The first difficulty encountered was the fact that this project was being held during a period of restrictions due to COVID. This was a difficulty on two counts:
The second type of difficulty encountered was the organisation in terms of timetables between the different professions and implications of the actors: the integration counsellors intervened during the salaried hours, which did not always allow the other actors (volunteer peer helpers) to participate in all the times of the project. This may have led to some discrepancies in the proper communication of information, the feeling that not everyone was moving at the same pace or was involved in different ways within the project team.
“We had a hard time getting back on track with some people” (one IPC)
“I couldn’t come every time” (a partner and a refugee)
Some felt that some peer helpers may have found it difficult to understand their role, not having been included in the thinking from the outset (with the project team itself discovering the concepts and questioning the roles of the peer helper) or having a short explanation time. This may have led to a lack of clarity, including for the refugees.
“Some refugees found it difficult to understand what the project could do for them at first.
In addition, another difficulty was cited: the investment required of the team and the change in working method and posture (moving to collective workshops, recurring times dedicated to the project, etc.). The question of the time spent on the project and the transversal working method, with time spent on the project being
This new approach, which is based on a “project” approach, has required the mobilisation of a new way of working.
“The project was ambitious, we were not able to deploy all the strategy we wanted at the beginning (covid and obstacles to meetings, internal changes...)“
The assessment of the collective sessions bringing together IPCs-refugees-peers-helpers-partners, carried out as a team, pointed out several weaknesses:
Finally, the team regretted not having interviewed the refugees about the assessment (which was done with the partners and peer helpers), and only 2 refugees could be interviewed for this report.
The partners interviewed mention difficulties in communication and linkage: a lack of
of information on developments, the feeling of not having understood or followed everything.
“If we had a little memo every week or a little communication, it would have kept us connected.“
“I’m not sure how it turned out in the end for the refugees.”
“I came to a rendition but I kind of wondered what I was doing there.“
“I had a little bit of an interrupted vision, I wasn’t there all the time.“
“As we are different actors, we don’t work together, maybe this link is missing.“
“I miss knowing how far they’ve gone… I know because I went to get the information, but peer helpers really need to be kept up to date on the progress of the project.”
“The fact that it is very spread out over time, you forget.“
Also mentioned are:
“We didn’t have time to talk about all the trades.
“there was technical vocabulary
“Even if the language problems have been taken into account, it is still complicated.
“Some interpreters lacked objectivity
“It’s the first thing, you can’t do otherwise; I have a mixed opinion about “working without talking”, it’s true that it also helps. But to work is complicated: we manage to do it but at what cost? We didn’t find any solution apart from ‘google translation’, it produced stress, misunderstandings and misinterpretations, the person was not autonomous.
Another difficulty was pointed out by a partner during the assessment of the collective sessions:
“Maybe making portraits of the refugees beforehand would help us to better target their project?”
“It might have been nice to have a file to evaluate the project.
“The projects were not advanced enough.
It was also mentioned that contact was not maintained between peer helper, partner and refugee.
The difficulty mentioned is the lack of adequacy between the refugee’s project and the peer helper’s experience (peer helpers who can talk about an experience of creation, of taking risks to set up a business where some refugees just wanted to find a job in a kitchen).
The lack of communication about the project is also regretted:
“I got a certificate, but did it help what I brought?”
In addition, during the assessment of the collective sessions, several criticisms are made：
A lack of clarity of purpose,
The difficulties that emerge from the interviews are:
“I have not kept in touch with the other people in the project, there is a lack of communication.