Access to decent housing. Pata-Cluj pilot project 2016 by Pata-Cluj

Access to decent housing Pata-Cluj pilot project

Content 1. The access of marginalized groups to social apartments in the context of national and local (Cluj-level) policies

1.1. The access of marginalized groups to social housing in national context

1.2. The access of marginalized groups to housing in the context of Cluj-Napoca

2. The approach to housing within the Pata-Cluj project

2.1. Housing policies based on rights versus policies based on needs

2.2. The Pata-Cluj intervention in the context of housing policies

2.3. The limits of the Pata-Cluj intervention

3. The Pata-Cluj pilot intervention

3.1. The housing condition/the housing need of the communities of Pata Rât 3.2. Community consultations regarding housing needs

4. The process of elaborating the accession system for the Pata-Cluj social housing 4.1. The elaboration methodology of the accession criteria for the Pata-Cluj social housing

15 16 17 17

PHASE I. THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE NEEDS RELATED TO HOUSING BEFORE AND FOLLOWING THE MOVING OF FAMILIES

PHASE II. COMMUNITY CONSULTATIONS IN THE PATA RÂT AREA REGARDING THE PATACLUJ SOCIAL HOUSING ACCESSION SYSTEM

PHASE III. THE WORKING OUT OF THE ACCESSION CRITERIA WITH THE IMPLICATION OF THE CONSULTATIVE GROUP OF STAKEHOLDERS

4.2. The presentation of the results 4.2.1. The identification of the housing needs before and after the moving of the families

4.2.2. Conclusions

4.2.3. The criteria identified by consulting the Pata Rât communities

4.2.4. The role of the group of stakeholders and of the Pata-Cluj team in the development of the assessment criteria

5. The Pata-Cluj social housing accession system

5.1. Eligibility criteria regarding access to the Pata-Cluj social housing

5.2. Assessment criteria for accessing the Pata-Cluj social apartments

6. Interventions planned for re-housing

7. Instead of conclusions

1. The access of marginalized groups to social houses in the context of national and local (Cluj-Napoca) policies 1.1.The access of marginalized groups1 to social housing2 within the national context Access to decent housing has to lay at the core of all systems of policies and coherent actions targeting social inclusion. The Romanian Government has taken the responsibility to prioritize the fight against poverty and social exclusion, one of the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. According to Eurostat data, more than one third of Romania’s population (40.2%) lived under the threat of poverty or social exclusion in 20143. Moreover, Romania is the first among the EU member states on overcrowded dwellings (52.3%). In what concerns the population in risk of poverty the overcrowding rate reaches

66.6%. The persistence of this situation is due to several factors: political, institutional and those linked to the real estate market. Among the political factors one can enlist: the lack of political will for implementing the assumed strategies, the marginalization of the problems the most vulnerable communities encounter, the lack of reparatory measures in cases of evictions etc. There are also institutional factors that contribute to the persistence of the problem, i.e. the need for a harmonization of the legislative and institutional framework, of certain fragmented programs, that depend, in general, on

Social marginalization is defined as a peripheral, isolated social position of individuals or groups with limited access to the economic, politic, educational and communicational resources of the community (Law no 116/2002 regarding the prevention and combating of social marginalization); 1

Social housing is defined as a dwelling granted against subsidized rent to people or families, the economic situation of which doesn’t allow them to own an apartment or to rent one under the market’s conditions (Housing Act no 114/1996, Article 2, paragraph c.). 2

http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/People_at_risk_of_poverty_or_social_exclusion 3

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 5

the power relationships at local level, a deficient housing sector etc. There are measures/ programs intended to regenerate the construction of social housing units, but unfortunately these are insufficient for the existing needs. The impact of such programs is marginal, on one hand because it only addresses the middle-class and is not addressing wider audience, and on the other hand the small number of housing units does not fulfill the needs. The third factor is related to the existence of a low stock of state owned housing units which could gain various usages, for example could be transformed into social houses, and to the fast degradation of a certain part of the existing housing stock etc. According to the data of the last census of population and dwellings (2011), the stock of dwellings in Romania counts 8.722,398 units, out of which only 98,263 units are in the state’s property4. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights indicated in its latest periodic monitoring report on the implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights that the decreased stock of social housing in Romania was a problematic aspect5. Because of that the state is incapable to respond to the housing needs of a significant part of the population, although “the subsidization of housing and public utilities are measures for combating social exclusion regulated by Law no 116/2002 on Combating Social Marginalization”6. In general, we lack an accurate and up-to-date assessment of the needs for social housing (which would not be based exclusively on the number of the requests submitted for social housing) at local level and of the resources which could be used for that. According to the Housing Act no 114/1996 (and its subsequent modifications and completions), local councils are generally responsible for creating and managing the stock of social dwellings needed to cover the local needs. In turn, the criteria for granting the social houses are established by local councils, a fact which in practice implies an extended discrepancy at

national level on the way the members of marginalized groups can actually access the houses intended, in theory, for them. In practice, the increased need for social housing, coupled with an insufficient stock of social dwellings, generates a “competition” among the groups considered as having priority regarding this segment of housing7. Moreover, according to the law, social housing addresses people’s or families’ “economic situation which doesn’t allow them to own an apartment or to rent one under the market’s conditions”. However, the income thresholds of the eligible renters would render as potential beneficiaries almost the entire population, thus most local authorities prioritize families with few children and enough income to cover the related costs when granting social houses and not to the families with many children (especially Roma families) and biggest needs. Thus, the most vulnerable groups remain outside the impact range of these policies. In the above mentioned report on monitoring the implementation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights calls the attention on the necessity to give priority to social housing to the marginalized and disadvantaged groups, especially Roma. Currently, as the National Strategy for Social Inclusion and Combating Poverty 2015-2020 reveals, the local authorities in Romania operate rather as financial managers of social houses. This fact entails significant risks in itself, first of all in terms of the potential segregation of certain areas with social houses. There is not an integrated inter-sectorial approach at place to include, besides access to housing, access to services targeting employment, social and educational services. The latest documents of public policies elaborated by the Romanian Government or pending (the National Strategy for Social Inclusion and Combating Poverty 2015-2020, the Anti-Poverty Package8 and National Housing Strategy9) converge towards a multi-sectorial, integrated

The census of the population and of dwellings, 2011, Preliminary results. Table 11. Conventional dwellings on property types (accessed in September 2016). 4

http://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=E/C.12/ ROU/CO/3-5&Lang=En 5

http://www.ier.ro/sites/default/files/pdf/SPOS_2013_nr.2.pdf

http://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/eca/romania/OutputEN.pdf

and harmonized approach, intended to fill in the existing gaps of the legal system and of the public policies. Thus, the National Strategy for Social Inclusion and Combating Poverty 2015-2020 suggests, among others: the evaluation of the housing needs, providing services related to housing by including a housing component as well in the minimum insertion income, which would ensure the costs of the rent and part of the heating costs, and the increase of allocations for social houses. The chapter on housing of the Strategy of the Romanian Government for the inclusion of Romanian citizens of Roma minority foresees the construction of social apartments, which would be accessible in a non-discriminative way to Romanian citizens belonging to the Roma minority with low incomes10. The Anti-Poverty Package includes 47 distinct measures. One of these measures is entitled social housing, and for example foresees the improvement of the stock of social housing units, the improvement of the management policy of

these units, the liability of local councils to implement an online system which would ensure the transparency of the allocation system of the social housing units, the creation of national allocation criteria, which would favor families with children and young people coming from the child protection system and people with disabilities, and finally the existence of a clear rate system, to include all the groups specified by the law. The new National Housing Strategy suggests among others the increase of the social housing stock by various measures, like partnerships with private investors, in which the local authority would provide for the plot and the infrastructure, and the private sector would actually build the housing units, would collect the rents and keep them for a fixed period of time; and the assessment/modification of the selection housing criteria in order to make them transparent and simple (including the re-examination of certain criteria regarding education and residence, which disfavor precisely the marginalized groups).

http://gov.ro/fisiere/stiri_fisiere/16-02-18-06-29-39160217_Pachet_integrat_pentru_ combaterea_saraciei.pdf 8

http://www.mdrap.ro/hg-pentru-aprobarea-strategiei-nationale-a-locuirii

http://www.anr.gov.ro/docs/Site2014/Strategie/Strategie_final_18-11-2014.pdf

Access to decent housing â&#x20AC;˘ Pata-Cluj â&#x20AC;˘ 7

1.2. The access of the marginalized groups to housing in the context of Cluj-Napoca Municipality The conventional housing stock in Cluj county consists of 312,886 units, out of which only 2,537 are owned by the state, according to the data of the same census carried in 2011, . In the city of Cluj-Napoca there were 129,837 dwellings, 98.1% of these being private property, and 1.3% being owned by the state. In 2014, the public housing stock consisted of 1,554 units, which means less than 1.5% of the total housing units in the city. The stock consists of “174 housing units built within the program of the National Housing Agency (ANL)11, 1,368 social housing units and units belonging to the national housing stock, fully occupied, and 12 emergency housing units”12. The extension of the public social housing stock is one of the main components in the list of measures proposed within the Development Strategy of Cluj-Napoca for 2014-202013. The concrete measures in this respect would be: • The identification of the plots and the development of the needed infrastructure with the aim of leasing them towards the beneficiaries, with the help of NGOs specialized in social housing; • The restoration of certain buildings owned by the local council, in order to turn them into social housing units; • The acquisition of unfinished buildings from the private real estate market, which have produced an uncontrolled and deficient urbanization, the restoration of such buildings (also through European Structural Funds) and their inclusion into the public housing stock; • Promoting public-private partnerships in the field of housing, with the aim of transferring a certain percentage of the apart-

ments built by private companies to the public housing system. The buildings would be maintained by the local authorities through the concession of the plots, infrastructural development and other facilities ensured for the companies. The Social Housing Policy File14 compiled by the collective affiliated to the Desiré Foundation in Cluj-Napoca15 adds new suggestions which complete the above-mentioned proposals: circuit removal of certain buildings with other destination than housing and their introduction into public housing circuit, the expropriation for public interest, the takeover, destruction and of certain buildings with another usage and the clearing the plot for building social housing units –all these measures aggregated within the framework of a local housing program correlated with the future National Housing Strategy, currently in the public consultation phase. As we have previously shown the allocation procedure of social housing units is the prerogative of local public authorities. Through the methodological norms regarding the application of Housing Act no 114/1996, the legislator directs the evaluators to check during the selection procedure the housing conditions of the applicant, the number of children and other individuals managing the same household with the applicant, the health condition of the applicant or certain family members of the applicant, as well as the period of time since the first application have been made. In the case of Cluj-Napoca the current selection criteria do take into account all these aspects, but also other criteria like the level of education, transforming, as representatives of the civil society and of the Pata Rât community and the scholars show, “the granting of a social housing unit into a competi-

See above the observations regarding the ANL program destined to young people and its addressability. 11

http://www.desire-ro.eu/wp-content/uploads/dosarul-politicii-loc-sociale-cluj_web-1.pdf

http://www.primariaclujnapoca.ro/userfiles/files/strategia2015.pdf

http://www.desire-ro.eu/wp-content/uploads/dosarul-politicii-loc-sociale-cluj_web-1.pdf

Vincze, E.: Proposals on budgeting local inclusion and social and territorial cohesion policies. The case of the disadvantaged area of Pata Rât, http://www.desire-ro.eu/wp-content/uploads/prop-buget-incluz-prim-CL_desiremart2013.pdf; Vincze, E.: Prevention and 15

tion among the deserving accepted to live in the city”16. Criticism regarding the social housing allocation system has been coupled with a series of proactive initiatives for their modification. Thus, one of the actions using the participatory research method, implemented within the Local Engagement for Roma Inclusion project of the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) of the European Union in Cluj-Napoca was the proposal for the modification of the criteria for allocating social housing units17. Some of these recommendations have been taken into account by the Local Council of Cluj-Napoca as a result of this action: the eligibility of applicants who earn their incomes on the basis of fixed-term contracts, the eligibility of applicants who have temporary identity cards, and the increase of the score for the so-called exceptional cases. Promoted within the framework of the So-

cial Housing NOW! campaign (Campania Căși Sociale ACUM)18, the Social Housing Policy File elaborated by the collective affiliated to the Desiré Foundation reiterates some of the criticized aspects of the existing allocation system and the modification proposals: the introduction of the selection criterion on education, and its disproportionate weight compared to other criteria, given the reduced access to education of marginalized people. Additionally, the representatives of the campaign recommend that the minimum national income should be taken into account as a type of income which ensures eligibility to social housing, and that those cases when the applicant is a vulnerable person, is a person with disabilities or a care provider of a dependent person, who does not have any other sources of income than allowances should also be taken into account.

fight against forced evictions – instrument of eradicating social marginalization, http:// www.desire-ro.eu/wp-content/uploads/prop-evac-incluz-soc_desire-oct2o13-final.pdf; Vincze E.: Cluj city – city without socio-territorial exclusion 2014, http://www.desire-ro.eu/ wp-content/uploads/Cluj-oras-fara-excluz-socio-terit_EV_20iun2014.pdf http://www.desire-ro.eu/wp-content/uploads/dosarul-politicii-loc-sociale-cluj_web-1.pdf

http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/leri_community_summary_-_cluj_napoca_-_romania_-_ro.pdf 17

http://www.desire-ro.eu/?page_id=2219

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 9

2. The housing approach within the Pata-Cluj project 2.1. Housing policies based on rights versus policies based on needs As we have previously shown, social housing allocation policies usually revolve around the concept of the “needs” of the families belonging to vulnerable groups. Besides the proven need, in most cases the accession criteria are completed with other aspects, which take into account the characteristics of the applicant, like their capacity to financially maintain the apartment, whether the potential beneficiary belongs to the sphere of specific intervention, and their behavior, which would entail as few risks as possible on the social level. These latter characteristics can be summed up as being “prepared” to be the beneficiary of a social housing unit. Policies relying on this housing ready19 approach usually set up a system of ac-

cession criteria, with which the applicant needs to “be in line”. Thus, the access of the most vulnerable groups becomes problematic, while structural violence20 as a cause is neglected. Within this methodological framework, emphasis is put on the selection of social housing beneficiaries, which would be able to both demonstrate the need they have and to show they own the resources for the upkeep of the social housing unit. In Romania, social housing can be accessed provided/on the condition that the applicant family is able to demonstrate both the existence of family resources as well as its vulnerability. The emphasis on income in the selection process of beneficiaries is reiterated again

See for ex. Ready or not? Considerations for the Old Housing Service System. Research report.. http://www.hpw.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/ready-or-not-housing-readiness-report.pdf 19

As used by David Gil, see Gil, D. (1971) Violence against Children. Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 33, No. 4, Special Double Issue: Violence and the Family and Sexism in Family Studies, Part 2, pp. 637-648 20

and again in public discourse, circulated also in professional circles, which highlights the fact that in case of failure, the family remains the “guilty”/responsible for not being able to cover the expenses incurred by the social housing unit. Thus, the existing system favors the allocation of social housing units to families, which in many cases, as they own the resources specified by the criteria, would be suitable to receive other types of support (i.e. rent subsidy on the private real estate market). The situation in Pata Rât is much the same: often families which need to benefit from social housing the most are not considered eligible to access the public social housing system21. Having said that, the advantage of the housing ready policy is the fact that it is capable of focusing on the specific needs of the target groups, promoting various types of specialized, home-delivered services. The public policy recommendations, which respond to the housing ready approach by promoting a “relaxation” of the criteria in order to improve the access of vulnerable families to social housing, are situated in the above mentioned framework. However, policies supporting unconditioned access to social housing are also needed, based on the housing first program and on the principle of the right to housing. The housing first policy22.23, is a response to the housing ready approach. Its starting point is the idea that all people are “prepared” to live in decent conditions. It promotes a very low threshold for accessing social housing, by claiming that decent housing is the right environment for each person, and most of the vulnerabilities of families and people are due precisely to their precarious housing conditions which, in turn, are the consequences of structural problems of society. According to the housing first methodology, the improvement of the social and economic situation of the recipient becomes an objective only after his/her/their housing condition is stabilized, namely after moving into a social housing unit. The methodology foresees a comprehensive social assistance scheme, which would respond to complex needs, and would be based on the voluntary participation of the family or

person receiving in the social housing. The results of the assessment studies, carried out in several countries of Europe following housing first pilot interventions, even if the vast majority of these addressed homeless people facing a unique set of problems, still reveal certain important aspects that need to be taken into account both in the preparation and implementation phases of any housing first type social housing program (Busch-Geertsema, 2014)24:

a.Need for support after moving into the social housing unit It has been revealed that support needs to be provided regarding the management of relationships with the owners and the neighbors, the settling into the apartment, covering expenses, obtaining personal documents for acquiring various social transfers etc. Isolation and loneliness were identified as major problems in the period following relocation. Relationship based on respect and empathy between the professional workers and the clients (service users) was considered a key factor in the improvement of life quality.

b.The housing types on offer The same assessment study (Busch‐Geertsema, 2014) shows that housing in individual apartments usually is more successful than collective housing. The latter was more adequate for families which expressly preferred this type of housing, and in cases, where intervention in individual apartments wasn’t successful.

c.Changes in the quality of life The improvement of life quality, in terms of health or the reduction of drug use is being attributed to the “ontological security”25, that is to the fact that decent housing ensures security through “daily routines, privacy and identity construction, and a stable platform for a less stigmatized and more normalized life”26. Less positive results were also registered with respect to financial situation, participation in the labor market and social relationships. Improvement of the financial situation depend-

See http://www.desire-ro.eu/wp-content/uploads/dosarul-politicii-loc-sociale-cluj_web1.pdf 21

Housing First is defined as “(…) approach to homelessness that involves moving people who experience homelessness into independent and permanent housing as quickly as possible, with no preconditions, and then providing them with additional services and supports as needed.” Housing First uses the following core principles: Immediate access 22

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 11

ed mostly on the social protection system in the respective country. Where the support system is weak, the success of the housing first program has been heavily compromised (for example in Hungary).

d.Integration in the community and in the neighborhood The success of community integration relied on several elements, for example on readiness and willingness to participate in community actions, but it also depended on the financial resources of the families/individuals.

e.Cost-efficiency Since the housing first policy requires the provision of intense support, the costs of the intervention are considerable. At the same time, success, - which translates to the achievement of maintaining the dwelling and respecting the contractual engagements on the long run - is associated with programs which have enough funding for ensuring complex assistance. Failure, namely the incapacity to maintain the apartment under the valid contractual terms, is linked to an under-developed social assistance system and the lack of financial subsidies granted to the participants in the program, whose qualification is insufficient for participating in the labor market.

to permanent housing with no housing readiness requirements; Consumer choice and self â&#x20AC;&#x201C;determination; Recovery orientation, focusing on individual well being, including harm reduction; Individualized and client driven supports; Social and community integration. As a philosophy, Housing First is a belief that all people deserve housing and anyone can be supported into housing directly from homelessness. This belief holds regardless of the level or intensity of individual and structural issues that led to their homeless, and states that housing should be the first and most primary need to address in case of people experiencing homelessness. Stephen Gaetz, Fiona Scott & Tanya Gulliver (Eds.) (2013): Housing First in Canada: Supporting Communities to End Homelessness. Toronto: Canadian Homelessness Research Network Press. The Pathways Housing First Model has been remarkably successful in addressing chronic homelessness. Dr. Sam Tsemberis founded the model in New York in 1992 to test his revolutionary belief that those with severe psychiatric and addiction challenges living on the street could go directly into housing. See also Tanya Tull. 23

European Journal of Homelessness, vol 8, no 1, August 2014, http://www.feantsaresearch.org/IMG/pdf/article-01_8.1.pdf 24

In terms as used by A. Giddens, see Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society, Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press. 25

European Journal of Homelessness, volume 8, nr 1, august 2014, http://www.feantsaresearch.org/IMG/pdf/article-01_8.1.pdf 26

2.2. The Pata-Cluj intervention in the context of housing policies We believe that, in the context of the necessity of spatial desegregation and social inclusion of the most vulnerable communities in Cluj-Napoca, the “housing ready” versus “housing first” dichotomy could be transformed into a complex and integrative housing policy. This integration would mean the introduction of the housing first policy in case of social housing, backed by a solid and complex social services system centered on housing., Besides the measures implemented within the residential services, this system should include other types of support as well, including financial support, to respond to certain specific needs of the target groups addressed by the housing policies. The reform of the national and local system of accessing social housing remains a priority. However, we think that at the moment, in Romania there are much too few experiences and validated methodologies concerning the allocation of social housing units, much too few alternative methods for supporting subsidized housing and complex assistance granted to families in order to maintain the houses, which could form the base of the new policies. The Pata-Cluj project wishes to contribute to these efforts targeting the social inclusion of the most disadvantageous communities by ensuring decent housing conditions, as part of the integrated measures for social inclusion. Since the aim of this project is to pilot methodologies, on which interventions from the part of public authorities could rely on when fulfilling their responsibility in implementing national policies of social inclusion, the results of the project will add a certain amount of know-how regarding various types of housing: social housing in rural and urban areas, assistance for families with complex needs related to inclusion, and for families with less complex needs (or even without any need for comple-

mentary assistance), or housing in individual social housing units and collective housing units. Within the framework of the housing component of the Pata-Cluj project, participatory social housing would be piloted, and 32 apartments outside the Pata Rât area will be built/purchased, available exclusively for the members of the communities in Pata Rât. Since the number of housing units within this project covers only approximately 10% of the total amount of housing units needed for the spatial desegregation of the communities living at present in the Pata Rât area, we are faced with the issue of having to select those families, which could benefit from these apartments. At present, the Romanian public and private system of social assistance is incapable of providing the necessary support, neither in terms of social services nor support services, in order to surpass complex situations of vulnerability that families living in marginalized communities face27. Therefore, even if the project does promote the principle of the right to housing, the methodology fits into a housing ready policy. Without the intention to “reward” those who have more resources at their disposal, we needed to create an accession system, which also functions as a complex system for assessing the needs and resources of the families applying for a social housing unit. Thus, within the framework of the project, a system for accessing the social housing was elaborated. This system is applicable to heavily disadvantaged communities, whenever a selection of the recipients is needed. According to the principles of the Pata-Cluj project, housing is a right, and not a means for social control, where the “deserving poor” gain this “benefit” through individual efforts. In this context, the easiest way for “selection” would be to draw lots in

Raţ C. (2012) Sărăcie şi marginalizare socială în rândul familiilor cu copii [Poverty and social marginalization among families with children], în Rotariu, T. and Voineagu, V. (eds.) Inerţie şi Schimbare [Inertia and change]. Iaşi, Polirom, pp. 179-198. 27

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 13

order to select those families, /wishing to participate. In the social and economic context of Pata Rât, this would mean a housing first type of intervention, where access to social housing is not linked to meeting certain conditions. We believe that in some cases, granting decent housing would be sufficient for the social inclusion of the family. On the contrary, in other cases, social inclusion would depend upon the success of social assistance measures based on decent housing conditions, including both services and social transfers. The Pata-Cluj methodology adopts the perspective of rights, with express emphasis on children’s rights, and a systemic approach, which takes into account various levels of intervention.

The system includes the accession criteria of the apartments and the instruments for assessing the needs and resources of the families, which wish to apply for social housing within the Pata-Cluj project. The intervention plan is completed on the basis of this assessment. Granting a social housing unit is in fact part of this intervention plan, which, however, has to be coupled with other measures in basic areas, like health, education and employment. The intervention plan itself focuses on the child, and revolves around the family28. Thus, assessment is based on the perspective of the rights of children, meaning that it analyzes the resources and needs of the family in the context of raising and caring for children.

2.3. The limits of the Pata-Cluj intervention The project does not succeed in responding to the housing needs of the most vulnerable families, since it does not have at its disposal either in the public or private sector the resources needed to ensure complex assistance. As a result, even if intervention plans will be completed for all the families submitting a request for social housing, the assessment criteria will take into account both the needs and the resources of the families. Finally, the assessment would allow for the prioritization of the families, that need a lower level of assistance (in terms of finances and ability development) at present, the Pata-Cluj promoter being able to ensure these resources also after the end of financing. The Pata-Cluj project is not in favor of the “privatization” either of the issue of social housing or of the social housing units themselves.

The fact that the intervention is carried out outside the system of public services, although it falls under the group of interventions which have to be ensured by public authorities, has both advantages and disadvantages. The advantages of the interventions implemented in the private sector consist in flexibility, the possibility for experimentation and piloting. Since this is a pilot project, it is possible to try out and re-plan interventions in a short period of time, which would be much more troublesome in the public sector. The disadvantages consist in the possibility that the results, like the concepts, methodologies and instruments created within the project, may remain outside public policies, as this depends to a great extent on the engagement of the responsible authorities may take in this regard.

“child centered and family focused” in Parton, N. (2014). The politics of child protection. Contemporary development stand future directions. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 28

3. The Pata-Cluj pilot intervention 3.1. The housing condition/the housing need of the communities of Pata Rât The Pata-Rât area is one of the most intricate cases of social marginalization in Romania, “cumulating the effects of polluted environment, geographical isolation, socio-territorial segregation, housing deprivation and cultural stigmatization”29. In what follows, we briefly present in a descriptive manner the housing situation in this community, mainly on the basis of the research carried out within the framework of the United Nations Development Programme entitled “Preparatory Phase for Model Project: making the most of EU Fund for Sustainable Housing and Inclusion of disadvantaged Roma (explicitly but not exclusively targeted) in Cluj Metropoli-

tan Area”, and presented in the report entitled “Participatory assessment of the social situation of Pata Rât”30, completed with the observations of our project team which has been carrying out daily activities in the community for around three years. The data of the participatory assessment, although carried out in 2012, still accurately reflect the precarious housing conditions of the Pata Rât communities. According to the Participatory assessment of the social situation of Pata Rât research report, around 1156 people live in the Pata Rât communities, namely Cantonului, Dallas, Colina Verde (the modular houses area) and Rampa (Land-

A community summary on the Cantonului street in Cluj-Napoca, written within the framework of Activity 4 of the project Local Engagement for Roma Inclusion of the European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) by the project team. The document has been submitted to the Municipality of Cluj-Napoca. 29

Raţ C. et all, (2012) Participatory Assessment of the Social Situation in the Pata-Rat and Cantonului Areas http://www.undp.ro/libraries/projects/75023_UNDP-UBB_Research_Report_Participatory_Assessment_Para_rat_Cluj.pdf 30

Other reviewed literature consists in the issued documents.

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 15

fill). According to the estimations of the project team made during the activities in the field, during the last four years the population grew to around 1,500 people. The vast majority of the members of the Pata Rât community declare themselves Roma ethnics. The polluted environment in which these communities live, spatial isolation, the lack of housing security, the inaccessibility of public education and of job opportunities, the precariousness of the dwellings (overcrowding, lack of lavatory or kitchen, in some cases the lack of basic utilities like electricity and a generally missing sewage system) are only some of the deeply troublesome aspects related to living in Pata Rât. The institutional response to spatial desegregation and social inclusion has not yet succeeded in bringing about significant changes in this respect. As revealed in the UNDP report, the Pata Rât area became gradually populated even before 1990. Each area, each family and individual has their own history and different features. The

structural factors determining the concentration of the population in this segregated area is multiple like a consequence of the loss of jobs caused by the closing of state enterprises, relocations and evictions by the authorities etc. Some inhabitants moved into the community upon reaching adulthood, after leaving the child protection system, or following a family reintegration program, carried out in the context of the necessity for the rapid reform of the child protection system in the EU pre-accession period, but also after that.. The lack of specific, efficient services targeting reintegration after institutional care, coupled with an unstable economic and social context, led to the situation of many young adults ending up settling in this area. Living in the Pata Rât area itself leads in too many situations to experiences of discrimination and difficulties in actually exerting the right to education, health, housing, identity or access to support services for each of the children in Pata Rât.

3.2. Community consultations regarding housing needs Community consultations carried out in all four Pata Rât communities between 2012 and 201432 represent the basis of the Pata-Cluj project. During the consultations, the following needs related to decent housing were identified: • Spatial integration: the majority of people living in Pata Rât expressed their wish to live in integrated areas of the city, together with the majority population; • Decent housing, with access to public services (access to utilities, public transportation); • Safe housing; • The proximity of schools, health services and workplaces; • Moving from Pata Rât has to be the families’ own choice – the eradication of other types of “relocations”, like evictions of people from Pata Rât; • The availability of the option to live in a rural area; • Support in ensuring the means for the upkeep of the new apartments, including employment services; • Support in developing good relationships with the neighbors belonging to the majority population.

After the implementation of the housing component within the Pata-Cluj project was started, a consultation was organized expressly for the Rampa community (in April 2016, at the Mobile Unit in Pata Rât) regarding the housing needs of this specific community. The consultation revealed the fact that the type of intervention proposed within the Pata-Cluj project, based on family-level intervention and housing in individual apartments, is not in accordance with their family and community needs. While the Pata-Cluj project aims for the desegregation and for the social and spatial inclusion of the families currently living in Pata Rât into the majority population, while having at its core an intervention/ support plan targeting the family as “the unit of intervention”, the option expressed by the families from the Rampa community (approx. 25 families, all from the same kinship) was to move together and simultaneously. The most important resource for these families consists in the relationships within the enlarged family, which are considered more valuable than any other support received from the outside. Consultations revealed the need for participatory intervention, fitted for the specific needs of this group, which would take into account the practices of mutual help existing in this community.

See information on the referred project at http://patacluj.ro/pentru-comunitatea-clujeana/studii/ 32

4. The process of elaborating the accession system for the Pata-Cluj social housing program 4.1.The elaboration methodology of the accession criteria for the Pata-Cluj social housing program The elaboration methodology of the accession criteria for the Pata-Cluj social housing program had three distinct phases:

PHASE I. THE IDENTIFICATION OF THE NEEDS RELATED TO HOUSING BEFORE AND AFTER FAMILIES MOVE In order to be able to plan the assistance measure necessary for the preparation of families for moving, and for those after moving of the recipient families in the social housing units, we collected information in an effort to seek the opinion of the members of the Pata Rât communities regarding their support needs before and after moving. Focus groups were held with the aim of identifying attitudes related to three issues among the targeted population, i.e.: (I) the needs generated by the possibility of leaving the community, of moving into

the new apartments and of sustaining them, (II) the amount of expenses considered to be “affordable” for the moving families, (III) the type of apartment they would deem appropriate. First of all, when organizing the focus groups, the specificity of the respective community has been taken into account. As the three communities (Dallas, Coastei and Cantonului) have their own features, problems and needs, we decided to organize separate focus groups in each community. Since our intention was that the participants at the focus groups represent as homogenous a group as possible, we chose to form groups on the basis of gender and power position, in order to create a discussion model where the views of women could be expressed openly, which were just as important for us as Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 17

the men’s . We preferred to organize separate groups for the leaders of the communities, in order to identify community dynamics and topics. The recruitment of the participants was carried out following a vast information campaign and direct invitation of the members of the communities to focus groups and the registration of all people wishing to participate. Consequently, we organized one focus group for women (7 participants) and one for men (4 participants) in the Coastei community; one focus group for women (10 participants), one for men (6 participants) and one for leaders (3 participants) in the Cantonului community; one focus group for women (9 participants), one for men (7 participants) and one for leaders (2 participants) in the Dallas community.

completed by an adult member of the household, is to ensure the possibility for each member of the community to express their options, irrelevant of their position in the community. In order to be able to plan the assistance measures needed after the moving of the recipient families into the social housing units, the opinion of the members of the Pata Rat communities was surveyed regarding the need for support the families would have after moving. In this case, the research team chose the method of focus groups. The opinions of the community members about the eligibility and selection criteria were collected in the community, by entering into each household. The suggested criteria collected this way were grouped in sub-categories, then into categories.

PHASE II. COMMUNITY CONSULTATIONS IN THE PATA RÂT AREA REGARDING THE PATA-CLUJ SOCIAL HOUSING ACCESSION SYSTEM

Presentation of the research population

The selection of the consultation methodology Taking into account the participatory approach through which the Pata-Cluj project implements its interventions in the community, choosing the consultation method was of special interest throughout the process. We have organized information and consultation meetings regarding the Pata-Cluj social housing accession system with the communities, where we also discussed the way the opinions of the Pata Rât population should be collected regarding the accession system. The questionnaire method was chosen following the request expressed by the members of the community (consultation organized at the Căsuţa Verde center in Dallas in April 2016). The reason for conducting a micro-research based on a questionnaire, applied in all households in the Coastei, Cantonului and Dallas communities,

219 families were interviewed. Table 1 shows that the distribution of the response rate is very similar to the distribution of the families in the UNDP research (2012). The data within the table show that 50.3% of the answers were collected in the Cantonului community, which, according to the UNDP research (Raț et al., 2012), represents 49.78% of the total population in Pata Rât. The Rampa community was not taken into account when making this quantification. The percentage of answers obtained in the Coastei community is 20.64%, while the population of this community represents 21.08% of the total population of the targeted area. In the Dallas community we have achieved a percentage of 28.97% of the answers, the population of this community representing 29.15% of the total population of Pata Rât. These results confirm that the collected answers represent the communities according to their shares within the overall population of the targeted area.

Table no 1. The distribution of answers among the 3 communities Community

No of collected criteria

Percentages

No of families in the community*

Percentages

Cantonului

393

50,38%

111

49,78%

Coastei

161

20,64%

21,08%

Dallas

226

28,97%

29,15%

Total

780

100,00%

223

100.00%

*Conform cercetării UNDP (Raţ& colab, 2012) 18

PHASE III. PUTTING TOGETHER THE ACCESSION CRITERIA AND THE INVOLVEMENT OF THE CONSULTATIVE GROUP OF STAKEHOLDERS We have organized a total of 6 meetings33, with the participation of 21 persons from outside the project team, the participants being representatives of the academic field, of civil society (social services providers and representatives of various Roma organizations) and of institutions with different responsibilities in the field of social inclusion. The criteria obtained by the door-to-door survey in all the three communi-

ties, and the needs identified in the focus groups were presented both to the members of the team and to the stakeholders. These results were the starting point in the elaboration of the eligibility and selection criteria. The work group within the project team was working under the coordination of the researchers of the Faculty of Sociology and Social Work, Babeș-Bolyai University, using the Delphi method. The results of the Pata-Cluj team’s work were presented periodically to the consultative group of stakeholders, which during our meetings formulated questions and comments, but also suggested recommendations regarding the draft documents.

4.2. The presentation of the results

4.2.1. The identification of the housing needs before and after the moving of the families The topics deducted from the analysis of the focus groups are classified into four major categories. I. Support needs before moving II. Support needs after moving III. Rent and expenses with utilities IV. Housing types

4.2.2. Conclusions The content of the focus groups reflect the wish of the participants to improve their housing conditions, but they also reveal anxieties regarding the success of such project. We noticed that members of the Pata Rât community have mixed feelings in relation to moving out from the area. On the one hand, the participants see a chance of improving their life conditions in the possibility to move. On the other hand, they express anxiety of the unknown, and their suspicion of said change, which is the result of past negative experiences. The need for guarantees is often mentioned regarding the length of the contractual period of the rental contract, their ultimate wish being to become, in time, the owner of the rented apartment. The temporary character of the contract, especially uncertainty regarding its validity reduces the attractiveness of this solution. Concerning the participants’ views regarding the families’ needs before and after moving,

they are similar to those specified in the literature (i.e. Busch-Geertsema, 2014): support for settling in the apartment, covering the expenses, obtaining personal documents in order to gain various social transfers, securing employment, support in the management of relationships with the owners and neighbors etc. The preferred services are linked especially to financial and instrumental support in maintaining the apartment (subsidies of the expenses, enrollment of children to school etc.). Emotional needs and the preference for support targeting these needs are mentioned only relative to children, and very rarely to adults, although focus group participants expressed their anxiety related to changes that may occur when attempting to integrate into a new community of the majority population. As to differences among the communities, the focus group participants from Dallas expressed more needs related to income and employment, in the groups from the Coastei

http://patacluj.ro/componentele-proiectului/locuire/

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 19

community it was needs related to children that were primarily expressed. In the Cantonului community the idea of receiving support and help was quite unusual, no matter if it came from the outside or from other members of the community (with the exception of leaders). The members of the three Pata RĂ˘t communities are suspicious of each other, a person from one of the communities may wish that people from the other two communities didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t live in their proximity. Contrary to our expectations, the majority of young families with underage children

prefer to move out by themselves, only with the nuclear family, while part of the elderly people who have adult children prefer to move together with their children. The possibility to move is often seen as a way to escape from an extremely polluted and violent environment, even at the price of losing a community which, in certain cases, may have a protective effect. Regarding the housing units, aside from the preferred structure, they refer to their quality, and emphasize the importance of respecting decent standards.

4.2.3. Criteria identified by surveying the Pata RĂ˘t communities The criteria formulated by the community reflect the two main directives present in the most frequently used policies when addressing the accessibility of housing: the needs of the families and the capacity of the prospective recipient to sustain the apartment, both financially and through appropriate conduct, repre-

senting the lowest social risks. Starting from this clear duality of the obtained criteria, we grouped them into sustainability criteria (which involve raising the chances of families with more resources), and criteria based on needs (granting more chances to those in the most difficult situation and lack resources the most).

Table no 2. The categories ensuing from the options expressed by the members of the communities Type of criteria Resources Resources Resources Resources Resources Resources Resources Resources

Criteria Documents Non-aggressive behavior School Family Paying the bills Maintenance Health Income Total

No of choices 17

Type of criteria Needs

124

Needs

66 8 60 110 8 206 599

Needs Needs Needs

Table no 3 presents the criteria specified by the members of the communities, respecting their way of formulation.

Criteria Family Housing conditions Health Low income Documents

Total

No of choices 78 35 28 33 2

176

Table no 3. Criteria based on sustainability/resources Categories Documents Non-aggressive/ assertive behavior

The education of children

Family

Civic attitude

No of choices/ categ. 17 124

Criteria

No of choices

The beneficiaries have identity documents

The beneficiaries have valid marriage and birth certificates

The beneficiaries are quiet people/don’t cause scandals

The beneficiaries respect the rules

The beneficiaries are straightforward, respect others

The beneficiaries are integrated, involved in community issues

The beneficiaries don’t use vulgar words

The beneficiaries aren’t aggressive

The beneficiaries are good neighbors

The beneficiaries don’t damage goods

The beneficiaries don’t engage in illegal activities

The beneficiaries don’t steal

The children attend school

The children attend kindergarten

School attendance

The parents as well are educated

The parents take care of children

The family doesn’t have more than 2 or 3 children

The family consists of max. 6 members

The beneficiaries pay the rent and the utilities

The beneficiaries have a contract

The beneficiaries pay their taxes

The beneficiaries are trustworthy, support others from the community

Maintenance of the space

Promotion of health

Income

110

206

The beneficiaries take care of themselves, are clean

The beneficiaries keep their house and the common areas clean

The beneficiaries take care of their house

The beneficiaries are neat

The beneficiaries have already lived in the city

The beneficiaries don’t have problems related to alcohol

The beneficiaries don’t have problems related to drugs

The beneficiaries have full mental capacity

The beneficiaries have the ability of emotional control

The beneficiaries have stable income

The beneficiaries have a job

The beneficiaries should be working/should be diligent

Work experience

Both adults should be employed

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 21

Data in Table 3 show that employment and a steady income is very important for the members of the community (205 options), emphasizing the importance of the sustainability of the apartments. The second most important category referred to the capacity of the family to integrate into a community, which is included under the Non-aggressive behavior category. The attitudes specified under this category were considered important by 124 respondents. The third most prevalent category on the basis of options (110 options) proved to be the capacity of a family to sustain an apartment (the

enumerated attitudes were grouped under the category Maintenance of the space). These categories were followed by the education of children and the payment of debts. All this shows that the members of the communities are aware of the resources necessary for the long-term sustenance of the apartments and for the integration into the majority society, and that they support the moving of families which are prepared for this step. Conversely the idea of helping the neediest appears at the same time, the criteria detailing this aspect is included in Table 4.

Table no 4. Criteria based on need-related categories Categories Documents Family

Housing conditions

Health/ illness in the family Venit mic

No of choices/ categ. 2 78

Criteria

No of choices

Those who don’t have ID cards from Cluj

Those who have temporary ID cards

With children

Married

Single mother

Young people with family

Without close relatives

Who look after orphan children

Close-knit family

They don’t have/didn’t have their own dwelling

They don’t have a place to stay

They are in a “bad situation”

They have never been the inhabitants of a social housing unit

They have been living in Pata Rat for a long time (“The number of years since they are here”)

Toxicity

They don’t own any land

There is a disabled adult in the family

One adult in the family has a chronic illness

One child in the family has a chronic illness

State child care l allowance, welfare

Low income

The number of the respondents who mentioned the lack of resources among the criteria which render a family eligible for an apartment is much smaller than the number of those who accentuated the existence of resources among the selection criteria. The categories of needs adequate for inclusion into the criteria for obtaining an apartment were first of all those which are linked to family features (78 mentioning), and those linked to the existence of children (66). The second category of needs was linked to housing conditions (35), the members of the community expressing the opinion that those people who live in the most inappropriate conditions should have priority access to social housing. The third most frequently mentioned category was linked to the existence of people with disabilities in the family (28). We can notice that the dispersion of answers centered on the access to social housing on the basis of needs is significant, as there are a lot of aspects specified by a small number of people;

however, we can also see the relatively significant consensus regarding the priority of families with children, as this aspect was mentioned 66 times out of 176 (37.6%). In conclusion, we can state with certainty that the community members suggestions regarding the accession criteria reflect the resources versus needs paradigm, characteristic to housing policies. Since being prepared for a change (“readiness”) means, beyond the need for a change and the confidence in one’s own abilities, to cope with the new situation, and not the coping capacity in itself (Cohen, Anthony & Farkas, 1997)34, the role of experts in this phase of the process is outlined. On the one hand ensuring support in the self-evaluation of the prospective recipients and choosing the areas that need ability improvement. On the other hand support is needed for the development of the beneficiaries’ existing capacities in coping with the challenges of the new situation, change occurs (Cohen and Mynks, 1993)35.

4.2.4. The stakeholders΄ and of the Pata-Cluj team’s role in the development of the assessment criteria There are many social stakeholders in Pata Rat, involved in different activities – starting from the provision of social and educational services on the basis of a contract or as volunteers, to research activities and advocacy for the promotion of fundamental rights. Additionally, there is a certain expertise in civil society and public institutions, which implicitly include in their area of interest the social exclusion of the Pata Rât communities. In accordance with the participatory approach of the project, we invited 29 people to participate in the process of developing the accession system to the Pata-Cluj social housing units, all representatives of public institutions or NGOs and social activists. In consequence a consultative group of social stakeholders was formed that contributed with a specialized know how to this pro-

cess. This group includes all those experts who agreed to take part in the whole or part of the development process of the accession system to the Pata-Cluj social housing units. Therefore, the document specifying the eligibility and accession criteria is the result of collective work, the core of which is comprised by the views of the people from Pata Rât. Having said that, there were also critics of this consultative process, as certain representatives of civil society considered that the implication of stakeholders took place in a much too advanced phase of the project, and it is considered a mere act of tokenism, or one through which the project promoter intends to avoid the responsibility of developing the accession criteria.

Cohen, M. Anthony, W, and Farkas, M. (1997) Assessing and Developing Readiness for Psychiatric Rehabilitation Psychiatric Services, vol 48, no 5 34

Cohen, M. and Mynks, D. (eds). (1993), Compendium of Activities for Assessing and Developing Readiness, Boston: Boston University Centre for Psychiatric Rehabilitation. 35

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 23

5. The Pata-Cluj social housing accession system The Pata-Cluj social housing accession system consists of the following: Eligibility criteria, Criteria for the assessment of needs and resources, Eligibility criteria upon signing the rental contract, General conditions, The

Evaluator’s Guide and specific field assessment instruments. In the following document we present the eligibility criteria and the criteria for the assessment of the needs and resources.

Table no 5.1. Eligibility criteria regarding access to the Pata-Cluj social housing No crit.

Description of the eligibility criteria

The applicant family (all the adult members) has been living at least since June 26th 2015 (the closing of the landfill) in the Pata Rât disadvantaged areas (namely Cantonului, Dallas, Coastei or Rampă)

Applicant families are eligible, if they DO NOT own a building lot larger than 150 m2 on Romanian territory, nor do their immediate family members (spouses, partners, children), with whom the applicants share the same household.

The applicants (both members of the couple applying for an apartment) must be at least 16 years old.

Applicant families are eligible if its members DO NOT own a dwelling outside the Pata Rât area (Article 48, of the Housing Act No 114/1996)

Applicant families are eligible if they ARE NOT tenants in other social housing units outside the Pata Rât area (Article 48, paragraph d of the Housing Act No 114/1996)

Table no 5.2. Assessment criteria for accessing the Pata-Cluj social apartments

I. Family income Description of the criterion The family income does not exceed the national minimum wage (1.250 Ron gross amount) per family member. All types of income will be taken into account: wages received on the basis of employment or service contracts, wages earned as a self-employed person, wages earned as day-laborers declared at the financial authority, all sorts of pensions, or income from various social allowance benefits.

Possible answers/options

Points (max 10)

Wages - every income based on a formal contract (employment contract for an undetermined or determined period of time, day-labor contract, service contract, self-employed person etc.) 4 points will be given to each income within a household, but the whole category of family income can gain a maximum of 10 points

Pension received upon retirement, early retirement, partial early retirement, disability pension, survivorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pension, alimony. 4 points will be given to each pension within a household, but the whole category of family income can gain a maximum of 10 points

Entitlements, allowances, stipends, compensations A maximum of 4 points can be given under this sub-category State child allowance benefits

Family support allowance

Foster care allowance

Social welfare (Guaranteed Minimum Income)

Child care allowance

Insertion incentive for working parents

Social canteen (soup kitchen benefits)

Allowances and other benefits given to people with disabilities

Grants: public and private grants. Social grants as well as all scholarships of children will be taken into account (including different grants received by students living with the aplicant family).

In case of several children receiving grants within a family, points will not be cumulated under this subcategory. Other sources of income Informal income obtained without any formal contract in place, to be declared upon submitting the application. A maximum of 2 points can be gained under this subcategory. The informal income of several family members will not be cumulated.

Access to decent housing â&#x20AC;˘ Pata-Cluj â&#x20AC;˘ 25

II. Workplace (points under II.1. and II.2. will be summed up) Description of the criterion There is at least one person in the family aged over 16, who has a job with a formal contract for an undetermined or determined period of time (employment contract, day-labor contract etc.). More points will be given if 2 (or more) persons from the family (aged over 16) have jobs.

Length of service at a workplace provides more guarantees for increased sustainability. Points will be gained if at least one member of the family accounts for income stability.

Possible answers/options

Points (max 17)

I.1. Workplaces/Jobs The applicant should choose one of the following options. Two or more family members have employment contracts for a determined or undetermined period of time.

One family member has an employment contract for a determined or undetermined period of time.

One family member has an employment contract and one member has a day-labor contract.

At least 2 members of the family have day-labor contracts.

One member of the family has a day-labor contract.

Self-employed persons, who have regular income

II.2.Length of service The applicant should choose one of the following options During the past two years (starting September 1st 2014) at least one member of the family worked for 6 consecutive months.

The applicant didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t work for 6 consecutive months during the last 2 years, but during their active life they worked for 5 years without interruptions.

During the past 2 years the applicant has worked for a total of 6 months.

III. Resource management Description of the criterion

Possible answers/options

Points (max 15)

Up-to date payment of family expenditures: bank rates, bills (electricity, phone etc.), rent etc. Those families or family members who are proved by evidence to have not payed their expenditures/ rent/rates or other financial obligations (i.e. alimony) will be marked down.

-2

Family resilience Assessment instrument based on FRA’s Family Resilience Assessment model (Sixbey, 2005): responsibility, positive family relationships, support, assertive communication within the family and community etc. Maximum 5 points depending on the score calculated with the instrument. Parental abilities instrument (positive disciplining, being organized, monitoring etc.) and a Questionnaire adapted from Parenting Skills Assessment (PSA, Sturdevant Reed, Van Egerenși McKelvey, 2009) and Alabama Parenting Questionnaire scale (Frick, P.J., 1991). Maximum 5 points depending on the score calculated with the instrument.

Maintenance of the house and the surrounding area Assessment instrument based on Home Condition Scale (Cox, Bentovim, 2000)

Maximum 5 points depending on the score calculated with the instrument and the expert’s report

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 27

IV. Family Description of the criterion

Possible answers/options

Points (max 8)

Family = persons who share the same household

Family with child/children

Besides the legal marriage certificate, a declaration will be considered valid in which the partners/ the applicants declare their living arrangements (share the same household) and enumerate the persons they are caring for.

Single parent family

Senior citizens (aged over 65) in the family’s care

Children with disabilities in the family’s care

Adults with disabilities in the family’s care

(regardless of the number of children)

The family applying for a social housing unit is a foster family/cares for (non-biological) children The applying family may declare that it has child/children in care (i.e. nephew/niece), even if officially it doesn’t have the child/children in foster care, provided that upon signing the contract, it will formalize the situation of the child/children.

V. Education of children Description of the criterion

Possible answers/options

Points (max 25)

Max. 20 points for 1 child, max. 23 points for 2 children, max. 25 points for 3 or more children. School-age children regularly attend an educational facility, pre-school age children attend kindergarten, and children aged 0-3 years are adequately stimulated.

School age child/children (6-16 years)

Priority will be given to families that make efforts to integrate their children in educational institutions, and stimulate them adequately.

The child doesn’t attend school or attends school occasionally.

The child missed more than 40 classes unexcused (and could be removed from school according to the school’s regulation), but their record could be completed on all subjects.

The child missed 20-40 classes unexcused.

The child missed less than 20 classes unexcused

The child attends school regularly, doesn’t have unexcused absences.

All children within a family will be assessed. The final score will be given based on the mean of individual scores. When calculating the score, in case of children aged 6-16 years, school attendance during the 2nd semester of school year 2015-2016 will be taken into account. On the final score children aged over 16 (but not older than 26) will also be taken into account, provided that they are still enrolled in an educational program. The child is enrolled in school.

The child attends school regularly.

(continued on page 29)

V. Education of children (continued from page 28) Description of the criterion

Possible answers/options The child attends extracurricular activities. 0 to 2 points can be given. Following school activities (the parent/parents or the person/persons caring for the child/children collects the documents needed for a scholarship, presents interest in the childâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s school situation, asks the child about his/her day at school, keeps in contact with the teacher/headmaster etc.)

Points (max 25) 2

0 to 3 points can be given. Pre-school aged children (3-6 years) All children within a family will be assessed. The score will be given by the mean of individual scores.

3 additional points will be given for 2 children, 5 points for 3 or more children. Enrolled in kindergarten

Attending kindergarten

The parent/parents or the person/persons caring for the child/children spend leisure time with the child (i.e. take them to the playground, in town, are playing with them etc.) or enrolls them in different extracurricular activities

The parent watches for the kindergarten activities (asks the child about his/her day at the kindergarten, keeps in touch with the teacher etc.)

Infants and toddlers (0-3 years) All children within a family will be assessed. The score will be given by the average of individual scores. 3 additional points will be given for 2 children, 5 points for 3 or more children.

Cognitive stimulation will be assessed through an assessment instrument (questionnaire) completed by the evaluators. 0 to 20 points can be given for each assessed child, depending on the score calculated with the instrument.

Access to decent housing â&#x20AC;˘ Pata-Cluj â&#x20AC;˘ 29

VI. Housing conditions Description of the criterion

Possible answers/options

Points (max 22)

Under this chapter current housing conditions and past possibilities will be assessed alike.

Members of the family have never owned an apartment.

Members of the family have never benefitted from social housing.

Increased score will be given to those whoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve had fewer chances in the past, and for those who live in more precarious conditions.

Members of the family have never owned a building lot larger than 150 m2.

Members of the family have been evicted.

Inadequate housing conditions The applicant will choose one of the following possibilities: the family is homeless

the family lives in an improvised lumber and plastic barrack, without any access to a sewer and water supply system, without a water closet and kitchen

lumber barrack (built by ProRroma), barrack made of PVC profile (built by Ecce Homo)

apartment without a kitchen, but with shared bathroom

Space per family member less than 8 m2/person

Time spent living in Pata RĂ˘t

More than 10 years

5-10 years

2-5 years

VII. Special conditions Description of the criterion Extra-vulnerabilities/ needs besides those that have already been assessed: persons of retirement age who have taken on parental responsibilities, and care for at least one child; families in which the breadwinning adult has a disability, people coming from the foster care system or other special conditions.

Possible answers/options

Points (max 9)

The members of the family are of retirement age and care for at least one child

One of the adult breadwinners of the family has a disability

Persons coming from the foster care system

Other situations implying vulnerability

Priority will be given to applicants with more such needs.

The assessment criteria counterbalance the needs of the family with the resources needed to sustain living in a social apartment integrated in the majority society. On the basis of the above presented argument, the needs and resources are represented in a proportion of 40%â&#x20AC;&#x201C;60% in favor of resources, qualifying this system for the housing ready approach.

Access to decent housing â&#x20AC;˘ Pata-Cluj â&#x20AC;˘ 31

6. Interventions planned for re-housing In order to avoid conflicts of interests which could arise during the selection process the Pata-Cluj project team will not have access to the information specified in the files submitted by applicants / families for accessing the social housing program of the project. Within the same context, in order to avoid suspicions of preferential treatment by the team members, interventions on individual and family level will be ceased, and substituted with group counseling sessions.

Phases of the selection process and the timetable are as follows: • Information campaign on the accession criteria: September 15th–21st 2016; • Opening the registration office in Pata Rât and registration of the applications by an external, contracted team (which was not part of the project implementation team until now).In addition to registering the files, they will ensure individual consultancy to the families in order to maximize their scores, taking into account the specific conditions of each family: October 3rd–November 18th 2016; 32

• Opening the help-desk in the community, where the Pata-Cluj project team provides general information (regarding the program of the institutions which issue the needed documents, the forms that need to be completed etc.) in order to obtain the necessary documents for submitting the application: October 3rd–November 18th 2016; • Organizing group counseling sessions by the members of the Pata-Cluj project: October 3rd 2016–February 24th 2017; • The evaluation of the submitted applications by external evaluators, which means both summing up the points for each file, and the application of the assessment instruments of the family resources: November 21st 2016 – February 24th 2017; • The validation of the selection results by an independent validation committee: February 27th–March 10th 2017; • Announcing the results: March 10th 2017; • Submitting and evaluating the appeals: March 13th–17th 2017; • Announcing the final results: March 24th 2017.

7. Instead of conclusions As we have shown, the Pata-Cluj project is first of all a learning project which does not intend to take over the role and responsibilities of the local public administration, and does not claim to solve the Pata Rât issue as Pata Rât is the outcome of complex social, political and economic processes, through which the structural problems of the Romanian society culminate. However, surpassing the limits of the existing practices, the Pata-Cluj project aims to contribute to the efforts targeting the social inclusion of the most deprived communities. The Pata-Cluj project represents only one phase and a fraction of all of the processes started in the past 20

years in Cluj-Napoca and in Pata Rât. The project exists thanks to the persistence and obstinance of certain professionals and social activists, who have been promoting the “Pata Rât cause” during all these years. Simultaneously with the selection process of the recipients of the social housing units, the package of support services will be set up for the families who would move into the Pata-Cluj social apartments. In the meantime, the Municipality of Cluj-Napoca has to prepare new projects (from internal and external funds) of social housing, for the spatial desegregation of the Pata Rât area.

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 33

On the Norwegian Financial Mechanism (Norway Grants) Through the Norway Grants and EEA Grants, Norway contributes to reducing social and economic disparities and to strengthening bilateral relations with the beneficiary countries in Europe. Norway cooperates closely with the EU through the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA). For the period 2009-14, Norway’s contribution is €1.7 billion. Grants are available for NGOs, re-

search and academic institutions, and the public and private sectors in the 12 newest EU member states, Greece, Portugal and Spain. There is broad cooperation with Norwegian entities, and activities may be implemented until 2016. Key areas of support are environmental protection and climate change, research and scholarships, civil society, health and children, gender equality, justice and cultural heritage.

Social interventions for the desegregation and social inclusion of vulnerable groups in Cluj Metropolitan Area, including the disadvantaged Roma Project financed through the Norway Grants, within the Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2009-2014, “Poverty Alleviation” program (RO25). Project promoter: The Cluj Metropolitan Area Intercommunity Development Association Project partners: Community Association of Roma from Coastei, AltArt Foundation, Habitat for Humanity Cluj The content of this material does not necessarily reflect the official position of Norwegian Financial Mechanism 2009-2014. Authors (in alphabetical order): Júlia Adorjáni, Imola Antal, Monica Ghițiu, Ágnes Dávid Kacsó, Gabriella Tonk Contributors: the work team on housing of the Intercommunity Development Association, Cluj Metropolitan Area Design: Erika Kramarik Photo: Roland Váczi January 2017 Intercommunity Development Association, Cluj Metropolitan Area Moților 5, Cluj-Napoca, România www.patacluj.ro info@patacluj.ro tel. 0786 375 825 34

Access to decent housing • Pata-Cluj • 35