Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2 F I N D I N G S offices, since this area was considered strategic but still very weak in the organisation. In the case of networks, whilst at the central level they can take the shape of an organisation (see Forum Mulher), at the local level it is a fluid mechanism of coordination of multiple organisations, with their initiatives, different strategic interests, resources and capacities. In this situation, the allocation of resources to a network at the central level can be less effective at the local level, since the fluid nature of linkages and mutual responsibilities between the central-level network and the local-level organisations that comprise a network increases the risk of the allocation of resources benefitting only some organisations. Anecdotal evidence gathered in interviews shows that in some cases, at the local level, networks exist thanks to activism of a coordinating organisation that often uses its own resources to sustain the network. 2.5.3 Gender, HIV/Aids, and Human Rights Outcomes - AGIR and Cross-Cutting Issues Within AGIR, cross-cutting issues in gender and HIV/AIDS are addressed at: 1) The partners organisational level; and 2) By partners in terms of activities relating to the general public, citizens, communities as well as specific target groups under each of the four AGIR themes. Through joint capacity-building activities held by the four intermediaries, training has been provided that usually focuses on awareness building. Most of this training has been workshop-based and of a general standardised nature. In some cases, mainly among those organisations with already existing gender practices (e.g. Akilizetho), training was important to improve their approach on gender and was seen as an opportunity to do some networking with other relevant organisations (WLSA and Forum Mulher). This has led to concrete cooperation initiatives in the future. While gender practices are generally strong in most partner organisations, including those contacted by the review team, in general, capacity strengthening in mainstreaming gender and HIV/AIDS has led to few results. Knowledge about these issues also depends on the area of specialisation of the organisation. For example, knowledge on gender is stronger in Forum Mulher and on HIV/AIDS in MONASO than in other organisations (see Diakonia 2011 Annual Report). Gender mainstreaming seems to be most widely integrated in partners’ planning instruments, although this integration has been a slow process. Some CSO partners expect to have drafted or approved gender policies by the end of 2012, including the following partners contacted by the review team: AAAJC, CTV (Centro Terra Viva, Environmental Organisation) under SCC. The joint outcome matrix, filled in by the intermediaries, provides mostly generic information. However Diakonia provides some quantitative measures, which may illustrate the level of implementation of cross-cutting issue outcomes among their partners, as does Oxfam’s annual report for 2011 (May 2012) in which it notes that only 1 of11 partners have an approved gender policy and that 10 of 11 partners have 61
2 F I N D I N G S no policy at all. According to the same source, few Oxfam partners have gender and HIV/AIDS policies in place. However, this can be misleading as most of them have activities in these areas. 7 of 11 of Diakonia’s partners have activities in these areas, but do not have policies or written instruments with activities in these areas having been done in an ad-hoc way. All four SCC partners, by the end of 2011, had gender and HIV/AIDS activities noted in their strategic plans or programmes, but still needed to operationalise these plans through policies and implementation structures and processes. Overall, gender and HIV/AIDS-based monitoring remain weak. The 4 AGIR intermediaries have recognised this weakness and have applied some of their first capacity strengthening efforts to this area through the testing, in 2012, of a new changeoriented gender training approach which has produced good results. The intermediaries have agreed to use this training method within 2012 and funds are available. It is expected that this should greatly improve the documentation of results through the use of cross-cutting gender indicators in 2013 (this is stated with the caveat that partners would need to improve their reporting of results and intermediaries would need to better systematise and improve their reporting in the joint results matrix so that results, not only in gender, are clearly related to indicators). With respect to specific thematic gender outcomes, variable positive progress is noted. For example: Advocacy efforts by AMCS (Women in Social Communication Association) were directed at the ‘The National Media Council’ for a bylaw to ensure gender balance in public TV and Radio broadcast contents. This pressure received a positive response from the council. Not only did this contribute to the achievement of outcomes associated with gender violation cases exposed by the media, but also had a direct impact on media houses in ensuring the employment of more women and journalists (both men and women) and increasing their coverage of gender sensitive issues. Gender mainstreamed practices are strong in land and natural resources. Local partners, for example AAAJC and UPCT (Tete Provincial Farmers Union), have conducted gender sensitive interventions on information and awareness development activities at the community level. These activities have included debates on the role of women in rural development, the role of gender in legislation/policies on mining, and land rights for men and women. 29 A preliminary AGIR programme result monitoring exercise by AAAJC reflects gender (not HIV/AIDS), but does not yet manage to specify gender specific programme indicators, which are expected to be included in the annual monitoring report by the end of 2012. 29 These activities are outcomes in AGIR’s results matrix on ”citizens’, particularly women’s, land rights”, and ”access to natural resources are protected in policies, legislation and regulations”. 62
Page 1:
2013:3 Kevin Kelpin Vibe Johnsen Jo
Page 4 and 5:
Authors: Kevin Kelpin, Vibe Johnsen
Page 6 and 7:
Abbreviations and Acronyms AAAJC Pa
Page 8 and 9:
Preface This evaluation of AGIR (Ac
Page 10 and 11:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y The
Page 12 and 13:
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y CSO
Page 14 and 15: E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y imp
Page 16 and 17: E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y eff
Page 18 and 19: E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y iv)
Page 20 and 21: E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y act
Page 22 and 23: E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y ges
Page 24 and 25: E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y des
Page 26 and 27: 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N ited numb
Page 28 and 29: 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N 1.2 EVALU
Page 30 and 31: 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N Field Vis
Page 32 and 33: 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N aftermath
Page 34 and 35: 2 F I N D I N G S tendency for the
Page 36 and 37: 2 F I N D I N G S ganisations work.
Page 38 and 39: 2 F I N D I N G S jor reason for th
Page 40 and 41: 2 F I N D I N G S This observation
Page 42 and 43: 2 F I N D I N G S 2.3.4 AGIR CSO Pa
Page 44 and 45: 2 F I N D I N G S gender policy, -
Page 46 and 47: 2 F I N D I N G S The mid-term revi
Page 48 and 49: 2 F I N D I N G S 2.4 EFFECTIVENESS
Page 50 and 51: 2 F I N D I N G S be relevant for t
Page 52 and 53: 2 F I N D I N G S the AGIR programm
Page 54 and 55: 2 F I N D I N G S production and qu
Page 56 and 57: 2 F I N D I N G S 2.5 IMPACT OF AGI
Page 58 and 59: 2 F I N D I N G S number of positio
Page 60 and 61: 2 F I N D I N G S Accountability o
Page 62 and 63: 2 F I N D I N G S Through campaign
Page 66 and 67: 2 F I N D I N G S Akilizetho has a
Page 68 and 69: 2 F I N D I N G S political partici
Page 70 and 71: 2 F I N D I N G S support the capac
Page 72 and 73: 2 F I N D I N G S The sustained par
Page 74 and 75: 3 C O N C L U S I O N S AGIR progr
Page 76 and 77: 2 findings 4 Recommendations The ke
Page 78 and 79: 4 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S Ma
Page 80 and 81: 4 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S rea
Page 82 and 83: A N N E X 1 - A G I R P A R T N E R
Page 84 and 85: A N N E X 2 - T E R M S O F R E F E
Page 86 and 87: A N N E X 2 - T E R M S O F R E F E
Page 88 and 89: 2 findings Annex 3 - Inception Repo
Page 90 and 91: A N N E X 3 - I N C E P T I O N R E
Page 106 and 107: 2 findings Annex 4 - Documents Revi
Page 108 and 109: A N N E X 4 - D O C U M E N T S R E
Page 114 and 115:
A N N E X 4 - D O C U M E N T S R E
Page 116 and 117:
A N N E X 5 - P E O P L E I N T E R
Page 118:
Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Program
show all

Mid-Term Review of the AGIR Programme - Sida

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?