IMPACT Europe is een evaluatie-Toolkit die professionals werkzaam op het gebied van het voorkomen en tegengaan van extremisme (hier Counter Violent Evaluation, afgekort CVE genoemd) ondersteunt bij de evaluatie van hun interventies. De tool is ontwikkeld in samenwerking met het Hogeschool Utrecht-lectoraat Kennisanalyse Sociale Veiligheid en is volledig toegankelijk via bijgaande link. Het doel van de IMPACT Europe Toolkit is om professionals te helpen in het ontwerpen en uitvoeren van evaluaties van CVE-interventies. Op dit moment zijn robuuste en rigoureuze evaluaties nog niet de norm in het CVE-veld, terwijl deze evaluaties juist zouden kunnen bijdragen aan het verbeteren van interventies. Daarnaast helpt deze Toolkit professionals bij het ontwikkelen van programma’s die makkelijker te evalueren zijn en waarbij het waarschijnlijker is dat gewenste resultaten worden behaald. De Toolkit bestaat uit drie onderdelen: 1. Evaluation Guide (Evaluatie Gids): dit onderdeel ondersteunt het ontwerpen en uitvoeren van een evaluatie van een CVE-interventie. 2. Interventions Database (Interventie Database): dit onderdeel geeft voorbeelden van bestaande interventies in het CVE-veld. 3. Lessons Learned (Geleerde Lessen): dit onderdeel geeft voorbeelden van CVE-interventies die geëvalueerd zijn en de lessen die uit deze evaluaties getrokken kunnen worden. Onder aan de voorpagina staat vermeld:'This project has received funding from the European Union's Seventh framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement no 312235' en 'Copyright IMPACT Europe Consortium'.
LINK
This article is about the effect of local tailored interventions to counter (violent) extremism, and therefore contributes to the academic and policy debates. It focusses on local, professional perspectives on person-specific interventions utilising a Dutch case study as the basis. The interventions are part of the wider-ranging counter terrorism policy that entails (local) measures that are deployed in relation to designated high-risk individuals and groups. By reviewing policy documents and conducting semi-structured interviews, the exploratory study concludes that the key factors for a hand-tailored intervention are a solid network, expert knowledge to assess potential signs of extremist ideology, an awareness of not having too many concurrent measures, good inter-institutional cooperation and information-sharing. The professionals involved felt that person-specific interventions have contributed to reducing the threat of religious extremism in the Netherlands. Nonetheless, municipal officials and security agents emphasised the importance of setting realistic goals and a focus on preventive rather than repressive measures. Furthermore, despite the central role that municipal actors play, they run up against problems such as cooperation within the security and care sector. National entities appear to emphasize information-gathering and monitoring more than community-focused cooperation. Thereby questioning whether, on the national level, local professionals are perceived as playing a key role in dealing with extremism.
In recent years, the fight against terrorism and political violence has focused more on anticipating the threats that they pose. Therefore, early detection of ideas by local professionals has become an important part of the preventive approach in countering radicalization. Frontline workers who operate in the arteries of society are encouraged to identify processes toward violent behavior at an early stage. To date, however, little is known about how these professionals take on this screening task at their own discretion. Research from the Netherlands suggests that subjective assessment appears to exist. In this article, we argue that the absence of a clear norm for preliminary judgments affects prejudice or administrative arbitrariness, which may cause side effects due to unjustified profiling.
