Universalių daugiafunkcių centrų veiklos galimybės: savivaldybės darbuotojų požiūris

Straipsnyje, analizuojant mokslinę literatūrą, dokumentus, kokybinio tyrimo rezultatus, aptariama universalaus daugiafunkcio centro samprata, veiklos prielaidos ir principai, pateikiamas Lietuvoje veikiančių socioedukacinių centrų teikiamų paslaugų pobūdis ir gyventojų poreikiai. Tyrimo pagrindu parengtas sėkmingiausiai savivaldybėse veikiančių universalių centrų žemėlapis, išryškinamos galimos universalaus daugiafunkcio centro tikslinės grupės; valdymo struktūra; finansavimo šaltiniai.

Lithuania as a European Union country is directed towards three priorities: the knowledge society, safe society and competitive economy. Therefore, during the coming decade it is necessary to ensure quality of education complying with the personal and public needs in the open civil society and market economy, to establish flexible and open education framework, and to create conditions for life-long learning. Education shall help the Lithuanian state and society find their place in the Western culture and economy; develop democratic national culture and sound civil society; strengthen national security; sustain national identity; establish and develop a knowledge based competitive economy; ensure employment, and cardinally reduce social exclusion and poverty [1]. These priorities comply with the models of universal multi-functional centres transformed from deserted schools, cultural centres, leisure camps, deserted or insufficiently utilised recreational zones or institutions to be adjusted to public interests. The idea of multi-functional centres corresponds to the idea of regional development on realisation (in one place) of complex programmes ensuring social cohesion and social stability. Regional development is related to the engagement of local communities and target groups in the assessment of needs, specification of priorities and joint management of regional strategies (Partnership Programme for Rural Community of the Baltic States for the Development of Rural Welfare. Effective Partnership Groups, pg. 14) (...)