leinster House and meeting with Minister or department
representative
Partially achieved. The Irish participants had the opportunity to visit partner organisations in
Ireland, including having interviews with people taking part in the campaign against fracking. During
the residential in Ireland, the participants met with local representatives from Leitrim, but a visit to
the Dail was not possible since the Dail was closed the week of the residential.
• Visit to Brussels, discussion of decision-making structures and energy policies with
Commission and MEPs Achieved
• Exploration of petition process, design of new petition Not achieved. Our information
was that the whole petition process is complicated and, given the capacity of our participants, it
was decided that this would not be possible
• Final Conference in each country, presentation of results of questionnaire, report on
Petitions, presentation of findings of the project. Achieved. Instead of running a full
conference, we “piggy-backed” on to another event organised by MARDI which included the
Premier of an international anti-fracking documentary by the youth Director, Jolynn Minaar, with an
introduction by our youth to the project. The audience were invited and included some local
councillors, and leaders of community and youth projects. The showing of the documentary took up
half of the evening and after that, the participants had the opportunity of presenting the Democratic
Energies project to all attendees and had a discussion on their experience. This was a good idea
as it disseminated the project, gave our participants experience on presenting the project and was
very cost effective..
Part of the presentation used the Forum Theatre methodology - one of the participants dressed up
as Moorman, CEO of Tramboran (the company wishing to frack Leitrim and Fermanagh) and had a
debate with others (who took the part of the protesters) on the relative benefits and risks associated
with fracking! This was very successful in bringing the issues to the fore in an unusual and
accessible way.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 5
Part II. Beneficiary

REPORTING OBLIGATIONS (Please consult your agreement before elaborating this report)

The final report should be submitted within two months following the end date of the project.

The final report includes one narrative section on the carrying out of the project, and one financial part. The beneficiary must
fill in both parts. Failure to accomplish the reporting obligations entitles the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive
Agency or the relevant National Agency to demand full reimbursement of sums already paid.

All costs must be fully justified with copies of travel tickets and/or invoices or acceptable accounting receipts. Achievements
must be described in detail in the narrative report. A signed list of all participants must be enclosed with the report, as well as
the final calendar and the daily timetable of the Activity.

Details of the beneficiary
Name Good Energies Alliance Ireland Limited
Street address Foxfield
Postcode 0000IE City Manorhamilton
Region IE011 - Border Country Leitrim
Email goodenergiesalliance@gmail.com Website goodenergiesalliance.com
Telephone 087 2382324 Telefax

Person authorised to sign the contract on behalf of the beneficiary (legal representative)
Family name (Ms/Mr) Mr. Mitchell First name Edward
Position/function Secretary

Person to contact for questions on this report (contact person)
Family name (Mr/Ms) Dr. McLoughlin First name Aedin
Position/function Director
Email goodenergiesalliance@gmail.com
Telephone 00353 872382324 Telefax

Profile of the beneficiary
Type and status Non profit/non governmental Public body Informal group of young people
organisation
Body active at European level Other – please specify:
in the field of youth (ENGO)
Activity level Local Regional National European/International

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 6
Part III. Partner promoters and participants
If more space is needed, please add rows.

A. Information on the PARTNER PROMOTERS directly involved in the project
Please, list here the partner promoters in your project. If partner promoters have changed since the grant approval, provide
their complete address in this list.

Country Name of the promoter, location Contact person
Ireland MARDI Ms. Meg Rybicki
Address: Willow Cottage Annexe Mullanyduff, 0000IE,
Castlegal, IE011 – Border, Ireland
Poland Stowarzyszenie Uwolnij Marzenia - Mrs. Wanda Jarczyk
Association " Let The Dreams Be Free"
Address: Wysoka 12, 32-590, Libiaz, Pl21 –
Malopolskie, Poland
Poland Grupa Nieformalna "Przyjaciele Przyrody" - Mrs. Roza Wypyska
Informal Group "Friends Of Nature"
Address: Obiezowa 24/8, 32-590, Libiaz, PL21 –
Malopolskie, Poland

B. Information on the YOUNG PEOPLE directly involved in the project
Please give information about the composition of the group(s) of young people by country of residence participating in the
project. This list has to match with the signed participant list annexed to this report.

Distribution by
Total number of Distribution by age group
Country of residence gender
young people
Male Female 13-14 15-17 18-25 26-30
Ireland 10 6 4 8 2
Poland 10 7 3 1 3 6

TOTAL 20 13 7 1 11 8

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 7
C. Information on OTHER PARTICIPANTS involved in the project (decision makers,
stakeholders…) – if applicable
Please note that this category of participants should be financed through co-financing, and not through the EU grant.

Gender Country of
Name Function
(M/F) residence
Aedin McLoughlin F Ireland Coordinator
Liam Breslin M Ireland Secretary and Youth Leader
Alicia Rybicka F Ireland Facilitator
Meg Rybicka F Ireland Promoter
Rosa Wypyska F Poland Promoter
Wanda F Poland Promoter
Art Coonaghan M Ireland Facilitator

TOTAL 7

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 8
Part IV. Project implementation
The points below are intended to serve as a guide for your description of the activities undertaken with your partners within the
context of your Youth in Action project. Do not hesitate to mention difficulties and problems you have encountered and other
99matters that you consider helpful for other groups or organisations, which would organise similar activities in the future.

Please enclose with this report the products developed during the project (video, photos, website, etc.) and information on
how these were disseminated.

If more space is needed, please extend boxes.

Description of activities
Please give a general description of the project. Indicate the implemented activities, the working methods used and how the
partners were involved.
Please attach the final calendar and the daily timetable of activities.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 9
Description of Project
The Democratic Energies project brought together young people from youth organisations in Ireland
and Poland to explore issues in both countries around Climate Change and shale gas exploitation
(fracking). Through the project, the participants explored how decisions are made in Europe and
their individual countries and how to engage with the decision-making process. They also explored
each other’s culture and had the opportunity of building relationships with participants who were from
different countries besides Ireland or Poland. This enabled challenging of stereotypes.
The context of this project is the current EU debate around the use and exploitation of fossil fuels
and renewable energy sources at a time when over 90% of scientists agree that climate change and
global warming are realities. In particular, there is a debate at present on the environmental and
health impacts of fracking. Both in Poland and in Ireland, there are proposals to develop this industry
- in Ireland, the proposals are at the planning stage; in Poland, projects have already commenced.
Poland has vast coal reserves and a huge industry based on these. The Polish government has as
policy the exploitation of their fossil fuel reserves, including shale gas. Major studies are being done
on these issues by the EU Commission and EPA Ireland at the moment.
Aims:
1. To explore how young people can influence decisions at national and EU levels
2. To use Sustainable Energy and Climate Change issues as the subject of this exploration
Objectives
1. Create opportunities for participants to explore and become informed on Sustainable Energy and
Climate Change issues
2. Create space to talk, interact with each other, discover that they are not alone
3. Dialogue with local, regional and national authorities
4. Explore policies of M.E.P.s and candidates for the next election
The participants explored how decisions were made in their own countries and got an opportunity to
engage with this decision-making process through dialogue with local and national decision-makers
and by exploring the issues around energy choices and engaging with decision-makers They also
got the opportunity to make their own views known through art, performance and presentation.
Through the development of a questionnaire for EP candidates, the delivery of this and examination
and publication of results, the young people's participation in the system of representative democracy
was increased. The EP elections were held in May 2014 and every candidate in Ireland and Poland
was sent a copy of the questionnaire. The young people, through this questionnaire, had the
opportunity to become more engaged with those elections. Through this exercise, they also became
aware of the policies of the candidates in their own electoral areas and what their policies are. It was
most unfortunate that the response rate from the EP candidates was so poor.
This project explored how important policies are made, who makes the decisions and how those
decisions are made. Young people are very concerned about the environment and the issue of
climate change is very important to them. Accordingly, this project recognised that young people’s
concern for the Environment can be heard and recognised through Democratic Processes
This project facilitated joint activities of young people from Ireland and Poland - different cultural,
ethnic and religious backgrounds. In Ireland, the project increased the young people’s positive
awareness of other cultures as they worked in a group that had not only Irish nationals, but nationals
from many European countries as well. .
During the project non formal and formal trainings were put in place, using role play, workshops,
music, arts and film to combat prejudice, racism, and all attitudes leading to exclusion. This allowed
the participants to develop sensitivity to local, regional , and European issues regarding prejudice,
racism and exclusion. The participants met a cross section of people from all backgrounds,
specialities, political persuasion, and both proponents and opponents of the contentious issue of
fracking and other environmental issues. .
The project stimulated young people's spirit of initiative and creativity through looking at choices
facing European societies in the context of climate change. Big changes are on the way; through
exploration of what those changes might include and what measures are required to deal with the
challenges facing us, the project stimulated new ways of looking at the world, stimulated debate and
exploration of methods of counteracting climate change, and encouraged new thinking around
enterprise creation.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 10
Important events and activities throughout the project were:

 A number of seminars in both countries to build relationships between participants and explore the
issues that were at the core of this project.

 Visit to each other’s countries and experience social, political and learning opportunities, delivered
in a way that encouraged creativity and challenged stereotypes.

 Some of the participants visited Brussels and experienced first hand the operations of the EU
Parliament and how lobbying is an important feature of environmental organisations in Brussels.

 Final Conference in each country, presentation of results of questionnaire, presentation of findings
of the project.
Methodologies for exploring and sharing relevant issues in the two countries.
Project Promoters
The Irish and Polish promoters (MARDI and Let the Dreams Come True) had the advantage of trust having
been built up during previous projects. We therefore had confidence in the capacity of the partners to
deliver on what was a challenging project on many fronts. From the start, Skype and email were used for
communication and relationship-building and all aspects were thoroughly discussed before implementation.
The APVs were a good opportunity to get to know people face to face.
Difficulties arose in some instances:
1. GEAI had only recently set up its banking on-line facility and this caused great difficulties at the start of
the project, especially since Poland is not in the Euro Zone. Bank charges were found to be
extortionate and the fixed exchange rate worked against the Polish partners as the value of the Euro fell
during the project. Such difficulties were eventually sorted out.
2. The fact that all funding was at 25% caused problems for the partners who were used to 100% funding
of travel. It was with great difficulty that this problem was resolved and it caused some friction between
the partners. By the end of the project, such difficulties had been resolved. However, the requirement
for this match funding resulted in less spending than had been anticipated as partners could not afford
the amount required.
In both countries, the promoters organised Seminars on a regular basis. These required coordination and
planning meetings between the partners. The seminars themselves were facilitated by youth leaders who
had experience in facilitation. In Ireland, we found that two facilitators were required for each seminar and
the residential. Non-formal learning methodologies were used at all events and the whole project was very
youth-based, with the participants engaged in discussion of what they wanted to do, how this was done,
and how learning was to be presented.
An example of this was the questionnaire for MEP candidates, which was designed by the young people
in both countries, they did the translation into Polish; they also sent it out, learning how to use Survey
Monkey in the process, and analysed the results.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 11
• Visit to partner organisations in the two countries.
These were most successful and worthwhile for the participants, leaders and coordinators. Both visits were
very much youth led, with leaders who had experience with youth exchanges and EVS beforehand. They
were organised very carefully by experienced people who were aware of the pitfalls of bringing young people
abroad.
Highlights of the visits included:
- In Ireland, visit to Derry City, meeting with an MLA (Phil Flanagan) and discussion of the political
situation in Northern Ireland today, as well as guided tour of the city walls with a guide who had
lived through the troubles in Derry.
- Snap-chat presentation of current situation regarding fracking in Ireland by one of the
participants.
- Visit to Leitrim County Council and discussion of Local Authority powers and functions with local
politicians.
- In Poland, experiencing the realities of a street-based campaign where passers by were asked
their views on fracking and the group experienced a hostile member of the public.
- Many of the exercises in both residentials challenged stereotypes and preceptions of the
participatns from both countries and had a lasting effect on participants.
• Visit to Brussels,
This visit was greatly enhanced by the fac t that the leader knew Brussels well and had worked with both the
EU Commission and Parliament. He was able to show the group around, knew how to gain admission to
important buildings and organised meetings with the environmental NGOs who had a lobbying function in
Brussels. He also organised a meeting with a newly-elected MEP who discussed her role with the group and
her position with regard to energy policies.
As some of the group were interested in art, he also organised visits to some exhibitions, museums and
galleries. This visit was highly successful and evaluations were very positive.

Protection and safety
Did you face critical situations that endangered the safety of participants? If so, please describe the situation and how you
handled it. Describe improvements you would make if you were to repeat the experience.
At the beginning of the residential in Bundoran (Co. Sligo) all participants were briefed on the
conduct expected of participants, also of restrictions concerning trips to the village and socialising in
the evenings. At all times, groups were escorted by Leaders and nobody was allowed out of the
hostel alone. There also was a curfew for underage members, who were strictly supervised when
out.
However, during the residential there was an incident where three of the participants, two underage,
“retired” to their bedrooms, then crept out of the hostel late at night (through a back door) and went
to a night club in the village. They were not missed immediately as the Leaders had seen them
“retire” earlier. They were met by the Leaders on their return.
The following day they were each interviewed by the heads of the two partner organisations in the
presence of the Leaders. They admitted what they did and also admitted that their actions were
planned beforehand. Under the circumstances, they were sent home immediately.
Afterwards, they did not show any remorse and were quite defiant. Those three participants
involved had been chosen by GEAI and had not been involved in youth projects before. They
obviously had not taken the rules of the project seriously (although had said at the start of the
project that they really wanted to take part). It was decided not to let them back into the project.
Luckily, GEAI Youth and MARDI had other young people who took their place and the project was
not harmed. The GEAI committee were very concerned that this happened to people selected by
them and it was agreed that in future, GEAI would only work with established youth groups/clubs
when recruiting candidates for youth projects.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 12
Preparation
Please explain how you prepared the project within your own group and with your partners (meetings, activities,
communication, etc.).
1. Brainstorming meetings. Held between the partners in each country to plan how to tackle the
ambitious programme laid out in the project. Three meetings were held in Leitrim/Sligo
between representatives of GEAI and MARDI. Informal meetings were held between the two
Polish partners.
2. Communication. Skype meetings were held between the international partners. These were
most useful to discuss aspects of the project such as activities, finance, match funding Etc. In
addition, email was used extensively and phone calls whenever required. It took a lot of effort
to make sure that all partners were agreed on the project and what we wanted to do, especially
as the Polish partners had no expreience of campaigns and know very little about fracking.
3. Contact made with youth leaders and facilitators in both countries. It was considered by all that
we would need experienced but young leaders who preferably had already been involved with
the Youth in Action Programme and knew the possible pitfalls. Agreement was reached with
facilitators and leaders who were known and trustedf by the partners.
4. Selection was made of participants. It was important that participants were genuinely interested
in the environment and open to learn more about the issues that were to be addressed by the
project – sustainable energy choices, issues around fracking, political involvement, how the EU
works and willingness to get involved in the democratic process. . We approached all our
pooled youth members and gave them the outline of the project. Those who came back with
good workable ideas and commitment to the project are the core groups. It was from those
members that the idea of the "Beginners guide to Engaging with Europe" came, as well as the
idea of conferences. In the event, MARDI had an existing network of young people who knew
each other and had been involved in previous projects. It was not difficult to recruit participants
from this network. GEAI had links with Lough Allen Vocational School who had a group of
young people who came from disadvantaged backgrounds and had not participated in such a
project before. The challenge was to involve such young people and to integrate them with the
other group.
5. Two first two meetings of the project focussed on getting both groups to get to know each other
and to mix. This was done reasonably successfully. By the time the Polish group came to
Ireland, all project participants knew each other well and were able to jointly participate in
project activities.
6. In Poland, the situation was less complex. Both organisations worked with young people as an
essential element of their work and had already a pool of young people to choose from. In their
first meetings they focussed on raising the capacity of the participants, with presentations about
climate change and fracking; and also some work on the English language, which they were all
anxious to practice before they came to Ireland. They were very excited about the project,
which they saw as an amazing opportunity to visit Ireland and to learn more about Europe.
7. The Polish organisation used their staff as youth leaders and also engaged facilitators for their
meetings. This went well – both groups were very pleased with the facilitators in general and
there were no problems there.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 13
Practical organisation
Please describe:
 how the logistical and practical arrangements were organised (transport, accommodation, etc),
 which languages were used most frequently during the scheduled activities and free time, including information on
language assistance provided,
which practical and logistical improvements you would make if you were to repeat the experience.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 14
Logistical and practical arrangements
In Ireland, there were constant and severe logistical issues. GEAI and MARDI are situated over 20
miles apart and this entailed a lot of travel just to have informal meetings between the partners. Our
travel costs were therefore very high. Unfortunately, there was no other choice in the absence of
public transport in our area. As much as possible, planning meetings were held in venues convenient
to one or both of the partners. Often, this resulted in both of us travelling to Sligo or Manorhamilton
as these were most accessible.
The practical arrangements for the implementation of the Activity was worked upon jointly by the four
groups, providing invaluable hands on experience for the youth democracy members, some of whom
have experience in the "housekeeping" of projects, but others will not have been involved at such a
level in the past. Advanced planning visits ensured that the accommodation, travel and food
arrangements in each country are safe and complient. Transport throughout the project was by
public transport whenever possible, or licensed operators and GEAI members vehicles when no
public transport was available. All groups were situated in rural areas without adequate public
transport, so this is an essential factor in the project.
It was agreed that project Seminars (where we brought participants from the two Irish partner groups
together for a day) were held in Ballinaglera Community Hall. This had excellent facilities and
housed the GEAI office, so arrangements for venue, equipment and catering could be done easily
and locally. This meant that MARDI had to organise car transport to all seminars, which was a
considerable imposition; parents got involved and car pooling was used.

In Poland, the seminars were held in Libiaz, in a community facility that was convenient. At one
stage of the project, the participants expressed their lack of enthusiasm for the venue and it was
decided to hold one Seminar in Krakow, which would give the participants an added value of being
able to sightsee and shop! This was done to keep the project momentum going.
During the residential in Ireland, the participants stayed in a hostel in Bundoran. This was very
satisfactory and there were no big problems with the accommodation. Bedrooms were dormitory-
style and there was a big kitchen and two living rooms where sessions could be held during the
week. Bundoran was a good venue as it offers many different activities that the participants could
enjoy, including surfing and paddle-boarding.
At first, the Polish participants found the food very strange - it was locally prepared and included a lot
of Italian-style and herby dishes, but by the end of the week they were used to it. Both vegetarian
and meat options were offered and the standard of cooking was very high.
The residential in Poland was more basic. The participants stayed in accommodation that was based
in very isolated woods and not very accessible to shops. The Irish participants didn’t like the Polish
food at all! This was a bit of a problem, as was the unreliable hot water. However, they had good fun
and all agreed that the trip was excellent and they learned a lot. The two residentials certainly had
the effect of building friendships and the two groups communicated extensively using Facebook and
Skype.
Language
English was the project language and the Polish groups were delighted to get the opportunity to
practice their English. Some participants had limited knowledge of the language and for them, it was
difficult to communicate and to join in discussions (which were many). The Polish leaders acted as
interpretors when they could and were available constantly to assist participants who wanted to say
something that was beyond their competence.
The Polish group had some special language training before they came to Ireland, especially in the
areas being addressed by the project. Thus the group had vocabulary for climate change, oil and
gas extraction and global warming. They also had prepared a presentation of Polish landscape and
culture before the Irish residential and presented this during a “Polish evening” in Bunforan. This was
completely done by the partivcipants and no doubt was a great way to improve their language
competency and self-confidence.
Music was used to overcome language boundaries. Polish and Irish (English) songs were learned by
both groups and much laughter ensued at mixed up pronounciations and words! A couple of
participants turned out to be good guitar players and they entertained the rest.
Role play or acting was also used as a non-formal learning tool. The Focus Theatre model was used
to get discussion going. One young participants dressed up as an oil/gas explorer and the rest had
to oppose this plans and be able to counter his arguments in favour of exploration. This format was
also used during the Irish conference.
Improvements
Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 15
Financial aspects
Please describe your experience with additional funding for this project (in addition to the Youth in Action Programme grant).
Include information if you had difficulties in your efforts to secure this additional funding.

The requirement for 25% match funding was a big problem throughout this project. Indeed, GEAI
would hesitate before it would take on another Youth Democracy project for this reason. The
organisation is growing and has a lot of commitments and therefore could not raise sufficient cash to
enable the project to spend the full amount it had committed to. Several money-saving measures
were taken. Travel expenses were to a large extent funded by the organisers. Catering was carried
out by willing (and qualified) members of both organisations rather than getting in professional
caterers. The Irish conference piggy-backed on to another event, which did not cost us anything. At
that stage we had run out of money and could not foot the bill.
The GEAI cashflow situation was made precarious by the delay in EVS funding for our three
volunteers and so, the last two months of the project were not as they should have been. Financial
resources that was initially intended to be used for the final activities of Democratic Energies had to
be spent on the EVS volunteers. This could not have been foreseen and was a shock to our
organisation. We managed the situation well but it brought home the fact that small organisations
have to be very careful in choosing their financial commitment and exposure. Unfortunately, MARDI
is equally small and both of us had a bad time for some months.
Our Polish partners were equally distressed. Initially, they had not realised that ALL costs, including
accommodation costs, were funded at 75%, even though they had been told and it was in their
contract. Obviously, there were some communication/language issues here. They were used to
Youth Exchanges, but this was also their first youth democracy project. This misunderstandfing led to
difficulties in our relationship for a while, but they decided to go with what they had signed up to do
and in the end had a really good project and were very pleased with the result. Unfortunately,
because of the cashflow difficulties, their final conference and final meeting were delayed until we
could assure them that their costs would be covered.
A big problem for all partners is that the participants come from area that are disadvantaged and
there is no spare cash around. Even to ask for some contribution towards expenses was difficult for
some participants and there was no way that they could contribute 25%.
A big learning curve was experienced by all partner organisations during this project. We are happy
that we have survived it and have had a good project. They participants loved it and gained a lot
from it; we did not involve them in our financial difficulties. It has taught us to to careful about what
we choose to do in the future. Also, not to rely on funding coming in exactly when we expect it!

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 16
Involvement of participants
Please explain:
 how the participants were selected and the groups set up,
 how the young people were involved in each stage of the project,
how policy-makers/experts contributed to the project (if applicable).

How participants were selected.

It was important that participants were genuinely interested in the environment and open to learn
more about the issues that were to be addressed by the project – sustainable energy choices,
issues around fracking, political involvement, how the EU works and willingness to get involved in
the democratic process. In the event, MARDI had an existing network of young people who knew
each other and had been involved in previous projects. It was not difficult to recruit participants
from this network. GEAI had links with Lough Allen Vocational School who had a group of young
people who came from disadvantaged backgrounds and had not participated in such a project
before. The challenge was to involve such young people and to integrate them with the other
group.
Two first two meetings of the project focussed on getting both groups to get to know each other and
to mix. This was done reasonably successfully. By the time the Polish group came to Ireland, all
project participants knew each other well and were able to jointly participate in project activities.
In Poland, the situation was less complex. Both organisations worked with young people as an
essential element of their work and had already a pool of young people to choose from. In their first
meetings they focussed on raising the capacity of the participants, with presentations about climate
change and fracking; and also some work on the English language, which they were all anxious to
practice before they came to Ireland. They were very excited about the project, which they saw as
an amazing opportunity to visit Ireland and to learn more about Europe.
The Polish organisation used their staff as youth leaders and also engaged facilitators for their
meetings. This went well – both groups were very pleased with the facilitators in general and there
were no problems there.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 17
Thematic concept
Please indicate if and how the thematic concept of your project focused on:
 the participation of young people in mechanisms of representative democracy;
 allowing young people to experience the concepts and the practice of representative democracy and active citizenship;
 facilitating dialogue between young people and decision-makers at all levels (local, regional, national and European).

The thematic concept of the Democratic Energies project focused on the participation of young
people in mechanisms of representative democracy. The activities include exploration of decision-
making processes at local, national and EU level; engagement with EP candidates through the
development and administration of a questionnaire and exploration of their policies; and
encouraging the expression of the participants' opinions through voting at the 2014 elections.
The young people experienced the concepts and practice of representative democracy and active
citizenship through their engagement with national and EU political systems; they explored the
decision-making process; they visited national and EU government establishments and met national
and EU decision-makers; they were facilitated to get into dialogue with decision-makers at all levels
- local, regional, national and European.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 18
Intercultural dimension

Please explain if and how the following aspects have been tackled in your project:
 young people's positive awareness of other cultures,
 dialogue and intercultural encounters with other young people from different backgrounds and cultures,
 prevention and fight against prejudice, racism and all attitudes leading to exclusion,
 sense of tolerance and understanding of diversity.

young people's positive awareness of other cultures
The young people’s positive awareness of other cultures was tackled throughout the project, through
intercultural aspects and themes introduced from the onset of Democratic Energies. The young
people from both Ireland and Poland were very open to differences in culture, societal norms,
ideologies, and views, leading to lively debate and further awareness and acceptance of each other’s
cultures.
dialogue and intercultural encounters with other young people from different backgrounds
and cultures
The project focused on young people engaging in active citizenship, and taking part in dialogue not
only with each other, but with elected representatives on a local, national, and EU level. None of the
youth had been actively involved in politics at any level, which was an advantage in many respects,
as they all, both the Irish and Polish groups, came into the project without prejudice, or prejudgement
of political parties or figures. The young people considered themselves quite active in terms of
environmental and local youth led issues before the project, but realised how passive their age group
is in terms of active political engagement, and voting.
prevention and fight against prejudice, racism and all attitudes leading to exclusion
The group worked together by email and group skype before the first residential in Bundoran, Co.
Donegal, which broke down any stereotypical views, or prejudices that they may have had about
each other.
The Irish group faced overt racism, hostility and stereotyping from locals during an activity in Poland,
(a street information session informing locals about UGEE (unconventional gas extraction and
exploration); a potentially tense situation which was diffused by the Polish leaders. The abuse was
carried out in Polish, but the intent was clear, and this incident led to a very useful evaluation session
where all the youth were able to discuss why the incident was important to the project, and how they
could overcome such responses from the general public, when taking part in a street canvassing
activity.
sense of tolerance and understanding of diversity
The youth from both countries have a much greater understanding of diversity, and tolerance to those
with diametrically opposed views on environmental issues, through their involvement in the project.
Informal Evaluations were invaluable in allowing the youth to explore their own thoughts and ideas,
and to be able to articulate them on neutral ground. Both groups were shocked at the poor or total
lack of response from their elected MEPS in Europe, which led to better understanding and tolerance
of those who see extreme energy exploration and extraction as a positive step, as opposed to
creating further dependence on fossil fuels.

Please indicate which activities made the greatest contribution to the intercultural learning of the participants.

 both residentials made the greatest contribution to the intercultural learning of the
participants
 the trip to Brussels and the EU greatly enhanced the young people’s perception of
themselves as Europeans
 the informal time out during the first residential in Ireland brought greater intercultural
learning and understanding of each other’s cultures, which was enhanced during the
residential in Poland.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 19
European dimension
Please explain if and how the following aspect have been tackled in your project:
 young people’s sense of European citizenship and their role as part of the present and future of Europe,
 common concerns for European society, such as racism, xenophobia and anti-semitism, drug abuse…,
 EU topics, such as EU enlargement, the roles and activities of the European institutions, the EU's action in matters
affecting young people,
founding principles of the EU, i.e. principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms,
and the rule of law.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 20
young people’s sense of European citizenship and their role as part of the present and future
of Europe,
The young people were encouraged to examine their roles in Europe and their own and collective
sense of European Citizenship by working closely together to “Be the Change”, both locally,
nationally, and on a European level. They were discouraged by the interaction they had with their
elected MEP’s; the Polish group had no response from any of their MEP’s, and the Irish groups were
disappointed in the small number of elected representatives who corresponded, replied or met with
them. The project gave the combined groups an impetus to become the future of Europe by
engaging much more robustly with community, regional, national and European issues, so that their
voices will be heard, now and in the future.
common concerns for European society, such as racism, xenophobia and anti-semitism, drug
abuse…,
The youth are aware of the rapid rise in far right politicians and movements across Europe, and their
fears and concerns were discussed by all groups with their leaders and the organisers of the project.
There is a symbiosis between climate change deniers, and right wing movements, and the fossil
fuel/extreme energy industry. The youth were all aware of immigrants and new communities
becoming the focus of right wing and Conservative politicians, who are adept at blaming certain
sections of society for the problems in that society. The youth tackled the issues of xenophobia,
islamophobia, drug abuse and youth suicide in informal group discussions, and agreed that poverty,
lack of opportunities, joblessness and low scholastic achievement can often fuel the fires of
radicalisation of youth, who can be manipulated by groups/politicians/individuals with hidden
agendas.
EU topics, such as EU enlargement, the roles and activities of the European institutions, the
EU's action in matters affecting young people,
The topics of EU enlargement were tackled by workshops held on both residentials (Ireland and
Poland), as Poland is a relative newcomer to the EU compared to Ireland, and the experiences of
both countries within the EU were discussed in detail. The youth all agreed that enlargement was a
positive step for Europe, but worried about proportional representation of countries with smaller
populations. The Irish group felt that Ireland, and youth in particular, were not represented well in
Europe, and the Polish group experienced being totally ignored by their own representatives. The
project gave the youth practical, hands on experience of dealing with EU institutions, beaurocratic
systems, and politicians who distance themselves from young voters/would be voters.
founding principles of the EU, i.e. principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights
and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law.
The youth were able to understand the founding principles of the EU by working through the
principles throughout the duration of the project. They all agreed that apart from a few isolated
incidents whilst street canvassing in Poland, they were fortunate to live in countries where they were
able to engage with and challenge state bodies, departments, and elected representatives without
being censored or putting themselves in danger. Their fundamental human rights were discussed,
and their conclusion at the end of the project is that the law in Europe is often slanted towards the
rights of industry and corporations, as opposed to the people. They argued that if laws are made to
protect profit, then their human rights could be eroded. The youth were decidedly better informed,
more aware of their rights, and their place and part to play in Europe, at the end of the project, than
at the beginning and mid way.
The project helped to prevent and combat prejudice, racism and all attitudes leading to exclusion.
These principles were made a priority at the preparation sessions and emphasised throughout the
project. Every measure was taken to ensure that no participant was excluded from any of the
activities of the project, regardless of race, creed, sexual orientation or disability. Attitudes
demonstrating prejudice and racism were challenged through non-formal exercises and dialogue.
By the end of the project, participants had developed a sense of tolerance and understanding of
diversity through their interaction with other participants from different backgrounds and cultures. The
entire project emphasised democracy, inclusion and human rights. The nature of the project activities
encouraged tolerance; the fact that the participants were so diverse led to understanding of diversity
and by working together, the richness that diversity brings became apparent.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 21
Evaluation
Please give details regarding evaluation you carried out with your partners and within each group, both during the project and
after the project was finished.

Reflective practice evaluation was carried out with our own groups, and with the Polish groups at
every meeting during the project. This method of evaluating the progress and learning cycle of the
youth proved very effective, as each member of the project was able to express and question the
learning, the objectives and the outcomes in a natural and in formative manner. The evaluations were
both writtenand verbal, and engaged the youth in moving ahead with the project. Evaluations during
and after each residential and study visit were particularly important, as the participants, leaders and
organiserstruly learnt from each other, and using reflective evaluation methodology meant that all
critique was used for progress and positive change.
The final evaluation meeting took place over a full day in both Ireland and Poland. The project was
evaluated over its life cycle, with some surprising conclusions and learning outcomes. A firm
conclusion reached by all of the youth is that to "Be the Change", they will have to truly engage at all
levels of European active citizenship, democracy, and the democratic process, in order to ensure a
youth voice at every level of the EU.

Impact, multiplying effect and follow-up
Please explain:

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 22
who benefited from the project in addition to the participants directly involved,
The impact of the project was wide ranging for everybody involved, including the schools and
colleges linked to the youth, as their profile was raised by the participation of the groups. Volunteers
with Good Energies Alliance Ireland, both youth and adult, benefited through being involved with the
organisation of the project and interacting with the groups involved. Many GEAI members assisted in
setting up venues, helping with administration and practicalities of the project. Local representatives
from the County Council, and youth projects benefited from knowledge gained from our youths’
experience of policy and law making in the EU, and gained valuable insight into why young people
feel polarized from policy makers, policy making, voting, and active citizenship, community and civic
activities. . The knowledge gained by the participants about how their MEPs work, and the basic
principles of the EU have been passed on to a wider audience.
The project benefited the schools and colleges linked to the youth, as their profile was raised by the
participation of the groups. The knowledge gained by the participants about how their MEPs work,
and the basic principles of the EU have been passed on to a wider audience. The Good Energies
Alliance organisation also benefited through being involved with the organisation of the project and
interacting with the groups involved. Many GEAI members assisted in setting up venues, helping
with administration and discussions of the project.
The impact on the local community and how it was involved in the project,
The local communities were involved in the project through sharing of community capital, knowledge,
information, access to local representatives, access to local decision makers who worked with the
youth and advised on appropriate measures to enable more participation in decision making. In
particular, project participants engaged with those taking part in the protest camp outside the quarry
where drilling was proposed. They held interviews with protesters and others who visited the camp,
including local politicians, farmers and residents. This action highlighted the project for the local
community and ensured that the local community knew that young people were engaged with the
issued involved and were able to take a stand.
The project relied upon community capital to carry out many tasks related to ‘Democratic Energies’,
as in our geographically remote area, the local community always gets involved, whether it be
organizing car pools, cheap printing, or local catering. We drew on expertise contained within the
community, ie. asking someone with experience to discuss with the young people how to register to
vote, and asking community members active in the local council to volunteer to show the youth
around the Council Chambers, and explain the workings of the Council. The young people really
did understand how important their imput could be in steering their future influence on local policy
makers.
Learning outcomes were shared by small presentations to schools and colleges by each of the youth
participants. The project was highlighted in the monthly newsletter Ezine produced by Good Energies
Alliance Ireland. The project was mentioned on local radio. The Polish partners had several articles
published in local newspapers.
the measures taken to recognize and validate the learning outcomes of participants and
promoters involved in the project
The possibility of getting YouthPass accreditation was discussed with the participants at the start of
the project. They were therefore aware of the learning criteria that were important in getting a
YouthPass certificate. Each participant was encouraged to reflect on his/her learning outcomes and
to document these using different media. These were discussed at the final meeting of the project
and YouthPass certificates are being issued to all participants who engaged in the project throughout
its lifetime.
The promoters involved in the project have been recognized by GEAI and acknowledged on our
website and social media pages as having been valuable and valued partners in this project, with a
serious message to share regarding the degradation of our environment, or potential degradation by
extreme energy companies.
impact on local politics by the youth· Learning outcomes were shared by small presentations to
their schools and colleges by each of the youth participants. The project was highlighted in the
monthly newsletter Ezine produced by Good Energies Alliance Ireland. Mentions in local media
including radio. The Polish partners had several articles published in local newspapers. In Ireland,
press releases were released but were not published.·

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 23
The multiplying effect and sustainable impact in a long term perspective,the core principles of the
project are to be used by the polish group and their partners in applying for a youth exchange, then a training
course over the next few deadlines. The follow up of this project is to be discussed at length between the
partners, as the new Erasmus + programme is in place, with many changes from the YIA
programme.Continuous contact with the promoters will be maintained, as the networking opportunities that
exist between established groups with long prior experience of the YIA programme, and many good contacts
is invaluable.The partner groups have good experience of EVS, youth exchanges, training courses, and
mentoring.

We will build on our experience of this project to carefully examine our aims and objectives of expanding our
work with youth with fewer opportunities, and those in the NEETS category, to apply for projects within
ERASMUS + that are within our capacity as an organisation, and our interests.

The multiplying effect and sustainable impact in a long term perspective, are being explored by the
promoters, with a KA1 action being actively discussed between 2 of the promoters, and a youth exchange to
be held in the Netherlands. The core principles of the project have been used by the Polish group and their
partners in applying for a youth exchange for the February 2015 deadline, and a training course over the
next few deadlines as spin off projects. MARDI’s Turkish partners are writing a training course around the
learning outcomes of this project.

The follow up of this project is to be discussed at length between the partners, as the new Erasmus +
programme is in place, with many changes from the YIA programme.

Mobility of the young people has always been an issue in rural areas such as ours, but our combined youth
groups have certainly broken the ice on travel between Poland and Ireland, with at least one of our youth
members taking up a university placement in the Netherlands, as opposed to Dublin, as a direct result of his
experiencing enhanced mobility through this project, and gaining enough self belief to leave Ireland to study
in Europe.

The dissemination of this project reached hundreds of youth via stands, displays, dissemination conferences
and events, and through social media and new media.

Continuous contact with the promoters is being maintained, as the networking opportunities that exist
between established groups with long prior experience of the YIA programme, and many good contacts is
invaluable.The partner groups have good experience of EVS, youth exchanges, training courses, and
mentoring.

We will build on our experience of this project to carefully examine our aims and objectives of expanding our
work with youth with fewer opportunities, and those in the NEETS category, to apply for projects within
ERASMUS + that are within our capacity as an organisation, and our interests.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 24
Visibility
Please describe:
 how you ensured the visibility of the project,
 how your project provided clear promotional added value for the Youth in Action Programme.

how you ensured the visibility of the project,
The youth spoke to their schools and introduced the project at class and school assemblies. We
informed local Community Development Groups about our project, (Leitrim Development Company,
Sligo Intercultural Forum, Sligo Leader, Leitrim Intercultural Forum), and posted updates on the
project both on our website, and through our e-newsletter (circulation of aroud 5,000). We used
Twitter, Facebook, Viber to give visibility to the project, as did our partners, and printed information
for youth groups and local youth leaders The youth visited their local County Councillors in the
Council Buildings, and explained first hand to the elected officials what their project involved, and
what they hoped to achieve by participating.
· how your project provided clear promotional added value for the Youth in Action
Programme.
The project tackled a difficult subject, which is how to engage youth with political decision making
from a bottom up approach, as opposed to building a project in which the youth passively participated
in.The
youth experienced first hand the difficulties of engaging with the European Political System, to
ensure that their voices and concerns be heard and acted upon. The youth visited Brussels and met
with NGO's, decision makers, and an Irish MEP, which gave the project, and the YIA programme,
great promotional added value, as most of the Politicians contacted had not heard of YIA or Erasmus
Plus.! Each participant on the project was offered Youth Pass, which gives the now Erasmus +
programme added promotional value, as these youth will include Yout h Pass in their CV's for jobs,
college, volunteering.

· how your project provided clear promotional added value for the Youth in Action
Programme.
The project tackled a difficult subject, which is how to engage youth with political decision making
from a bottom up approach, as opposed to building a project in which the youth passively participated
in.The
youth experienced first hand the difficulties of engaging with the European Political System, to
ensure that their voices and concerns be heard and acted upon. The youth visited Brussels and met
with NGO's, decision makers, and an Irish MEP, which gave the project, and the YIA programme,
great promotional added value, as most of the Politicians contacted had not heard of YIA! Each
participant on the project was offered Youth Pass, which gives the now Erasmus + programme added
promotional value, as these youth will include Yout h Pass in their CV's for jobs, college, volunteering.

Dissemination and exploitation of results

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 25
Please give a detailed description of standard measures undertaken to disseminate and exploit the results of the project.

Dissemination of the project took place at a series of meetings with environmental groups in the
licenced areas of Leitrim and Fermanagh, Antrim and Sligo. One youth leader, and 2 youth gave an
overview of the project at each meeting.The final disseminatioin meeting took place in the North Side
Community Centre in Sligo town, on October 27th, and attracted a good diverse audience. A film
was shown made by a young South African director, which tackled extreme energy extraction in both
SouthAfrica, the US, and Europe.

The project attracted several PhD students, one of whom is now considering using parts of the
project in his thesis, as a study on youth/community involvement in environmental activism and
awareness The learning outcomes of the project will be presented to youth services within Leitrim
County Council as an example of good practice in working with intercultural youth groups, and youth
with fewer opportunities. A final draft has been put together for a series of pieces to be put into the
local press in the New Year as a series on youth activism, citizenship and democracy.

Dissemination of the learning outcomes of the project have been sent to larger NGO's such as Food
and Water Watch Europe, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace Ireland and Transition Towns Ireland.
We have disseminated our project to diverse groups who are expressing their wish to find out more
about Erasmus Plus, and to participate in further projects.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 26
Inclusion of young people with fewer opportunities
Did your project involve young people with fewer opportunities (facing situations that make their inclusion in society more
difficult, see main situations/obstacles identified herebelow) and/or special needs (mobility problems, health care, etc.)?
Explain how the Activity programme was adapted to particular needs of participants.

The Irish group had a number of youth with different learning needs:
Two participants had severe dyslexia
One participant had ADHD
One participant had OCD/acute anxiety disorder
The nonformal learning and workshopping environment of the project was ideally suited to the learning cycle of
these participants.They were able to express themselves very well outside of a classroom environment, and
became more able to articulate their ideas and thoughts as the project progressedWe used art, song,
film clips, dance and drumming as mediums during the residentials for the youth to convey their messages

Number of young people with fewer opportunities directly involved in the project (out of the total number of participants
indicated in Part III, Table B of this form):

Please tick the situation(s) they face:

Social obstacles Economic obstacles Disability

X Educational difficulties X Cultural differences Health problems

X Geographical obstacles Other – please specify:

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 27
Achievements
According to what you described above, please summarize what you achieved with this project in relation with e.g.:

 the objectives and the priorities of the Youth in Action Programme (please see the Programme Guide),
The general objectives stated in the Youth in Action Programme are to:
� promote young people’s active citizenship in general and their European citizenship in particular
We achieved this during the Democratic Energies project through discussion about the
meaning of European citizenship, examination of the EU decision-making process and how
young people can get involved. The visit to Brussels was important in this regard.
� develop solidarity and promote tolerance among young people, in particular in order to foster
social cohesion
The social dimen sion of the project enabled the participants from different cultural
backgrounds to form relationships and to work together. In addition, many of the non-formal
exercises carried out in the course of the project challenged perceptions and stereotypes
and promoted tolerance among the participants. An example of this was the organisation of
cultural evenings during residentials in which cultural differences were discussed and a
greater understanding among the participants developed, which led to greater tolerance of
differences.
in the European Union
� foster mutual understanding between young people in different countries
Since Ireland and Poland were both involved, the visits to each others countries was very
important. As above, much of the non-formal learning and social occasions fostered mutual
understanding between the young participants and their leaders.
� contribute to developing the quality of support systems for youth activities and the capabilities of
civil society, N/A
organisations in the youth field
� promote European cooperation in the youth field. This project was promoted in local
schools and youth groups, thus encouraging other organisations to consider participating in
Erasmus+ in the future

the objectives of the project that you planned,
Objectives of Democratic Energies
1. To explore how young people can influence decisions at national and EU levels.
The project achieved this through non-formal learning opportunities focussed on giving the
young participants access to decision-makers north and south of Ireland, and in Brussels,
discussing how decisions are made and giving them the opportunity to express their
opinions and present these publicly.
2. To use Sustainable Energy and Climate Change issues as the subject of this exploration
Objectives:
1. Create opportunities for participants to explore and become informed on Sustainable Energy
and Climate Change issues
Achieved. During national and international seminars, the participants were given
opportunities to explore the issues around fracking and substitution of fossil fuels with
renewable renergy sources. They were encouraged to develop their own presentations,
which some did and to present these to school assemblies and other groups.
2. Create space to talk, interact with each other and gain in confidence
Achieved. Throughout the project, the four youth groups involved communicated through
Facebook, Skype and email. During the residentials, time was given to social interaction and
they certainly interacted and gained in confidence as a result. At the end of the project,
several of the participants spoke about their increased self-confidence and the difference
the project had made to them, both personally and to their perceptions of other nationalities.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 28
Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 29
3. Through non-formal learning activities, address the personal development of participants
Throughout the project Seminars and Residentials, the personal development of participants was a
priority. All participants were encouraged to fully participate in all activities; the inclusion of
participants with particular difficulties (e.g. who had dyslexia or ADH) was ensured through the
wide variety of methods and media used throughout. The leaders were very experienced and their
resources included varied methodologies that could be used depending on circumstances. Thus,
methodologies included art, dancing, energisers, drumming, singing, drama and sports.
Aspects of personal development addressed during the project included increasing self-
confidence, ability to express themselves and their opinions, socialising and personal interaction,
communication in their own language as well as a foreign language, digital competence (in tackling
questionnaire and disseminating it, also in making snapchat presentation), competence in
organising travel arrangements and budgeting, greater understanding of their role as a European
citizen and the potential for involvement in decision-making, understanding cultural differences
and promoting tolerance.
These achievements were recognised through the issuing of YouthPass Certificates to participants
at the end of the project.
4. Dialogue with local, regional and national authorities
Achieved in Ireland. The participants had the opportunity to meet with Leitrim County Council
members, TDs, MLAs and MEPs. They also met with and discussed issues with other people who
were involved in politics at a local and national level (party members, campaigners, etc.) They
spent a day in the company of a person very involved in the local and national political process and
had the opportunity of discussing any issues of interest to them. In Brussels, they had the
opportunity of disussing the project with lobbying organisations and an MEP who was newly
elected and was on one of the Environmental Committees.
In Poland, public representatives are not as accessible. The participants could not meet with
representatives but had facilitators who were knowledgeable about the political system in Poland
and was able to discuss the decision-making process in Poland. This was very interested for the
Irish group, who had not been aware that there was such a difference between the two countries.
The session where the two groups campaigned publicly against fracking was an eye-opener for the
Irish group. In Sligo/Leitrim, there is a high public awareness of fracking; in Poland, knowledge of
fracking is not there (even though local plans for fracking are in place) and there is less interest in
knowing about environmental issues. One passer-by was vehemently pro-fracking and was quite
abusive towards the group, a challenging moment for them.

5. Explore policies of M.E.P.s and candidates for the next election
Achieved. A questionnaire was developed by the participants, who decided what questions they
wanted to ask and also decided that Survey Monkey could be used. One participant had used
Survey Monkey before and volunteering to draw up the survey in the required format. All this was
finalised. Initially the questions were formulated by the Irish participants, who sent them to the
Polish participants. They discussed them, a final version was agreed, and the Polish group
translated the questions into Polish.
Then the participants had to find out who the candidates were for the EU election. This task proved
to be quite difficult but eventually the names and email addresses were found on the Internet. The
individuals targeted were from Ireland and Poland only.
Finally, the survey was sent to both sets of candidates. It was resent twice but the response was
very disappointing. Only six Irish candidates responded, none from the government parties, and
NO Polish candidate responded. The project participants were extremely disappointed with this
situation and it certainly did not support the objectives of the projects which were to give them
confidence of their role in EU decision-making!
During the visit to Brussels, the MEP who met the group did discuss her policies.

6. Explore the petition process and the possibility to use this tool in the context of Youth Democracy
Partly achieved. The petition process was explored but, in the light of the experience of other
campaigning organisations, it was decided that the process was too complicated and beyond the
possibility of this project. It was an interesting thing to explore but the Brussels bureaucracy is
too complex.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 30
the relevance of the theme to the interests and needs of participants,

The theme of energy choices and climate change is one that is very relevant to all young people.
All of the participants had a genuine interest in the environment and the future impacts of global
warming. The Irish participants also were concerned about the proposals for fracking locally and
the possible impacts on their environment and quality of life. The Polish participants initially had
little knowledge about fracking and its impacts but during the project their interest grew so that
they had the idea of carrying out a day’s local street action to raise awareness.
One of the important aspects of this theme is that it is global. Climate change will impact on all
countries and all peoples and the participants during the project learned a lot about how climate
change is affecting those who can least cope with extreme weather and who have contributed
least to carbon emissions or global warming. The young participants in this project will, without
doubt, be involved in decisions that can impact on emissions, e.g. use of fossil fuel, measures
that would reduce carbon emissions or increase energy efficiency, etc. One of the results of this
project is increased awareness by the participants of the role that each of us has to play in this
global crisis and the need for all of us to get involved.
the social and personal development of the participants (including non-formal learning objectives).

This project was very important for all the participants. Coming from disadvantaged areas and some
with learning or other difficulties, it was a great opportunity for all of them to gain socially and
personally. They all agreed that they had benefited greatly from the project in self-confidence and in
communication skills. All had participated in activities and events that addressed their social
development – travelling together, sharing accommodation, meals, activities etc. In addition, during
each Seminar, they participated in various non-formal learning activities and exercises that
addressed their social development – interacting and communicating with others, including people
from different nationalities and cultural backgrounds. During their socialising times, they were
enciouraged to mix, to get to know each other and to build relationships. This was successfully
done.
The non-formal leaning exercises also addressed their personal development. The trainers made
sure that all participants were included in what was going on and various media and methods were
used to ensure that all were able to participate. They were also enciouraged to take responsibility for
their own safety and progress. (During the residentials, each day different people volunteered to be
”assistant eaders” or take up some other role.) This resulted in increased self-confidence among the
participants. They were also encouraged to join in discussions, give short presentations of issues,
of culture, of cooking, etc, and affirmed in their right to have opinions.

Did you inform participants about their possibility to receive a Youthpass Certificate? X Yes No
How many Youthpass Certificates did you issue? 8
In case you issued one or more Certificates did you also fill-in the sections relating to descriptive parts of the Youthpass
Certificate (Individual activities undertaken…) X Yes No

Please describe any other measures implemented to recognize and validate the learning outcomes of participants and
promoters involved in the project.

Additional information
Give any additional information, observations, comments or recommendations that may be useful for future projects as well as
to the European Commission, the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency or the National Agency. You may give
some indication of participants’ personal assessments of the project with the support of two or three individual evaluations.
Describe specific difficulties you encountered in implementing your project.

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 31
Part V. Financial report ALL ITEMS IN
EUROS
For further information please consult the Youth in Action Programme Guide for funding rules and your agreement for
accepted amounts.

A. Costs
Final
Total amount
assessment
as accepted FINAL
(to be filled in
in your STATEMENT
by NA or
agreement
EACEA)

A.1. Direct cost
1. Travel costs 12,680.00 12,144.80
2. Accommodation/food costs 23,008.00 19,846.78
3. Organisation of seminars, meetings, consultations, activities 5,400.00 3,269.98
4. Publication/translations/information costs 2,300.00 929.68
5. Dissemination and exploitation of results 600.00 395.58
6. Other costs directly linked to the implementation of the project 4,000 3,678.41
Sub-total 40,265.23
A.2. Indirect costs
7. Indirect costs (up to 7% of direct costs; i.e. budget items 2,598.94
1+2+3+4+5+6)

Total costs (A.1 + A.2) 42,864.17

B. Income
Final
Total amount
assessment
as accepted FINAL
(to be filled in
in your STATEMENT
by NA or
agreement
EACEA)
B.1. EU Grant
1. Contribution requested from the “Youth in Action Programme” 38,406.00
B.2. Co-financing
2. Own resources (including partners) 6,000.00 6,193.39

3. National/regional/local public institutions 0.00
4. Private donors 1,600.00 430.00
5. Other Community funding for this project 0.00
7. Other contributions to this project (please specify each source): 5,202.00 4,159.98
Discounts from Donegal Adventure Centre (662.40), Surfing (132),
Polish campsite (1,535.58), Drumming instructor (50) BIK (1,780.00)

Total income (B.1+B.2) 10,783.37

C. Payments
Amount

Pre-financing payment already received from the Youth in Action Programme 30,723.01
Expected balance claimed 1,425.12

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 32
D. Detailed calculation of final grant request ALL ITEMS IN
EUROS
If more space is needed, please add rows.

Travel costs
Please note: only cheapest means of transport/fares are subject to reimbursement. Also include the local transport. If
applicable, please separate clearly the different phases of your project (e.g. preparation, activity, follow-up, etc.) in the
“specification” column.

Number of Means
Specification Promoter From To Costs
persons of transport

Activity: Visit to GEAI 6 Leitrim Libiaz Bus/Plane 2398.72
Poland
Activity: Visit to MARDI 6 Leitrim Libiaz Bus/Plane 2398.72
Poland
Activity: Visit to Let the Dreams 6 Libiaz Leitrim Bus/Plane 1757.69
Ireland be true
Activity: Visit to 6 Libiaz Leitrim Bus/Plane 1757.69
Ireland
Activity: Visit to GEAI 2 Leitrim Brussels Train/Plane 840.00
Brussels
MARDI 2 Leitrim Brussels Train/Plane 480.00
Wanda 2 Libiaz Brussels Bus/Train/Pl 175.78
ane
Roza 2 Libiaz Brussels Bus/Train/Pl 170.00
ane
APV in Poland GEAI 1 Leitrim Libiaz Train/Plane 338.97
APV in Ireland Wanda 1 Libiaz Leitrim Bus/Train/ 516.57
Plane
Trip to Derry 24 Bundoran Derry Bus 350.00
Trip to Leitrim 24 Bundoran Carrick- Bus 350.00
County Council on-
Shannon
Travel to Seminars 24 609.66

TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS 12,144.80

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 33
Accommodation/food costs
Please specify the costs for accommodation and food. If applicable, please separate clearly the different phases of your
project (e.g. preparation, activity, follow-up, etc.) in the “specification” column.

Specification Number of persons Number of days Cost per day Costs

Advance Planning visit in Ireland 1 3 66.75 200.45
Activity (Irish visit to Poland) 24 6 1086.36 6,518.13
accommodation and food
Activity (Polish visit to Ireland) 24 6 1099.79 6,598.74
accommodation and food
Activity (Visit to Brussels) 8 3 425.60 1,276.79
Accommodation and food
Preparation: Brainstorming and 4 3 26.42 79.25
Information meetings
Preparation: Advance Planning Visit 1 3 74.00 221.98
in Poland
Activity: Project meetings - food 2-8 10 58.79 587.90
Activity: Project Seminars - food 12 15 186.39 2,795.88
Activity: Conference 80 2 545.88 1,091.75
Follow-up: Evaluation meetings 12 2 237.96 475.92

TOTAL ACCOMODATION/FOOD COSTS 19,846.79

Organisation of seminars, meetings, consultations, activities
If applicable, please specify clearly the different phases of your project (e.g. preparation, activity, follow-up, etc.) in the
“specification” column.

a) Rental costs (rooms, equipment, etc.)
Specification Number of days Cost per day Costs

Preparation: Brain-storming and information sessions 1 40.00 40.00
Special activities in Adventure Centre during visit to 6 75.58 453.50
Poland
Activity: Seminars – hire of hall and equipment (IRL) 6 150.00 900.00
Special activities in Adventure Centre during visit to 6 203.48 1220.88
Ireland
Activity: 3 Project meetings 3 54.00 162.00
Activity: Meetings to prepare for Brussels visit
Activity: Special activities in Brussels 3 47.20 141.60
Activity: Advance Planning Meeting
Activity: Hire of hall during visit to Poland
Activity: Meeting to organise conference
Activity: Conference 1 202.00 202.00
Follow-up: Evaluation meeting + Seminar 7 1 150.00 150.00
Subtotal 3269.98

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 34
b) Interpreting costs (including travel, accommodation and fees)
Language from/to Number of interpreters Number of days Cost per day Costs

Subtotal

TOTAL SEMINARS 3269.98

Publication/translations/information costs
Please specify the costs for production and translation of information material.

Specification Costs

Production and delivery of questionnaire for EP candidates in both countries and 569.68
translation
Production of petition in Polish and English 0.00
Cost of design and printing a leaflet: "Beginner's Guide to Engaging with Europe". 110.00
Other publicity materials – flyer, posters 250.00
TOTAL PUBLICATION/TRANSLATION/INFORMATION COSTS 929.68

Dissemination and exploitation of results
Please specify the costs for dissemination and exploitation of results.

Specification Costs

Leaflet: "Beginner's Guide to Engaging with Europe". Distribution to schools in 88.00
Ireland and Poland
Dissemination of results of conferences from all groups. Presentations made in 0.00
local schools, youth groups, environmental organisations
T-shirts made to publicise the project and campaign 57.58
Presentation made to Local Authority members in Carrick-on-Shannon and 250.00
discussion of results of project
TOTAL DISSEMINATION AND EXPLOITATION OF RESULTS 395.58

Other costs directly linked to the implementation of the project
Please specify other costs directly linked to the implementation of this project.

Specification Costs

Facilitators of seminars, meetings, conferences 2017.66
Cost of resources for meetings, consultations, seminars, conference 753.63
Internal travel to meetings 907.12

TOTAL 3678.41

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 35
Indirect costs
Please specify other costs indirectly linked to this project.

Specification Costs

Phone/Internet costs in Ireland and Poland 431.51
Contribution towards office overheads (heat, light, rent, insurance) 1000.00
Internal travel to meetings 537.43
Administration staff costs 630.00
TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS 2,598.94

Youth in Action programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects Page 36
List of young persons and other participants (For more participants use copies of this page or extend the list with copy/paste of rows above.)
Activity title: Democratic Energies

Venue: Dates: 01.03.2014 – 30.10.2014

Young
person (YP)
Female (F) Year of
N° Family name, first name Date of arrival Date of departure Country of residence E-mail address OR other Signature
or male (M) birth
participant
(OP)

1 Debbie Beirne – Leader Ireland ruachrhythms@gmail.com F OP

2 Art Counihan - Leader Ireland M OP 1989

3 Diarmuid Django Armstrong Ireland diarmoarmstrong@gmail.com M YP 1997

4 Sarah Beirne Ireland F YP 1996

5 Amy Beirne Ireland F YP 1993

6 Eleanor Louise Cooke Ireland Tigertales98@gmail.com F YP 1998

7 Oisin McAuley Ireland youthmardingo@gmail.com M YP 1997

8 Micael McAuley Ireland mcauleymicael@gmail.com M YP 1996

Catherine Glimartin Catherinegilmartin41@gmail.co
9 Ireland F YP 1998
m

10 Stanley Dimes Ireland jackiedimes@gmail.com M YP 1997

11 Jacob Ripley Ireland M YP 1998
12 Jack Cavaliero Ireland Jack.cou97@live.com M YP 1997
13 Aedin McLoughlin Ireland aedinmcloughlin@gmail.com F OP 1957
14 Liam Breslin Ireland irishfarmsmatter@gmail.com M OP 1955
15 Meg Rybicki Ireland youthmardingo@gmail.com F OP 1963
16 Alicia Rybicki Ireland alicia2554@gmail.com F OP 1992
17 Roza Wypyska – Leader Poland roza.wy@interia.pl F OP 1992
18 Jonasz Bisaga Poland biszkopt225@gmail.com M YP 1995
19 Weronika Kopacz Poland wkopacz426@poczta.fm F YP 2000
20 Szymon Kobyłczyk Poland skobylcz@gmail.com M YP 1995
21 Andzelika Szyjka Poland aszyjka0007@interia.pl F YP 1995
22 Dominik Szyjka Poland domins54@interia.pl M YP 1996
23 Ewelina Jarczyk – Leader Poland ejarczyk@tlen.pl F OP 1994
24 Piotr Przeciszowski Poland kaczorpix@interia.pl M YP 1995

Youth in Action Programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects List of participants
List of young persons and other participants (For more participants use copies of this page or extend the list with copy/paste of rows above.)
Activity title: Democratic Energies

Venue: Dates: 01.03.2014 – 30.10.2014

Young
person (YP)
Female (F) Year of
N° Family name, first name Date of arrival Date of departure Country of residence E-mail address OR other Signature
or male (M) birth
participant
(OP)

1 Debbie Beirne – Leader Ireland ruachrhythms@gmail.com F OP

25 Kacper Siwek Poland polak9889@wp.pl M YP 1998
26 Mateusz Gorecki Poland mateuszgorecki760@interia.pl M YP 1998
27 Marcelina Łapuszek Poland mlapuszek@op.pl F YP 1994
28 Konrad Jarczyk Poland kjarczyk2@interia.pl M YP 1997
29 Sergii Marynkovskyi Ireland marinkovsky_sergey@ukr.net M OP 1987
30 Irina Tiugan Ireland Irina.geai@gmai.com F OP 1989
31 Olga Zoma Ireland Olga1.geai@gmail.com F OP 1988
32 Santi Agra Ireland Santi1.geai@gmail.com M OP 1988
33 Katharina Dietz Ireland Capybara4ever@gmail.com F YP 1999
34 Wanda Jarczyk Poland wjarczyk@tlen.pl F OP 1970

The European Commission, the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency and the National Agencies inform the participants that all data provided in this report will be used for the purposes of solely managing
and evaluating the Youth in Action Programme. All personal data collected for the purpose of this project shall be processed in accordance with Regulation (EC) N° 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on
the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies.

Data subjects may, on written request, gain access to their personal data. They should address any questions regarding the processing of their personal data to the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency or
the relevant National Agency. Data subjects may lodge a complaint against the processing of their personal data with the European Data Protection Supervisor at any time.

Youth in Action Programme – Sub-Action 1.3 - Youth Democracy Projects List of participants