EUROPEAN COMMISSION Delegation to Sri Lanka Mid-Term Evaluation of EIDHR Micro-Projects programme in Sri Lanka FWC Benef 2008/162237 FINAL REPORT 15 December 2008
This project is funded by the European Union This project is realised by ARS Progetti/Dialogue Consortium-Framework Contract BENEF Lot 7 Acknowledgements This report was written by two independent consultants: Pierre Robert and Tania Weerasooria. The consultants would like to thank all those who gave their time and contributed information during the evaluation. They would like to thank in particular the staff of the NGOs visited across Sri Lanka who generously gave their time and shared insights, often at short notice. The consultants also extend thanks to the volunteers and project beneficiaries who joined activities and briefings, and whose dedication and commitment are essential to the success of the projects. They also thank the staff of the European Commission Delegation in Sri Lanka, particularly Ms Sarah Pallak, for facilitating their mission and providing a wealth of relevant information and guidance. Mr Robert would also like to acknowledge the commitment and deep insights brought into the evaluation process by Ms Weerasooria. Disclaimer This evaluation is supported and guided by the European Commission and presented by ARS Progetti on behalf of the Dialogue Consortium. The views expressed in this report are those of the consultants and can in no way be taken to represent those of the European Commission. Any mistakes or omissions remain the responsibility of the authors. 2
Executive summary The European Commission (EC) Delegation in Sri Lanka has commissioned the Dialogue Consortium to carry out a mid-term evaluation (MTE) of its Micro-Projects programme carried out under the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR). The MTE was carried out in October 2008 and followed in November by the reporting phase. The MTE s terms of reference called for an assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability and anticipated impact of the supported actions and the prospects for the sustainability of the benefits [and] to provide practical recommendations for the follow up actions and lessons learned. The evaluation focused on four micro-projects funded under the 2006 Call for Proposals. These had a total budget of 259,052. In addition, the evaluators were asked to give some consideration to four projects funded earlier, with a total budget of 263,963. The evaluators methodology was based on the study of written documentation; interviews with managers, staff and volunteers; some meetings with project beneficiaries; and field visits. The long-running violent conflict in Sri Lanka has a major impact on the implementation of the EIDHR-funded projects. The conflict has contributed to a polarisation within Sri Lankan society, often along real or perceived ethnic and/or community lines. One consequence was that NGOs sometimes experienced difficulties gaining the trust of communities they sought to work with. In addition, the decades of political violence have left a legacy of grievances and complaints of human rights violations on all sides, reinforced by impunity for human rights violations and abuses. Faced with these conflict-related challenges NGOs have taken different approaches in view of their own priorities and constraints. However all projects faced the risk of controversy and accusations of bias. In general, the relevance of the projects was high, in terms of the needs they were responding to. All the project proposals highlighted the fact that the projects were addressing issues on which current resource allocations by the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) and donor governments were insufficient (as in the case of support to people with disabilities) or neglected (violence against women), or where civil society had a key role to play rather than government (as is the case of encouragement to human rights reporting). However, several of the projects lacked a clear advocacy or awareness raising strategy, that would go beyond the provision of information to beneficiaries on matters including human rights. It is in the nature of EIDHR that such advocacy or awareness raising should be conducted, even if this has to be done in a low-key manner in recognition of the sensitivities involved. The evaluators found that the projects were generally effective, in the sense that they were on the way to achieving their objectives to an adequate degree. The evaluators were able to reach the following findings on effectiveness: - All projects have largely implemented the planned activities: where delays have occurred they were manageable. - In some cases, activities have been implemented to an extent that went beyond what was originally planned. - Information on attendance and participation suggested that activities reached the intended beneficiaries, despite occasional logistical difficulties. 3
Each project has an appropriate level of engagement with civil society stakeholders. The picture was different, however, as far as engagement with government authorities at local and national levels is concerned. In some cases, the advocacy element of the project was not in evidence. All projects were efficient. The project budgets were modest, which suggests that they represented value for money. The reasons for the efficient management of the projects were the following: - Good standards of project management skills within the implementing NGOs. - A capacity to harness organisational capacity to respond to needs. - Access to highly skilled staff and volunteers. While some projects missed some reporting deadlines, the delays were manageable and were explained by managers workload. The evaluators heard no reports of significant staffing problems related to the projects. It is by definition too early to assess fully the impact of projects in the context of a MTE. However, the field visits and information received allowed the evaluators to form a preliminary, tentative view of the likely impact of the projects, in relation to their respective objectives. Generally, the projects appear likely to achieve the expected impact, although they are likely to do so at varying levels, discussed in the annexes on the respective projects. The reasons for the achievement of impact were, in essence, the following: - Appropriate analysis of the situation to be addressed. - Appropriate selection of entry points in the exercise of advocacy and/or awarenessraising. - Provision, where necessary, of a high level of skills and competence. As mentioned above, however, some projects were weaker than other in terms of public advocacy, and this may affect their eventual impact. Elements of sustainability have been built by the projects, and include the following: - Buy-in and good practice. - Some projects also enjoy some support by relevant institutional stakeholders, which should contribute to their sustainability. - The implementing organisations have enhanced their institutional capacity through the projects. Coherence among the projects cannot be expected from a programme of funding that is based on the appraisal of individual proposals. There appears to be a demand on the part of EIDHR micro-projects implementers themselves for more coordination, and for liaison among project staff and NGOs that have EC funding in common. Some of this demand for more liaison can be met merely by convening meetings, as has been the case recently, to discuss an issue of common interest such as project management, etc. Should the EC and the partners wish to go further, avenues for more formal partnerships among EIDHR-supported NGOs could be envisioned. To support such collaborative activities, the EC might consider setting aside a small pool of funds, which could be, on an ad-hoc basis, dedicated to funding the activities. The October 2007 MTE looked in detail at projects. In the view of the evaluators, the projects have largely taken the conclusions of that MTE into account, and are essentially on track to achieving their objective, albeit with some delays in some cases. In terms of programme, the key findings of the evaluation were the following: 4
- The projects covered a broad range of human rights issues in Sri Lanka, making the overall portfolio relevant to the implementation of the objectives of the EIDHR. - Programme management was of a high standard, with the EC Delegation providing detailed and timely feedback to NGOs. - While the evaluation highlighted some concerns with some of the projects, it found nothing to suggest that any of the projects was seriously at risk of failure. The portfolio is made up of relevant and effective projects and the weaknesses noted by the evaluators are not of a fundamental nature. - Efforts to support consultations among NGOs supported by EIDHR have been initiated. Activities have included meetings and training sessions organised by the EC. These have been broadly welcomed by the NGOs, and participation has been satisfactory. However, although NGOs all recognise the potential benefits of NGOs cooperating with each other on specific activities (and even on designing joint projects), such joint activities have not yet taken place. - All projects in the portfolio contribute to social inclusion and tolerance in Sri Lanka, and all have made deliberate efforts to address all relevant communities which is important in the current climate of continuing politically-motivated violence. - Although the portfolio of projects address a wide range of human rights issues, it does not directly cover human rights violations related to the current conflict. Although other funding mechanisms do so, it might be appropriate for the EC to seek ways to support NGOs working on the protection and promotion of civil and political rights, and on the fight against impunity. - While the EC is actively encouraging cooperation among NGOs it supports through EIDHR, it might be relevant to broaden such encouragement to NGOs supported by other donors and mechanisms in the same field. As a result, the MTE formulates the following general recommendations (recommendations to specific project implementers are formulated in the relevant annexes to this report): Relevance to conflict context Organisations that propose to deal with aspects of the conflict or its consequences, and/or engage in peace-building or similar activities, should enhance the conflict analysis which underpins the design of their project. To that end, they should confront their analysis with that of other organizations with relevant expertise and/or credible research institutions. Fostering innovative projects To ensure that innovative projects have a reasonable chance of being selected, it is recommended that the EC consider amending the concept note and application form, by asking applicants to set out explicitly whether their proposal is for the continuation or amendment of an existing approach, or is for a new project if the latter, the applicant should also explain how the proposal is innovative, compared to previous projects. Human rights advocacy/awareness raising The guidelines to applicants should be slightly amended to reinforce the importance of the advocacy element, and/or awareness raising of human rights to the fulfilment of EIDHR criteria. All projects should enhance the element of advocacy for human rights, particularly in relation to authorities (local at all levels, and national) and in relation to stakeholders able to exercise an influence on the situation they are dealing with (such as opinion leaders, etc). Hiring and retention of staff and volunteers The guidelines to applicants should be slightly amended to require applicants to be more explicit about the way they will ensure the identification, recruitment and retention of appropriately skilled staff and volunteers, at all necessary level and in all locations where activities are planned. 5
Inclusiveness and gender equality The guidelines to applicants should ask them to specify how they will ensure that people from a range of backgrounds are involved in the project as beneficiaries, participants, staff and managers. In addition, the guidelines should require applicants to demonstrate how they ensure equal gender representation at all levels of their organisation. Beneficiaries buy-in and feedback Organisations should systematically seek feedback from beneficiaries on the design and implementation of the projects (especially training in language or skills), and regularly inform them of developments, achievements and challenges. This would enhance accountability and effectiveness. This would further assist in addressing the do no harm criteria of project interventions, which can happen if beneficiaries are alienated. Engagement with government and other state institutions As part of the stakeholders analysis and project strategy, applicants should be required to specify how they will engage with government authorities at all appropriate levels, and with state institutions relevant to their field of activities. Opportunities for collaboration across EIDHR-supported projects The EC should consider ways of encouraging collaborative activities between NGOs implementing projects with EIDHR funding, including the possibility of establishing a small fund to support such activities. Coordination with FLICT The EC should consider coordinating EIDHR Calls for Proposals with those launched by FLICT, with a view to ensuring that these are complementary and do not conflict or overlap in terms of contents and logistics for applicants (which may wish to apply to both mechanisms). Registration of NGOs The EC should consider broadening the range of acceptable forms of registration for NGOs to be eligible for EIDHR funding. 6