FROM AMERICAN 12EBPkE End of Program Eva uation Report Mercy Corps' Program Youth Education for Life Ski YES Submitted by: Axel M. Addy Alfied B. Stevens Alexa Inc. Monrovia, Liberia Alexa I~zc. Decelvlzber 5, Abbreviations and Acrortyms A1 APU CPA DART DDRR ECOMOG ECOWAS FGD GOL GRS ID1 IDP IP IQc LF LURD MC MODEL MT NAEAL NTGL NGO OTI SOW TDY UN UNMIL US US AID USG WAS WAY YDC YES YMC YTM Alexa Inc. Abuse Prevention Unit Comprehensive Peace Accord Disaster Assistance and Response Team Disarmament, Demobilization, Rehabilitation and Reintegration Economic Community Military Observer Group Economic Community of West African States Focus Group Discussions Government of Liberia Grassroots Soccer In-depth Interview Internally Displaced Persons Implementing Partner Indefinite Quantity Contract Learning Facilitator Liberia United for Reconciliation and Democracy Mercy Corps Movement for Democratic Change in Liberia Master Trainer National Adult Education Association of Liberia National Transitional Government of Liberia Non-governmental Organization Office of Transition Initiative Scope of Work Temporary Duty United Nations United Nations Mission in Liberia United States United States Agency for International Development United States Government Consortium of World Vision, Action Aid and Search for Common Ground and Mercy Corps War Affected Youth Youth Development Club Youth Education for Life Shlls YES Management Committee Youth Team Member Deccm ber 3'. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iv PREFACE ........................................................................................................................... v Mercy Corps YES Overview ......................................................................................... vi ... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. viii ... Program Strengths ....................................................................................................... viii ... Program Weaknesses ................................................................................................... viii Key Recommendation for Follow-on Program ............................................................. ix Findings Summary per Evaluation Objectives .............................................................. ix FINDINGS AGAINST OBJECTIVE 1 ............................................................................ 14 FINDINGS AGAINST OBJECTIVE 2 ........................................................................... 15 FINDINGS AGAINST OBJECTIVE 3 ............................................................................ 17 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 19 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 23 ANNEX 1 : Scope of Work ........................................................................................... 24 ANNEX 2: Evaluation Team Composition ...................................................................... 27 ANNEX 3: Methodology .................................................................................................. 27 ANNEX 4: Report Findings Validity ............................................................................... 28 ANNEX 5: The Liberian Context ..................................................................................... 29 ANNEX 6: Stakeholders Responses to SWOT Questionnaire ......................................... 31 ANNEX 7: FGDs SWOT with MTs and YTMs .............................................................. 33 ANNEX 8: Stakeholder Responses during IDIs and FDGs ............................................. 34 ANNEX 9: Interview List ................................................................................................. 49 ANNEX 10: Community Visits ........................................................................................ 51 ANNEX 1 1 : Evaluation Questions ................................................................................... 52 ANNEX 12: Documents Provided by MC ....................................................................... 54 ANNEX 1 3 : YES Curriculum Profile ............................................................................. -54 OWLEDGEMENTS Axel M. Addy and Alfred B. Stevens prepared tls report with extensive support from A19s survey team members, Anthony Koisee, Sawo G. Buh, Stephen G. Uekeh and Ernest Stevens with administrative and logistical support from Acquea Addy and fichmond V.K. Jones. The team is grateful for the support of the managerial tearn and staff of Mercy Corps, led by Tom Ewert, Tricia Matthews and Michael Doe. The team is also thankful to Mercy Corps' Grand Gedeh team lead by Varney Gaie and Mercy Corps' implementing partner in Nimba, NAEAL, lead by Emmet Freeman and Ernmanuel Doe. Many thanks to Roland Taylor and Joel Boakai the team assigned drzvers who safely transported the team through some rough terrain to the various communities to conduct the surveys. The communities9 warn welcome and cooperation greatly contributed to the teams' ability to conduct its work without obstacles. The tearn is truly grateful to all of those whose contributions and recommendations made the entire experience a pleasant and informative one. Decen? ber 5, Conducting an end of program evaluation requires the full cooperation of the client and all its partners. Evaluators bear the responsibility of deriving some estimation as to the level of success of the program. Ths can be quite a challenging task as those who have greater experience with the program may have greater depth of knowledge of the various factors that enhanced or undermined the program. As the evaluating team, it is important to look at all the factors that provide evidence as to the true impact of the program. With the full cooperation of the Mercy Corps' team along with its partners, the team aimed to look at the various dimensions that affected the level of impact of the program. The team looked at the premise behd the inception of the program, looking at the social and political context that served as the impetus that influenced the program design and implementation. As is in the case of the Youth Education for Life Skills (YES) program, Mercy Corps9 aimed to have an external evaluation conducted on its implementation of YES to evaluate the level of impact of the program. Although the team's findings may not all be in agreement with MC teams perceptions of the level of success of the program, it is however hopeful that the information provided herein will serve as a thoughtful guide for MC when designing and implementing similar programs in the future. Mercy Corps YES Overview USAIDIOffice of Transition Initiative (OTI) fi~nded the Youth Education for Life Slulls through a Cooperative ~~reement* as acontribution to USAID Liberia's Strategic Objective Six: Community Revitalization and Reintegration. World Vision and Search for Common Ground Mercy Corps, and Action Aid (in a consortium known as WAS), were the implementing partners of the Creative Associates through its Liberian office, the Liberian Transition Initiative (LTI) served as the Indefinite Quantity Contract (IQC) holding contractor with the OTI, managing the approximately $26 million grant. From this IQC, Mercy Corps was awarded over $2.5million to implement the Youth Education for Life Skills (YES) program in Montserrado, Margibi, Nimba, Bong, Grand Bassa, Grand Gedeh and Sinoe ~ounties.~ The program as designed aimed to assist war-affected young Liberians to become productive members of their communities through community-based life-skills education. The seven modules of the curriculum aimed to empower war-affected young Liberians to become productive citizens by fostering healthy relationshps between people living in the selected c~mmunities.~ YES had two intermediate results. The first intermediate result was to improve knowledge, skills and attitudes and enable 15,000 youth to make informed life decisions (I.R.6.1). The second intermediate result was to enable 285 communities to actively support and accept the integration of war-affected youth as productive members of their society (1.~62) .5 Mercy Corps implemented YES by teachng life shlls using the seven modules YES curriculum / /MCJs/ LFs 1 and through community empowerment Life Skills initiatives led by the youth between the ages of Curriculum 1 8 and 3 5 (see Appendix 1 3). The program team of Mercy Corps (MC) and their well-trained field team lead by Master Trainers (MTs) and Youth Team Members (YTMs) carried out the Empowerment management of the program. Community leaders selected by community members (CMs) c:z: (r.1 : 1 Activities were trained as Learning Facilitator (LFs) to teach the Life Skills curriculum. Master Trainers, Youth Team Members, and Learning Facilitator participated in extensive training done by MC program for the implementation of YES. Additionally, the community leaders selected reputable members of the community to serve on the YES Management Committee (YMC). Mercy Corps used the YES Management Committee to promote greater cooperation between the youth and the elders, and provide leadershp in the project selection process. The YES Management Committee provided moral support for the Youth Development Club (YDC) and USAIDIOTI Cooperative Agreement number OTi-00-05-00004-00. ' See Social Impact Inc. Final Evaluation: The Liberia Transition Initiative (2004-2006). October 19, 2006. p4. - See Social Impact Evaluation Report. p7. See Mercy Corps Quarterly Report. See Mercy Corps Quarterly Report. supervised the YES program in the community. Mercy Corps established the Youth Development Club with the goal to empower the youth of the community to take initiative and implement development projects as a contribution to their community. Learning Facilitators used various learning tools including dramas, dance, storytelling, picture cards, and flash cards to teach the curriculum. The youth in the communities met four times per wee for two-hour sessions in the evening over a four to five months period to complete the seven modules of the cumculum. The average class size was no more than thirty-five participants, although some communities had more participants. YES was implemented in three cycles at four to five months intervals beginning in 2005. Cycle 1 communities and some Cycle 2 communities benefited from Creative AssociatelOTI funded community driven projects (i.e. wells, latrines, rice mills), whereas the Cycle 3 communities did not benefit from these additional projects. During the Cycle 2 phase, Mercy Corps launched the pilot project YES to Soccer with great success in select communities. YES to Soccer ran in Cycle 2 comunities in Sinoe and Grand Gedeh. The goal of YES to Soccer was to provide HIViAIDS education through soccer. With the guidance of Grassroots Soccer, a US based nongovernmental organization; YES to Soccer, staff underwent training on implementing the program. Participants joined the soccer team, received Nike clothing, and shoes at the end of the eight weeks program. YES to soccer proved a very popular pilot program among war-affected youth. YES was implemented in 3 84 comunities with approximately 14,000 participants. BEST AVAILABLE COPY vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Mercy Corps commissioned Alexa Inc (AI) to perform an end of program evaluation for its (YES) program, utilizing in-depth discussions, focus group discussions and a questionnaire, to acheve the following objectives: To assess the changes in Life Skills session participants as a result of the curriculum, To appraise the role of the YDC and YMC in the reintegration of war affected youth, and To examine the impact of the program on the Learning Facilitators, Master Trainers and Youth Members. Propam Strengths 1. Women represented the majority of the participants in the twenty-four communities visited by the team. Out of the 633 participants, 361 participants were women. Through the YES Life Skills training, which aimed to enhance their self-esteem and voice their opinions on matters affecting their community, the women were empowered to be more active and outspoken in the community. Many could also now write their names, count from one to hundred, and say their ABCs. 2. Participants reported an increase in the awareness of methods to prevention diseases, such as HIV/AIDS and malaria. 3. Master Trainers, Learning Facilitators, and YES Management Committee members underwent anger management, conflict resolution and problem solving skills training that transformed their outlook on life by reinforcing their ability to better address adversity in a more logical and systematic way. 4. In many instances, the program greatly enhanced community cooperation through the work of the YES Management Committee and the Youth Development Club. These organs served as conduits of cooperation between the youth and the elders in the community. Thls was especially evident in Cycle 1 and some Cycle 2 communities, where the YES program had funded complementing projects. Program Weaknesses 1. The low participation of male ex-combatants, a segment of war-affected youth, affected the overall true impact of the program. Women represented the majority of the program participants. Of the 633 youth participants of the twenty- four communities visited by the team, only 11 6 claimed to be ex-combatants. See Annex 1 for detail SOW. ... Vlll 2. The discontinuation of the additional Creative Associate/OTI funded community driven projects (i.e. wells, latrines, rice mills) in Cycle 2 negatively affected the level of participation of the youth in the program and undermined the integrity of the program, as some Cycle 2 communities were promised projects that were never implemented. 3. The lack of incentives such as grades, stipends or sitting fees for project participants, along with an increase in other competing NGOs offering such incentives affected the level of participation in the program. 4. The program proved inflexible to changes given the reality of implementation, which influenced an increase in the drop out rate. When asked about why some participants had dropped out of the program, respondents to interviews or focus group discussion responded that people dropped out of the program due to pregnancy, sickness, farming engagements, poor lighting facilities and most importantly, the lack of incentives. 5. The program as design did not create the conditions for greater support to the Learning Facilitators by the YES Management Committee and the Youth Development Club. Greater support and coordination between these groups could have had a positive impact on the number of participants in the program. 6. The program lacked a concise exit strategy from communities. Neither the YDC nor the YMC were prepared to continue some variation of the program after the exit of MC. Key Recommendation for Follow-on Program The YES program triggered an intrinsic desire to learn in participants. Participants, especially women, expressed over and again their desire to attend night school in their communities. There was a consensus that although their daily obligations kept them from going to school, YES evening sessions made them realized that school was still possible. Many informed the team that they were very grateful for the lessons learned in YES, but now that YES has taught them to write their names, and count from one to a hundred, they wanted to learn more. Night school in the form of an Accelerated Learning Program was suggested by those interviewed as a follow-on to YES. Findings Summary per Evaluation Objectives Changes in Life Skills Session Participants as a Result of the Curriculum The team visited twenty-four communities and conducted focus group discussions (FCDs) with two hundred seventy-three participants. Communities selected for the evaluation were from two project counties: Nimba and Grand Gedeh. The National Adult Education Association of Liberia (NAEAL), a local non-governmental organization implemented the program in Nimba, whle Mercy Corps implemented the program in Grand Gedeh. The team, in an effort to ascertain the level of impact of the curriculum on participants, used focus group discussions for the data collection process. Below are summary results from the interviews conducted. Regarding the social aspect of the modules, participants learned a lot from the sessions. Marriage When asked about mamage, they responded with the following: e Marriage is based on love, respect and understanding of each other e Both partners should provide for the home There must be equal rights at home 0 Know each other well before marriage Inheritance Rights The female participants attained a better understanding of their inheritance rights. Most, if not all, understood their rights as wives and mothers. Conflict Resolution Other participants responded that the curriculum helped them to better deal with conflict by seeking consultation with the elders to act as mediators to help resolve conflicts. One participant openly conveyed that prior to the program, he used to beat his wife whenever they had a disagreement (palava), but now, he does not. They now try to solve their disputes by consulting with the elders. In regards to health and hygiene, participants conveyed their appreciation for what they had learned from the curriculum. When asked about HIVIAIDS prevention, they responded: Use a condom; Be faithful to your partner and Avoid used razor blades. Malaria Prevention When asked about Malaria prevention, they responded: e Use a mosquito net; Clean your surrounding and e Go to the clinic when you get sick. Thls was the most talked about part of the curriculum. The literacy rate in Liberia is very low, especially among the female population. The program contributed to the increase in the number of women who could write their names, say their ABCs, and count from one to hundred. 9 The program also broke the comunication barriers. Most women, due to their level of education coupled with traditional beliefs, were unable to express themselves in the public. The YES program has helped them overcome thls barrier. Youth Development Committee C) and YES Management Committee Impact on the Reintegration of War Affected Youth The team visited 24 communities in Nirnba and Grand Gedeh and conducted focus group discussions with forty-eight members of the YDCs and the YMCs. The YMC comprising of elders and leaders in the community supervised the YES program in the community. The YDC comprising of youth that had participated in the Life Slulls classes and those that had not received the training initiated and implemented youth development projects in the community. YDC and the YMC were both important elements in terms of their involvement in getting youth to participate fully in all aspects of the program implementation. These groups worked directly with the youth encouraging them to attend the program and at the same time serve as peace builders between all groups within their individual communities. Youth Development Club '8 Inzpacl When asked about their perception of their role in the program, Youth Development Club members responded that as members of the Youth Development Club, they were responsible for: Youth mobilization to help with community projects which included block malung, well digging and digging of latrines; Encouraging the community youth to participate in the YES program by attending the YES curriculum evening sessions; 9 Liaising between the participants, Learning Facilitators and YES Management Committees; Coordinating meetings once a week to address community matters and organize community activities. They also met weekly with the YTM to organize cornunity activities. When asked about the impact of the YDC on the community, YDC member responded that: Youth contributions to project helped improve the relationshp between the elders and the youth of the community. Youth projects such as block malung, hauling of gravel and their provision of work force benefited the comnity as a whole. Under the guidance of Mercy Corps and NAEAL, Youth Development Club members also organized projects, whlch included cultural drama performances that promoted unity in the community. YES Management Committee 's Impact When asked about their perception of their role in the program, YMC members responded that as members of the YMC, they were responsible for: The storage and distribution of materials (kerosene, chalks, zinc, sporting goods, planks, cement, and cultural items) delivered by Mercy Corps for projects. Liaising with Mercy Corp in the selection and implementation of projects. Mediating conflict between members of the community including the youth. When asked about the impact of the YMC on the community, YMC member responded that: The YMC managed projects (i.e. rice mills, latrines, wells) that benefited the community. YMC served as mediator and resolved disagreements between the youth and the elders of the community. The program also provided leadership opportunity, whch benefited the community. Program Impact on Learning Facilitators, Master Trainers, and Youth Team Members The Learning Facilitators along with Mercy Corps9 field team of Master Trainers and Youth Team Members faced a great challenge in uniting community members. In order to complete this task, they had to develop the techniques to do so. In light of this, Mercy Corps initiated series of trainings held at different stages of the program. During these trainings, participants discussed problems and constraints and derived solutions, thus enriching training participants with better skills and techniques in relating to the community members they served. After undergoing these trainings, Learning Facilitators, Master Trainers, and Youth Team Members performed the great task of mobilizing communities into the YES program, and were able to foster greater cooperation among youth and elders in the communities and help promote the development of community-initiated projects and initiated conflict resolution methods. With the constraints of bad roads, low stipends for Learning Facilitators and getting youth and elders to work together after periods of conflicts, their lives were also transformed through the messages they passed on to their students/participants. When asked how the program has changed their lives, many responded that it has given them the tools to deal with adversity. The anger management, conflict resolution skills and problem solving skills transformed their outlook on life. Impact on Learning Facilitator The team conducted interviews with twenty-four Learning Facilitators to assess their perception of their role in the program and the programs impact on their lives. When asked about their perception of their role in the program, Learning Facilitators responded that: The three sets of training they received from Mercy Corp prepared them to teach the curriculum modules to participants. They were responsible for engaging delinquent participants including ex￾combatants. e They met with the Master Trainers once a week to review lessons and make necessary adjustments. When asked about the impact of the program on their lives, Learning Facilitator responded that: The monthly stipend enable them to pay school fees for their chldren, provide food and clothing for their families and even build their house. e Because of the slulls they gained from the program, they were empowered to go into fanning, small business, counseling and even teaching. e The training conducted by the MT was encouraging in that they improved their teaching techniques and ability to better serve their communities. Impact on Master Trainers and Youth Team Members The team met with the Master Trainers and the Youth Team Members, conducted in￾depth interviews, focus group discussions, and utilized a basic SWOT analysis questionnaire in an effort to assess the impact of the program on the group and some of the challenges of implementing the program. When asked about their perception of their role in the program, Master Trainers and Youth Team Members correctly responded that they were responsible for: e Assessing and selecting the communities to participate in the program; e Providing guidance in the selection of the YES Management Committee members , interacting with those member once a week, and providing guidance on the selection of cornunity projects; e Training Learning Facilitators and offering guidance to improve their teachmg techques. When asked about the impact of the program on their lives, Master Trainers and Youth Team Members responded that: 0 The program improved their ability to interact with others even in difficult situations. e The program improved their ability to manage their time and finances. e They learned of the importance of their leadershp contribution to the community. ... Xlll FINDINGS AGAINST OBJECTIVE 1 eumuLuM IMPACT IN TWE LIVES OF LIFE S~LLS SESSION PAR TICIPANTS The team conducted focus group discussions in all twenty-four communities in Nimba and Grand Gedeh. The communities welcomed the YES curriculum with great enthusiasm especially in Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 communities where the program had a complementing project for almost all communities. However, as indicated in Table 1, the implementation of the curriculum in Cycle 1 experienced a 26% incomplete or dropout rate and a 21% incomplete or drop out rate in Cycle 2.7 MC adjusted the curriculum for Cycle 2 to address some of the issues associated with the dropout rate, but due to the discontinuation of the complementary projects the communities had come to expect as a part of the YES program and new competing programs offering incentives, the dropout rate only decreased minimally. Participants also cited pregnancy, illness, farming obligations and the lack of grades as other reasons why participants dropped out of the program. Table 1: Communities Completion Rate , I I I -- - Cycle 3 1 172 / 6,020 1 5,160* 1 85% 15% * Estimate - Cycle 3 was still ongoing during the evaluation period. Cycles Cycle 1 Cycle 2 During the sessions with the participants, it was quite clear that the YES curriculum had quite a positive impact on the participants. When asked various questions on the curriculum's impact, many responded that they now knew how to write their names, to count from one to a hundreds and to say their ABCs. One participant told a story of how he was embarrassed when he had participated in a wedding in Monrovia, and when asked to write h~s name, he could not. He commented that he wished YES had come sooner to ks community, he would Communities 163 165 have learned to write his name then and not had to face the embarrassment. The team also met participants who were now proud students enrolled in the local schools due to their experience in the YES program. Participants 5,705 5.775 Female participants responded that they had a better understanding of their role in the home. Participants also seemed to favor some modules over others, as clearly indicated by the level of interest during the focus group discussions. My Identity, Keeping Healthy along with the module on Peace and Conflict appear to gamer the most enthusiasm amongst participants, whereas explaining the ideals of Good Governance appeared more challenging. Participants attributed better hygiene practices, better understanding of marriage and property rights, community togetherness, an increased awareness and See MC Quarterly Reports 3 (5707 participant, 4275 graduates) and 4 (5775 participants, 4557 graduates) To graduate, participants must be able to count from 1 to 100, some graduates struggled with counting beyond 10, this was especially the case with the older participants. Completed 4,275 4.557 Completion 74 YO 78% Incomplete 26% 22O/0 understanding of HIViAIDS and preventing malaria, to lessons learned through the YES curriculum. When asked about lessons learned about HIV/AIDS, many responded that condom usage and being faithful to one's partner was the best way to prevent oneself from getting the disease. It is quite clear that the curriculum had a positive impact on the community, although areas that dealt with sexuality and the roles of men and women in the communities seem to be somewhat controversial as cultural barriers played an important role and affected the reception of the message. It is also worth noting that, of the 24 communities in Nimba and Grand Gedeh visited by the team, the majority of the participants were women and mostly former IDPs and returning refugees. Six hundred and thirty-three (63 3) youth participated in the focus group discussions conducted by the team. However, of that total, 272 were males compared to their 361 female counterparts, representing 57% of the total number of youth participating in the focus group discussion^.^ Ex￾combatants, who were among the war affected youth targeted group for the YES program, were only 1 16 (57 females, 59 males) of the total number of participants involved in the team led focus group discussions. They represented 1 8.3 % b f the iota1 number of participants of the focus group discussions. Therefore, although there was real impact on the various communities, that impact appeared minimized when loolung at the broader premise of the implementation of the program as clearly indicated by intermediate result 1.~.6.2." FINDINGS AGAINST OBJECTIVE 2 ROLE OF YDC AND YMC IN THE MINTEGRA TION OF WAR AFFECTED WUTW The team conducted focus group discussions with members of the YES Management Committee and the Youth Development Club to first assess their perception of their role in the YES program and their understanding of their contribution to their respective communities. The communities selected honorable community leaders, who promoted community cooperation between the youth and the elders, to serve on the YES Management Committee. Members of the Youth Development Club were the youth of the community who were encouraged to participate in youth driven activities. AS per Mercy Corps' quarterly, women represented 5 1.4% (2,197 of total of 4,276) and 54.47% (2,496 of total of 4,559) of the total number of graduates for Cycle 1 and Cycle 2 Communities. lo YES program aim per I.R.6.2 is to have 285 communities actively support and accept the integration of war-affected youth (victims and perpetrators) as productive members of their society. See MC Quarterly Report. Overall, the YES Management Committee's role of a harmonizing entity in the community was evident in most of the communities visited by the team. The YES Management Committee mobilized the community to promote youth initiated projects and joined the youth in the celebration at the conclusion of such projects. This was the case in Salay, another community in Nimba, where the YES Management Committee promoted the youth rehabilitation of a school and celebrated once it was completed. The YES Management Committee had an impact in the reintegration of war affected youth into the community in their role as the moral supporter of the youth in the community. They encouraged youth in the community to participate in the Youth Development Activities. When asked about the relationship between the Youth and the elders, many members of the YES Management Committee responded that there had not been any major problems between them and the youth. In fact, the relationship between the elders and the youth had improved. (See Annex 8). The YES program enhanced their leadershp abilities that they are now the source of mediation for resolving disputes. However, there were instances where the team encountered a power struggle between the traditional leadership and the new YES Management Committee. In Kumah Town, a community in Grand Gedeh, some of the elders saw the YES Management Committee chair as having too much power in the community. In this instance, this was a tool of division instead of cooperation. Here, the elders of the community had decided that they no longer wanted the chair of the YES Management Committee to lead the YES Management Committee because they believed he conspired with Mercy Corps' team to limit their access to the rice mill. In this instance, the other elders of the YES Management Committee refused to cooperate and participate in the focus group discussions held by the team. Members of the YES Management Committee also felt a sense of achievement in the form of the YES funded projects camed out in Cycle 1. When asked about their accomplishments as members of the YES Management Committee, many cited the construction of the cornmunity hall, sporting materials, rice mills and market halls as some of the achievements of the group, even though these were mostly funded projects initiated as complementing projects of the YES program. Nevertheless, the YES Management Comrnittee with support from Mercy Corps initiatives such as drama events and sporting activities served as an impetus in the promotion of unity and cooperation in the community. Mercy Corps provided sporting goods and costumes for drama clubs in some communities, which enhanced the level of participation in the Youth Development Club. The Youth Development Club served as the voice of the Youth. They met once a week with the Mercy Corps Youth Team Member to discuss their needs and projects they were working on. Mercy Corps through the Master Trainers and Youth Team Members supported the group by providing learning materials and guidance on their various projects if they had any. The Mercy Corps team also worked with them to track those who drop out of the program. When they had projects, it benefited the entire community and brought the community together. Youth Development Club members seem eager to point out the achievement of the group. However, for communities without projects, the Youth Development Club's role seemed minimized, as most Youth Development Club members seemed dnven by the fact that they were contributing to their community through the YES funded projects. For example, Youth Development Club members pointed out that they helped dig the well for the community or helped clear the bush for the area for the new town hall. In communities where there were no funded accompanying projects, many members of the Youth Development Clubs did not seem to understand that the essence of the Youth Development Club was to promote cooperation amongst the youth not only to foster unity, but also to foster youth initiated self-help projects. Although a few communities were proud to show the team their projects, it was quite clear that youth equated Youth Development Club membership with incentives. In addition, it was quite apparent that overtime, although the Youth Development Club contributed to the reintegration process, its level of contribution varied between communities. Cycle communities with projects seemed to have a much stronger YES Management Committee and Youth Development Committee as opposed to Cycle 2 and Cycle 3 communities with no projects. The members of the YES Management Committee and Youth Development Club also seemed to exhibit a sense of entitlement in that since they participated in YES, they and their respective communities were entitled to the same project benefits as the other communities they had heard about. Competing NGOs programs in the same communities appeared to reinforce this sense of entitlement. One example of this was an encounter in Grand Gedeh in the town of Barblor where the team was meeting with participants. In that incident, while conducting the focus group discussion a Save the Children UK vehicle arrived bearing gifts of sporting goods and other supplies which caused most of the youth to come out running to greet the Save team which has a youth program in the same town. Both the youth and the elders of the towns visited by the team saw the benefit in the YES Management Committee and the Youth Development Club, but many appear to equate some form of compensation for their participation. FINDINGS AGAINST OBJECTIVE 3 PROGRAM IiMPACT ON LEARNING FACPLITA TORS, MASTER TRAINERS, AND YOUTH TEAM MEMBERS The team interviews with the Learning Facilitators, Master Trainers and Youth Team Members conveyed a definite positive impact on their personal lives. Several Master Trainers discussed with the team, how the extensive training for the implementation of the program affected the way they approached adversity. They pointed out that it helped them better manage their temper by approaching adversity systematically. The communities selected their Learning Facilitators to go through the Mercy Corps training. Learning Facilitator pointed out that it was challenging at times to get people to understand the benefits of the program. Keeping participants interested required extensive mobilization and continuous promotion of the program to the communities. However, because of the training they received, Learning Facilitators managed those challenges positively and overtime, people became more interested in the program as their friends told them about the lessons they learned in the evening sessions (see Annex 5). Many Learning Facilitators pointed out that their participation in the program has empowered them to speak openly and freely. Through the training, many developed useful slulls on how to engage delinquent participants. Leaming Facilitators, especially, were financially empowered through the monthly stipends they received. They were able to provide food for their families, pay their children school fees and even build their homes. Because of the training and the stipend they received from Mercy Corps, some Learning Facilitators were able to go into business for themselves. Many express great joy in seeing the transformation of the youth of the communities due to their contribution in the YES program. The team conducted focus group discussions, in-depth interviews with Master Trainers and Youth Team members followed by a SWOT questionnaire (see Annexes 6 and 7). These discussions provided the team an in-depth view of not only the various roles of the Master Trainers and Youth Team Members but also the program impact and the factors that affected the implementation of the program. When asked about the level of training they received, both Master Trainers and Youth Team Members expressed that the training they received from Mercy COGS adequately prepared them to carry out the duties of their respective positions. They saw it rewarding that through their leadership they were able to empower Leaming Facilitators to teach the curriculum and provide guidance that led to greater cooperation between the youth and the elders of the community. Seeing the transformation in their youth was rewarding. One Master Trainer in New Tappita was proud to show off one of hs former YES participants who enrolled in school and was doing very well. When asked about the overall strength and weaknesses of the program, Master Trainers and Youth Team Members cited the training and the cuniculum of the program as two major strengths and unequal distributions of projects and lack of incentives as two major weaknesses (see Annex 6 and 7). When asked to make future recommendations, they commented that the inclusion of leadershp training, consistency in project implementation, sponsorshp of youth initiated activities, grades and greater coordination between NGOs as strategies that could enhance the impact of the program. They also saw the separating of illiterate and semi-illiterate participants for the curriculum session as an adequate way to improve the efficiency of the life slulls training lessons given to the participants. CONCLUSIONS The implementation of life slulls training in a post conflict context was quite an ambitious undertaking, when decades of war and lawlessness has affected the mindset of the target group. It is quite clear that YES, as implemented, was quite an ambitious undertaking and the true level of impact is one that is debatable given a subset (excombatants) of the primary target group of war affected youth is underrepresented. However, overall YES was successful in affecting some behavior change and community togetherness. Achievements by Objectives Objective I - Curriculum's Impact on YES Participants The YES curriculum had a positive impact on the participants, especially women. Women participants who represented the majority in the group appear to have a greater appreciation for the program regardless of incentives. They were happy to express how the lessons learned from the curriculum had changed their lives. Two of the greatest impacts of the curriculum on women were the trigger of the desire to leam more and the boosting of their self-esteem in the community. Women across all the communities visited by the team pointed out that because of the YES cuniculum sessions requiring them to speak in front of groups; they now voiced their opinions in town hall meetings in discussions that affected the community. Across the communities visited, women were also proud of their ability to say the ABCs, to count, to write. Women of the various communities were the ones pleading for YES to continue with an accelerated learning program in the form of night school. As a result of the curriculum, women who had given up hope on getting an education were empowered with an appetite to leam more, a profound transformation. However, transformation in male participants appeared more challenging to assess. First male participants of the team focus group discussions were less interested in the discussions. Their participation in the group interviews took work on the part of the Learning Facilitators and the Master Trainers. Male participants were not as forthcoming in providing examples of the program's impact on their lives. Objective 2 - Role of YDC and YMC in Reintegration of War Afected Youth The YES program, by placing the decision-malung process in the hands of the community yielded a sense of ownership, as the community served as the primary source of solutions affecting the community. The YES Management Committees was more effective when the programs had a complementing program in that the participants had concrete tasks to perform and responsibilities as custodians of project materials. In these communities, the YES Management Committees play a greater role in mobilizing the youth of the Communities. This was the same situation for the Youth Development Club, whlch had an impact in mobilizing the youth in the communities to contribute to the YES funded projects. This was quite clear in both groups9 responses to the team's questions about their achievements. Both groups cited their respective contributions to the YES funded as major achevements (see Annex 8). Whether thls was a major contribution to the reintegration process remains debatable. Objective 3 - The Impact of Program on the Lives of LFs, MTs and YTMs YES had the greatest impact on the lives of the Learning Facilitators. Learning Facilitators were empowered socially and economically as major contributors to their communities. Both the elders and the youth respected and celebrated Leaming Facilitators because of their contribution to their communities. Learning Facilitators aware of their new status in the community proudly carried out their duties.. The monthly stipend they received from Mercy Corps translated into an improved lifestyle for their families and their small businesses, a contribution to their various communities. The impact of the program on the lives of the Learning Facilitators was more profound then that of the Master Trainers and Youth Team Members. However, given the terrain and some of the situations that arose during the teams' visits to the various communities, it is quite commendable to the leadershp of the Mercy Corps program that Master Trainers and Youth Team Members were able to cany out their duties. Master Trainers and Youth Team Members accredited their abilities to the extensive training they received. In some instances, the team observed Master Trainers and Youth Team Members effectively address issues regarding the teams7 visits. One example was their ability to quickly reorganize the team's schedule and mobilize the relevant communities to meet the new schedule. Master Trainers and Youth Team Members attributed their ability to deal with challenges such as bad roads, community disputes and non-cooperation, to the extensive training they received during the program. General Challenges to Implementing YES First, from inception, because of time constraints and the size of the program, it appeared that the rollout of Cycle 1 followed by Cycle 2 affected the management of the program. Managers overwhelmed by the mawtude of the program had to continuously make adjustments due to a complexity of management issues including cost overruns thereby affecting the project delivery to all participating communities. ' Some projects were more costly than projected and therefore some communities promised projects did not receive those projects. Master Trainers in the focus group discussion commented to the team that this occurrence made their jobs more difficult. Communities viewed their promises with skepticism. It also affected the participants' level of interest in the program. Members of the Youth Development Club and the YES Management Committee attributed much of their achievements to their contributions to the YES funded projects (see Annex 8). It is also worth noting that the team came across several situations where communities unable to purchase the fuel were not using the rice mill purchased as a YES funded project. Second, although the participants expressed their enthusiasm about the curriculum and conveyed the impact it has had on their lives, some struggle with identifying some of the lessons taught in the modules. Participants over and again, were ready to let the team know that the program taught them how to say their ABCs and count, but many appear to 11 See Social Impact's Final Evaluation: The Liberia Transition Initiative (2004-2006), October 19, 2006. struggle with some of the other lessons taught in the curriculum, especially those in modules such as Good Governance. Third, in order to avoid duplication and unnecessary competition, NGOs needed to coordinate their efforts in implementing their programs to avoid the coincidence as the Save UK example given earlier. One of the main points expressed by the Learning Facilitators and Master Trainers was that the discontinuation of community development projects in Cycle 2 and Cycle 3 had a negative impact on the communities9 perception of the YES program, and required greater effort in promoting the program to convince people to participate. They perceived that the program came along with projects and the absence of these projects had a negative effect on the level of impact of the program. With more competing NGOs, especially for Cycle 2 and Cycle 3 communities, participants began to gravitate to programs where NGOs provided incentives for their participation.12 Fourth, YES did not meet the objective of promoting mentorslxp or apprenticeship schemes as a component of the reintegration objective. The reason given for this was the lack of business enterprises. However, upon visiting the communities, it is worth noting that although a mentorship or apprenticeslxp schemes in the traditional sense may have been lacking in the communities, there were instances where opportunities warranted youth participation as apprentices. One clear example was a construction of a Catholic school in New Tappita, a YES community. Master Trainers and Youth Team Members tasked by Mercy Corps to find and take advantage of such opportunities, could approach the managers of such project to get more youth involve and work as apprentices. Finally, there seemed to be a growing sense of donor-dependency among participants given the increase in NGO programs in the various communities, especially incentive driven programs. The team observed during their visits to the various communities, especially communities in Grand Gedeh, that many communities lacked youth initiated projects outside of the YES hnded projects. Master Trainers and Youth Team Members cited the lack of a sponsorship, as an incentive for youth initiated project, as the reason for the absence of youth initiated projects in many of the comunities the team visited. Communities also appeared less receptive of programs without projects or other foms of incentives. In some cases, community members were quick to point out that Mercy Corps did not even reward or recognize them for their hard work, for projects they initiated, although it benefited their community. YES benefited the many communities participating in the program. However, the fact that the level of impact varied from community to community, is evident that YES proved to be a very complicated program to implement. The aim of behavior change through a curriculum tailored to address a multiplicity of issues regardless of the contextual application of such a curriculum proved to be quite an ambitious undertaking. '' As per Annex 7, during the interview a focus group discussion with the MTs and YTMs, cited the paying of sitting fees and stipends by DEN-L as an example of an incentive driven program. The architects of YES failed to incorporate some of the culturally driven natural trends into YES design. It would have been worthy of research to investigate traditional norms of rehabilitation and reintegration to devise a more culturally sensitive curriculum. However, despite the many challenges and the magnitude of implementing such a robust program in a short period of time, YES had a positive impact on the lives of the members of the cornunities participating in the program. It however remains debatable as to whether the YES curriculum will lead to sustained behavior change in war-affected youth. LTI. YES Curriculum. Modules 1-7. Mercy Corps. 2005. Youth Education for Life Skills (YES) First Annual Workplan, January 1,2005 - December 3 1,2005. Mercy Corps. 2005. YES Quarterly Report #2, July 1,2005 - September 30,2006. Mercy Corps. 2005. YES Quarterly Report #3, October 1,2005 - December 3 1,2005. Mercy Corps. 2006. YES Quarterly Report #4, January 1,2006 - March 3 1,2006. Mercy Corps. 2006. YES Quarterly Report #5, April 1,2006 - June 30,2006. Mercy Corps. 2006. YES Quarterly Report #6, July 1,2006 - September 30,2006. Mercy Corps. 2006. Overview of Results: Pilot Implementation of YES to Soccer. Social Impact Inc.2006. Final Evaluation: The Liberia Transition Initiative (2004-2006). ANNEX 1: Scope of Work Background Mercy Corps has been implementing the Youth Education for Life Skills (YES) program in seven counties for the past two years. The program will close December 3 1,2006 and Mercy Corps wishes to conduct an external evaluation. The targeted group for the YES program is youth between ages of 18 to 35 years. The program has two major objectives: 1. Help was affected youth make informed decisions about their lives and future 2. Help was affected youth contribute positively towards the development of their communities. This is achieved through two major activities: 1. Life Skills are provided to participants through a curriculum that covers such topics as: My Identity, Good Governance, Literacy, My Environment and Health. Implementation of the Life Skills curriculum takes approximately 4-5 months and is administered in cycles. Mercy Corps has completed three cycles and reached almost 300 communities. The training is delivered by two Learning Facilitators (LFs). The LFs are community members who are trained in facilitation slalls by Mercy Corps staff called Master Trainers (MTs). 2. The youth in each community forms a YES Development Club (YDC) that is managed by a YES Management Committee (YMC). The YDC is comprised of youth in the community that are committed to the development of their community: This is done by undertaking an activity weekly that helps improve the livelihood of the community. The YMC is comprised of current leadersielders in the community. Mercy Corps staff called Youth Team Members (YTMs) work closely with the YDCs and YMCs to meet thls goal. The objectives of the Evaluation are to: 1. Assess the changes in Life Skills session participants as a result of the curriculum 2. To appraise the role of the YDC and YMC in the reintegration of war affected youth 3. Examine the impact of the program on Learning Facilitators, Master Trainers and Youth Team Members. Methodology The surveying of participants will be done using focus group discussions. Two focus groups will be held in each community, one discussion will be held with participants and another with members of the YMC and YDC. LFs will be interviewed separately with a questionnaire. One day in each county been set aside to talk to the implementing staff (MTs and YTMs) in each office. Each staff team will complete a SWOT analysis looking at the overall program (the opportunities section should focus on the possible complementary or subsequent programs for the communities) and a discussion should be facilitated on lessons learned. Individual questionnaires should be conducted on an as needed basis. Due to the complex nature of the program and the destiny of the curriculum, the questionnaires will be developed by Mercy Corps' program staff and reviewed by the evaluation team. The evaluation team can suggest changes to the questions to ensure ease in data collection. The administration of the questionnaires and analysis and interpretation of the collected data is to be done solely by the selected firrn or c onsultanc y group. Project Timeframe: Activity review of questionnaires, YES curriculum and selection of communities Commencement 1 Number of Days to complete 1 Briefing on programs, Administering of questionnaires and collection of data from the contract Date Upon signing of Upon completion of questionnaires 3 days - Monrovia 3 travel days 2 days with MTs and YTMs 6 days with communities Geography: field Analysis and interpretation Total The YES program is implemented in seven different counties. Mercy Corps implements the program directly in Bong, Grand Bassa, Sinoe and Grand Gedeh. A local partner NAEAL implements the program in Nimba and Margibi and another local partner implements the program in Montserrado. The evaluation will be conducted in Nimba and Grand Gedeh counties. These counties were chosen to provide a balance between a county where MC directly implements and one that is implemented through a partner, their physical proximity. OTI conducted an independent evaluation in September that visited Bong, Margibi and Montserrado thus those counties were ruled out. Twelve communities in each county (four from each cycle) and their corresponding LFs, YMCs, and YDCs will participate in the evaluation. Team Composition: Upon return from the field Mercy Corps is recommending a team composition of 5 persons. One Evaluation coordinator, two discussion facilitators and two recorders. The discussion facilitators will be paired with the recorders so that two communities can be interviewed simultaneously. Mercy Corps anticipates that each group will need two to three hours in each community and that each team can evaluate two communities each day. 1 day flex 5-10 days 15 Days scheduled plus preparation Deliverables: Mercy Corps will require a narrative report as a fmal product. A draft is required withn . one week (seven days) of the returnsfrom the field visits. Mercy Corps will then make comments and return it to the contractor within one week. The final report will be due within the next week. The report should not exceed 25 pages without appendices. The narrative report must be presented in the following forrnat: Executive Summary Methodology Findings against Obj ective 1 Findings against Obj ective 2 Findings against Objective 3 Recommendations for follow-on activities Conclusion Appendices Questionnaire List of communities visited sorted by date and time List of people surveyed in each community As needed Important Conclusion 0 The selected contractors will be responsible for reviewing questionnaires, administering questionnaires, collection of data, analysis and interpretation of the collected data. 0 The selected contractor will be responsible for briefing and management of evaluation team. Most of the participants are expected to be illiterate of semi-illiterate. Mercy Corps' Responsibilities: Provide driver and vehicle to transport the evaluation team. After the team selects the communities, mobilize the communities in preparation for the visit. Contractor's Responsibilities Hire team members. Provide them with feeding and accommodation during field visits. Brief and supervise the team members to ensure quality results. Implementing the terns of reference as stated. Photocopy questionnaire, provide writing implements and stationary as needed by the evaluation team. ANNEX 2: Evaluation Team Composition Axel M. Addy lead the six-member A1 evaluation team as the project lead along with, Alfred B. Stevens, team lead, Anthony Sumo Koisee, facilitator, Stephen G. Yekeh, facilitator, Sawo G. Buku, recorder, and Ernest Stevens, recorder. Mivlr. Addy holds an M.A. in African Studies fiom the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) with extensive research design and data analysis experience. He has also designed surveys and facilitated focus groups discussion for program evaluation and organizational development assessments. Mr. Alfred B. Stevens holds a B. Sc. in Economics and Minor in Demography with extensive field experience as a data analyst, facilitator and numerator. Mi. Koisee holds a B.A. in sociology with a Minor in Demography and Population Statistics from the University of Liberia with extensive experience in field research and data collection. Mr. Yekeh holds a B.A. in Sociology and Demography from the University of Liberia with extensive experience worlung with youth as a social worker and a field researcher. Mr. Buku holds a BA in Sociology with Minor in Demography from the University of Liberia with extensive experience working with youth as a teacher. ANNEX 3: Methodology Upon extensive document review, the team utilized questionnaires, in-depth interviews (IDIs) and focus group discussions (see Annex 11) to survey all stakeholders to conclude its findings. They carried out a comprehensive review of the YES curriculum to formulate interview questions aimed at capturing information on the curriculum impact on the session participants. The team thoroughly reviewed the scope of works (SOW) of the Master Trainers, Youth Team Members, Learning Facilitators, YES Management Committees and Youth Development Clubs and conducted in-depth interviews and focus group discussions to conclude their findings. They utilized a SWOT analysis through a questionnaire and focus group discussion to assess the overall impact of the program on the stakeholders. Prior to departing for the field, the six-member team spent three days at Mercy Corps' Monrovia office reviewing documents, especially the program curriculum. They held extensive discussions with senior program staff that provided ample information on the implementation of the program. The team underwent training on methods of conducting focus group discussions and in-depth interviews and briefed on A1 standard operating policies and procedures. During this the, the team also participated in the question scripting and selection process upon the extensive review of the curriculum and the various SOWs of the stakeholders. As a result, each formulated survey question aimed to capture the core message of each of the seven curriculum modules. General and targeted questions for the Master Trainers, Youth Team Members, Learning Facilitators, YES Management Committees and Youth Development Clubs were also prepared to attain each stakeholder's interpretation of their respective SOWs. The team carried out community selection exercise prior to their departure for the field surveys. They randomly selected twenty-four communities from both counties with two Alexa Inc. ,3006. new comunities and two repeat communities selected with the aim of having an even distribution between the Master Trainers and the Youth Team Members responsible for those comunities. I cycles / Grand Gedeh 1 Nimba I Total I Cycle I Cycle 2 I Communities I 12 12 24 1 Cycle 3 Upon the commencement of the field visits, four of the six-member team separated into two teams, with teams A & B and commencing their visits to their assigned communities. The Team Lead and the Project Lead also visited the communities to ensure that the surveys carried out were in accordance with the project's SOW. The team spent three days in each county visiting four communities per day. They visited two new communities and two repeat communities per cycle and conducted in-depth interviews and focus group discussions in each of those communities. . 2 New 2 Repeat 2 New 2 Repeat ANNEX 4: Report Findings Validity 2 New 2 Repeat The findings and conclusions of this report are limited to the information made available to the team and the interviews and field visits with the various stakeholders. First, the absence of any real baseline assessment data compromises the team's ability to truly measure the level of impact of the program. Evaluation of non-participants and non￾participating comunities could have provided important indicators pre and post implementation of the program to verify local knowledge before and after the implementation and to assess whether the program brought new knowledge to these communities or whether communities already had some knowledge of the various subject areas. This information could have had an impact on the curriculum design. Second, low turnouts affected community in some areas. The team schedule days of visits to the communities coincided with the days the community members' visited their farms. Saturdays and Sundays were the communities' preferred days for the interviews. Finally, the team had to replace some of the some of the communities selected due to the absence of many participants who were no longer residing in these communities. 2 New 2 Repeat 2 New 2 Repeat 8 8 2 New 2 Repeat 8 ANNEX 5: The Liberian Context The Conflict For the past 26 years the Liberian experience has been one of social instability caused by civil conflict. Events contributing to this state of affairs include military coup (1980); two civil wars (1989 and 2003); two contentious multi-party elections (1 985 and 1997); three interim governments and 14 aborted peace agreements amid intervention by Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which, from 1990-1999, fielded its Military Observer Group (ECOMOG) in an attempt to establish peace. Finally, in August 2003, following Former President Charles Taylor's exile in Nigeria, representatives from the belligerents, LURD and MODEL (Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy and the Movement for Democracy in Liberia), the Government of Liberia (GOL), major political parties and civil society signed the Comprehensive Peace Accord (CPA) in Accra, Ghana and, at the same time, selected the National Transitional Government of Liberia (NTGL) to govern the country whle preparing for elections in October 2005. The Humanitarian Response As the result of the Civil War 200,000 Liberian civilians were lulled; 500,000 were displaced inside the country and 800,000 became refugees in neighboring countries. Schools, clinics, roads, and markets were destroyed or severely damaged. At the same time, agricultural production was limited as was access to basic social services. In response to the devastation of the country's infrastructure and to the displacement of its population the United Nations and its myriad agencies as well as the European Union, USAID, other bilateral donors and international NGOs provided the civilian population protection, food, water and sanitation, shelter, health services, education and sllls training. In many cases these multilateral and bilateral donors worked with the local NGOs, churches, mosques, and other civil society organizations to provide basic needs and to address human rights violations and security issues. Implementation of UN Resolution 1509 In September 2003 the Security Council passed UN Resolution 1509 authorizing the deployment of 15,000 peacekeepers to Liberia. By December 2003,5000 or 1/3 of the 15,000 UNMIL troops had been deployed, which meant civilians in 85 percent of the country were still subjected to human rights violations by LURD forces in Lofa, Grand Cape Mount, Gbarpolu and Bomi; by MODEL in Sinoe, Grand Kru, River Gee and Maryland; and the GOL and MODEL in Nimba. It also meant that areas beyond Monrovia and its immediate suburbs remained insecure and accessible to humanitarian aid agencies until the end of December 2004 when the full complement of peacekeepers was deployed throughout the country. The deployment of peacekeepers had implications for Disarmament, Demobilization, Rehabilitation and Reintegration (DDRR) as well. Initially, disarmament scheduled to begin in December 2003, was postponed until April 2004 when proper planning and logistical support avoided the violence that had occurred in December. In any case 103,000 combatants were disarmed: 33,342 males; 22,370 females; 8,532 boys; 2,440 girls. Post-Conflict Reconstruction The task of rebuilding Liberia has required massive assistance from the international community. As a consequence, the agencies, donors, international and local NGOs along with the civil society organizations, referred to above, are assisting the Liberian government initiate post-conflict resconstruction activities designed to restore normalcy. As might be expected the USAID is a major party to this effort both on its own terms and in relation to its specialized offices. For example, USAID's Disaster Assistance and Response Team (DART) as well as OTI have been involved in providing assistance in post-conflict environment and continue to be. In August 2003, just prior to Taylor's departure and signing of the CPA, DART entered Liberia from Sierra Leone. In addition, in response to OTI's request to have the Abuse Prevention Unit (APU) represented on DART an APU representative was assigned to Liberia that September. By December 2003 the first Temporary Duty (TDY) personnel began OTI's longer-terrn presence in Liberia. Significantly, the CPA that established the NTGL led to UN Resolution 1509, which allowed the Security Council to field 15,000 Peacekeepers. Since the inauguration of Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf in January 2006 as the first female woman elected president of an African country, several hundred internally displaced persons and refugees have returned to their respective communities. Although they have come back to depopulated villages where adequate housing, potable water, health care, education, agricultural inputs for farming and transportation to local markets are in short supply, returnees are hopeful circumstances will improve. Reportedly, some villagers are still refugees in neighboring countries where children are in school, others are in Monrovia, which is overcrowded and, in spite of UNMIL's presence, experiencing an increase in crime, particularly armed robberies . ' '' See US Mission Performance Plan: FY2008, US Mission to Liberia, Department of State, February 13, 2006. Alexa Inc. Decenl ber 5, 3006 ~~~"~d/~~Z~~~~@SS$>~;A~4S~~Y~~~~W~~>~~~C&&V~%V/M~~$Z~~~4&~:~W~~~~K~P~~"~~?~~>~<~~~~Z~~~~V,~~~~~~~~~~~~<~W~~~~~~~?~~X>W?':~~~W/~W~$~tW~~~~#~>;~~~~~2%~>~$8~%~~%~~,~~,~~~~~~;~~~s'~~~~Ld~,~~~~+:?%~4,~~~~'~~.~%SC~'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~d~~~~X~~k~~~,~~~%~~~~~.~~; ANNEX 6: Stakeholders Responses to SWOT Questionnaire Distribution of Responses on Program Administration by Strength, Weaknesses, and Reeommendations for the VES Program in both Grand Gedeh & Nimba Counties Grand Gedeb Nimba 1 / Strength Timely delivery of materials Accountability strictly adhered to Good Information dissemination Delivery of curriculum Capacity building of MTs, YMTs & LFs Sensitization of communities Training of LFs Proj ect implementation & implementation Providing stipend for LFs Programme & Financial Management Logistics supplies Monitoring of projects by program staff Good working relation Trained manpower Delay in procuring spare parts Purchase of sub-standard materials Recommendation Bureaucracy procedures reviewed / Provide enough logistics for project & approved Low incentive for program staff Poor exit Strategy Weak reporting system Inconsistent project implementation Weakinesses Poor procurement system Too much bureaucracy Constant breakdown of cars & bikes Delays from partner organization Proper handling of procurement issues Re-introduction of Grassroots Soccer (GRS) Introduction of Agriculture in program 1 cars I I Removal of projects from cycle 3 Poor lighting facilities Changing of projects after being identified implementation Improve lighting system Provide other incentive in addition to certificates Continue project implementation in all Regular supply of spare parts for bikes & phases of program Improve training for MTs & LFs visits to project sites Establish a monthly reporting system Provide adequate support for project 1 Age of participants be lower to 12 years Increase stipend for LFs 1 Empower youth participants Administrative staff should make more Empower field staff to conduct monitoring implementation Increase incentives for field staff Distribution of Responses on Program Impact by Strength, Weaknesses, and Recommendations for the YES Program in both Grand Gedeh & Nimba Counties Grand Gedeh Nimba Strength Capacity building Brought about behavioral change in participants Training sessions using modules Involvement of youth in community activities numeracy section YES to soccer program Proj ect implementation method r communities Curriculum; especially the literacy1 Involvement of participants in community ] activities Project implementation method Literacylnumeracy session Field visits by MTs, YTMs & office staff Reintegration of youth into their MTS & YMTs visits to communities Use of LFs to conduct training I Weahesses LFs not understanding modules YMCs does not understand their roles & responsibilities Low stipends for LFs Program Exit Strategy from communities Poor lighting system Not providing means for project sustenance Selection method of participants No identification cards for LFs and participants Provision of inadequate logistics Low incentive for program staff Low level of YMC & YDC support to LFs Poorprocurementsystem I Recommendation Leadership training for YMCs, YDCs Empowerment of participants through Incentives Include Agriculture with program Establish an accurate and reliable reporting Program period be extended to 1 year Provide adequate logistics Accept youth with ages as low as 12 years Increase number of participants system Improve procurement services Include skills training in program 1 from those without during literacy/ / administration and MTs 1 Improve lighting system Develop projects for every community Separate participants with literary skills participating in program Increase number of field trips from both numeracy sessions Improve literacy/numeracy training Empower field staff to conduct monitoring Provide more training for program staff Increase incentives for field staff ANNEX 7: FGDs SWOT with MTs and YTMs SWOT Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats Nimba (11/25/06) - Training - building the capacity of imp lementers - Promotion of Youth togetherness - Level of transformation among youth greater cooperation between youth and elders - Literacy -participants learned to write their names - Positive change in the community - LFs members of community - Logistics - delivery of supplies including spare parts for bikes, support in case of injury due to fall offbikes, - Stipends for field staff - Promises to community -slow delivery on promises i.e. flashcards, picture boards - Support of youth activities - no support of youth initiated community activities - Sponsorship of youth initiated community activities - incentives.for greater youth participation - Consistent projects - ifprojects for one community then projects for all communities - Greater NGO coordination Grand Gedeh (11/29/06) - Training - building capacity of implementers - Support - Support from MC Monrovia - Community Participation - Literacy - impact on community - MC Monrovia -program staff - Curriculum Design and Method of Delivery (Participatory) - Moral Support -from supervisors and MC Monrovia - Grassrootss ~occer'~ - Low stipend to LFs - Unequal distribution of projects between cycles - CYCLE 1 communities had project3 some CYCLE 2 communities had projects, all CYCLE 3 communities have no projects - Leadership Training - strengthen leadership training especially in terms of conflict resolution - Skills Training - communities misinterpreted Life Skills as skills training - would like to have skills training that addresses their immediate needs - Night School - communities feel they have learnedfrom YES but would like to learn more. - Parallel programs with incentives - DEN-L gave sitting fee and stipends to participants - Schools - students got grades and were promoted Grassroots Soccer -pilot program implemented in same YES communities and popularity undermined YES program. More youth joined GRS because of incentives. ALP - implemented in some YES communities and gave grades and promotions as incentives, unlike YES that only gave certzjktes - Schools - newly built schools in YES communities Change in methodologylstrategy -no projects for some communities in CYCLE 2 and all communities in CYCLE 3. Participants joined and dropped out when they discover no projects was apart of the program 14 Grassroots Soccer is a Mercy Corps pilot project implemented with great success in a few communities in Grand Gedeh and Sinoe counties. 33 ANNEX 8: Stakeholder Responses during IDIs and FDGs OBJECTIVE It: ASSESSING C 6-E PARTICIP P Better hygiene practices P Learned how to read, write and spell names, also to count from one to hundred P Both youth and elders work together to develop the community > Better understanding of the spread, prevention and treatment of malaria 3 Improvement of their knowledge in understanding the spread and prevention of HIV/AIDS 3 Wives and children can possess properties of their late husbands. 3 Mamed age is 18 years and above. OBJECTIVE 11: APP ISING ROLES OF UDC TION OF AFFECTED YOUTH A, UDC P Youth's involvement in decision making with regards to project initiatives. > Youth play most active part in project implementation such as clearing of site for project work to begin, digging of wells? malung of bricks, etc. 3 Most than half of the youth population is involved in community activities. 3 Relationship between youth and elders is strengthened and improved because of the YES Program. 3 Youth's involvement or willingness to implement community projects has benefited the community B. VMC > Keep Materials P Select Candidates for LF Position 3 Inform the community about which project has been identified and selected by the youth. > See to it that youth (YDC) receive support or cooperation from other community members P Give community support or encouragement for participants and LFs during YES training. 2006 ~~~~~~4>xv~<,4,~,m~~~~~a~#~w~~~~v#.<*~*:~*~~~w~ ~,~:>m*3*%~*~PT<5 ~~"~'~~~~,~~~.~~s~..~*~"~~~<~'~~~~~~%~~m,~~~~v*w~~/~~~~@~~'~///m*~/~m~~~@~~v~~.s~,*~*~~~~~?~~~~~*~~~~>~~~~~#~~m~*~~~*~~~*9~~~.t~~~~~i~~,~%~v~~~'~A~~.~~~s,~~~%~~4:~~~~~o:-z~~~~~~"~4~~%~.~~ OBJECTIVE III: E MINE THE IMPACT OF THE PRO6 ON LFs, MTs AND YTMs A. LF 9 Be with the comxnunity in order to find an area for the YES training. P Stipend provided some source of income for LFs 9 Curriculum/lesson was very useful in improving learning ability of participants 9 Maintain an accurate report on participants' progress during the YES class/session. 9 MT meet LF on a regular basic to guide LF in teaching the modules Curriculum helped LFs to improve their farming skills and to have a safe environment. B. MT 9 Constant visitation of MTs to LFs served as a great encouragement for participants. P Traveling on muddy roads by bike during Rainy Season 9 Sleeping out of their homes P Guidance on LFs presentation of modules/lesson presentation 9 Not get involve into marriage C YTM P Bad road conditions P Help youth get involved in community activities 9 Such as project implementation or initiative, clearing of site for project constmction, and of roads 9 Visitation of YTM was on a regular basic (once or twice a week) P Direct involvement in cultural performances and drama SUMMARY NOTES OF PARTICIPANTS RPlSPONSE IN NIMBA Ql. Participants learned that marriage is base on the following P Love, respect and understand each other 9 Both husband and wife should provide for their home and children 9 Bothhaveequalrightsinthehome Q2. As a result ofthe program participants did the fo Nowing Below 18 years should job: 9 Soap Making P Going back to school Alexa Inc. Dccerrzber 5, 2006 9#~#4#&>66fl49,fiV&A>W/K22K,d,~,3$S7&WZ&fW&SS4W,'<'6fid#A<.4Z~,$5$>>#$>>%%V<4S#~%~~?~d?W.~~:~~~~Y~~9~3~?r~~4Y~>~V~~~?5~~~~~#~>:~~~&%~~~D~~~~~~~:~~~?d~~~/d'74~%~~~~'~~~~~~~~~~'>~ *3;W$<9:tfi*g&Y;<%W>T 3 Doing business (i.e. selling kerosene) Q3. As a result ofthe program participantk$ knowledge improved on the preventions of HIV/AIDS such as use of condom and being faithful to one partner. Q4. Program taught them better understanding of the prevention and treatments of malaria, that is having a clean environment and going to clinic Q5. A. Participants learned the follo wing about working together: P Communal farming P Group discussion with regard to developmental activities such as project implementation B. Participants learned the following about frring palava 3 Elders should get involve in fixing palava P Avoidance of lawsuit Q6 Participants learned about wifc inheritance i.e. when husband die wife and children posses proper@. Q7. Participants learned about personal hygiene such as bathing three (3) time a day, cutting of grass and branches of trees regularly. Q8. As a result ofthe program the lives ofparticipant have been changed in the following ways: P Participants learned how to read and write their narnes P Participants gained self esteem such as tallung in public. Q9. Participants toke the YES class base on thefollowing: P Performance of participants in previous cycles 3 LFs, YDC, YMC, encouraged participants P Peer pressure Ql 0. A. What participants like most about the YES class were: P LFs, presentation of lesson/modules P Modules on good governance and my identity P What participants dislike 3 Poor lighting 9 Time too short for the program Qu. The total number of those who completed the cycles in all it committees evaluated was 6I 6 participants Alexa hc. Decen7 ber 5, 2006 ,~~.~~~~,~~~p~>>,~%,~~~~p~&&~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~<*~~q~~~~~~~~q>~~~.~~~~w~~~~~*~~w<~~~~&~>~~~,~5~~~~~~*.*~~~~~~~~~*~&~~~n~<~~~~~* #,*$~;,4sd~:*9%$**m#~7~**?,, ~<~4G*:V<;*S.+<*,*K+*~''~T'?+W~P4*>%*W+*?~b~~~.**~,*+<4*~~~ Q12. Some participants stopped attending YES class due to P Pregnancy 3 Sickness > Poor lighting facilities 3 Farming engagement 3 Expecting benefit or incentive from YES program P Expecting grades or passes Q13. From the program, participmts learned how to 3 Say the alphabet P Count from one to hundred SUMMARY NOTE OF E1)C mSPONSE IN MIMBA Ql. YDC mobilized youth for community development such as bricks making, P Brushmg of the town, helping digging of wells 3 They also encourage youth to attend YES program Q2. In the YESprogram, Mercy CorpsmEAL worked with the YDC in the following ways: > Help to provide leaning materials llke books, chalks and kerosene 3 Mercy CorpsNAEAL provided guidance for YDC Projects. Q.3. They were involve in the following activities during the YES Program like: 3 Football games 3 Cultureidrama performance 3 Cleanup campaign Q4. YDC carried out these activities on a weekly basis Q5. About 75% ofthe youth were involved in the activities Q6. These activities helped to unite youth with other community members. Q 7. These activities help youth to directly interact with other communig members in making decision Q8. To solve community matters (projects0 EZ)C meet weekly. Q9. To organize communi~ activities YDC meet with YTM weekly. 'r Rice Mills 'r Latrines Q!!. In the hpbmentation ofthe projects, the youth play the following roles: "r Help in malung books, hauling gravel, sand and provide manpower 'r Play Grassrootss soccer "r Culture/drama performance Q12. As a result of these projects, relationship between youth and elders become better. Q13. The project benefited the entire communi@ SUMMARY NOTES OF VMC RESPONSE IN NTMBA Q1. YE Keep YES materials like kerosene, chalks, zinc, sporting materials, planks, cement, and cultural items Q2. The accomplishment ofthe YES Programs differfrom community to community, for example some communities benefited from community hall, sport materials, rice mill, cultural material, market hall while others only benefited from skill training. Q3. The challenges includes the following: 3 How to make youth understand the importance of YES Program 3 How to improve youth and other community members relationship "r Learning how to read and write Q4. Since the introduction of the YESprogram, there has been no problem bemeen youth and elders, instead there relationship has improved. Q5. The relationship improved because they were taught their basic rights and identity Q6e YMC bring both parties together for peaceful settlement. Q7. Youth are to make sure that they meet weekly and carry out community work, and this has improved. Q8. The big,oest problem in these communities vary some lack of rice mill, palava hut, hand pump, latrine, farm to market road, and bridge. Hence they are expecting Mercy Corps and other non governmental institutions to come to their aid. Q9. Program gffected Y2MC lives in the fallowing ways: > It taught them how to read and write k It taught them how to express themselves freely and openly > It gives YMC leadership ability. SUMMARY NOTES OF LEARNING FACILITATORS RESPONSE IN NlMBA Ql. Community selected LFs Q2. LFs received 5 different training Q3. As a result of the basic training conducted by Mercy Corps (MTs), LFsBnd the training to be fine, therefore they were prepare to deliver to their respective comm unities. Q4. lt was difficult at the beginning of the program but at time went by, participants startedfinding the YES curriculum interesting and enjoyable. Q5. AtJivst it was difficult to keep the participants interested in coming, because of the farming season coupled with hunger, but later they develop interest due to what their friends told them. Q6. Teaching ex-combatants k To meet and engage delinquent participants > To explain the modules, which was not academic Q7. youth and elders are involve in decision making ofthe community b- Participants involvement in farming to sustain themselves Q8. MTs visited communities once a week to obsewe and make correction on curriculumAesson Q9. As a result ofthe basic training acquired by LFs some went into farming petite business, bluehithing while others because class teacher. QlU. A monthly stipend given by Mercy Corps to LFs was used the following ways: P Buy wire and set trips P Provide food and wearing for family P Help to build houses P Help to pay school fees Qll. LFs relationship with YMC and other members in the communig was good SUMMARY NOTES ON MTS IRESPONSE IN NIMBA Ql. Most MTs said that the training was adequate and therefore they were prepared to the job. Q2. MTs' wanted extension in training. time Q3. MTs ' criteria were as follow: 3 Accessibility of roads to cornunities 3 Willingness of cornunity to accept YES Program 3 Availability of communities to provide two persons with at least a 10" grade or above. P Accommodation for participants (town hall, school building, etc.) Q4. MTs response was once a week Q5. MTs Guidance to the selection of YMC to the communities were as follow: 9 One most reside in the community 9 Developmental oriented, influential and trustworthy Q6. The biggest challenges ofMTs were as follow: P Road condition during Rainy season (muddy) P Learning to ride motorbike P Sleeping out of your home Q 7. The biggest accomplishments of MTs were as follow: P To complete training of LFs P Implementation of projects 9 Elders entrusting project implementation to youth Q8. There were cooperation and coordination between youth and elders. fiample. A youth was selected as a zonal chief for Sarlay Town and money was given to youth for rice mill construction in Vahn Town. Q9. A. Beating on wife and children is wrong B. That every human has a right and self-esteem. QlO. A. To reduce participavlts age from 18 to 14 years, because they were sexually active. B. Add motivation to the program such as printiw T-shirt for graduation, giving cnpybooks in order to encourage their learning Qll. A. Adult literaq school in each YES Communiq B. Agriculture training Q12. Agriculture and accelerated learning program (ALP) Q13. A. Change of emotion 43. Write reports on time C. To have patience in dealing with people (improved human relationship) D. Zinprovement in financial management. SUMMARU NOTES OF UTM IN NIMBA Ql. Training was adequate to prepare me for the job Q2. One main change at TOT: inzprovement in lodging Q3. Criteria set for YDC Loyal to the community > Unite youth ? Must live in the community Q4. YTM interact with YDC four times in the month Q5. Guidance or selecting YDC by YMC P YMC should look at character P Willingness to cooperate with YMC and YMT P Be able to encourage youth Q6. Three biggest challenges P Road conditions during Rainy season P Lack of safe drinking water P Leaving one's home to sleep Q 7. Three biggest accomplishment P To have sporting materials To have youth take part in the YES program 9 To see transformation in youth Q8. Youth and elders work together to discuss about project works and implementation or such projects as in the building ofa market house in Zolay Town Q9. One lesson that I learn is: 3 It takes patience to convince elders QlU. To add motivation to the program such as T-shirt fir graduation AZexa 1~7~. December 5, 2006 :'A?~~~,~~~~~W~~/~~~~~~~W~~~~~~,W.~~~~~~O~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Y~~!~~~~>W~~IIIIIIII~~~~:~~W~~~.W~~Y~~~~~~~S,~~I~~~~~LI*~WCI~~~ ~S.~*~~Z6ti>ii%~W~~~~S.~~ii<*YS?i:1~X~>~-h'~i~PI~17~rI~8i%iii~:~ii",.ii~."d*%~.Iri~IW~ii~~~1?.>~~~C~~'~d,~~~~&%/*rrYiiY~~~~(Y~~I(I(E~~APP~1WBXY/r Q11. Adult literacy school Q12. The Communities must need P Hand pump P Town halVPalava hut P Rce mill 013. To be able to meet my work schedule on time NOTE ON PARTICIPANTS mSPONSE OF GUND GEDEH Ql. Participant's knowledge on married P To know each other well before marriage P Spouses should not listen to rumor (they say) P Consult each other Q2. As a result of the program, the participants did the following jobs: k Soap making P Farming P Sale of kerosene r" Returning to school Q3. It improved their knowledge on the preventions of HIV/AIDS in the following: P Use of condom P Avoiding used razor blade P Faithfulness to one's partner P Testing of blood before transfusion Q4. It taught them better understanding of the prevention and treatment of malaria in the following > Use of mosquitoes net and cleaning the yard as prevention. P Go to clinic and use of traditional medicine as treatment. Q5. A. Working together does the follo wing: P Cooperation and coordination in communal farming and community project implementation B. Fking palava does the followiv2g: 9 Elder intervene to settle palava Q6. The program teaches the following: 3 Wives and children inherit property upon death of husband Q7. The participants learn about protecting their environment in the following ways: 3 It makes them to have a healthy living 9 It makes them to care about their baby (personal hygiene) Q8. The Program has changed life in the follo wing: 3 Able to express myself in public in group P Transformation from bad behavior to good behavior 9 Participant took the YES class de to the following: 9 Encouragement from LFs and participants that complete the cycles P Peer pressure QlO. Participants like the YES class because k Presentation of curriculum~lessons by LFs 3 Gender equity Dislike: poor lighting QU. All who completed the cycles were those who completed YES lesson Q12. Itwasdue P Pregnancy 9 Hunger P Poor lighting facility 3 Ill health Q13. Participants coulddo the following: R Say the alphabet P Count from one to hundred SUMMARY NOTE OF GRAND GEDEN UDC Ql. I.'DC stated roles as follows: P Mobile youth for community development 9 Liaise between participants, LFs and YMC Q2. Merq Corps work with the YDC, in the following ways: 9 A follow-up on participants who drop from the program 9 Project implementation of YES Program 9 Implementation of YES Program Q3. YDC does the fob wing activities: 9 It encourage youth to attend session P Mobilize youth for community activities such as farming, hauling of gravels and sand, and cleanup campaign and sporting events. Q4. These activities are held weekly Q5. They have approximatel_v 75% of the youth population Q6. These activities involve that youth in the following ways: 3 Youth meet to discuss community matter Q7. These activities improved relationship in the fillowing way: 9 Youth meet and discuss matter with other community/members Q8. YDC meet once a week Q9. YDC see YTM on a weekly basis QlU. The following project; 'P In cycles I community, hand pump, rice mill and soap malung 9 In cycles I1 community, hand pump, rice mill and soap making 9 In cycles I11 community, life slulls training Qll. Youth play the following roles: P Youth provided manpower to implement project Q12. Relationship was better because Decena Fer 5, SUMMARY NOTE ON YMC IIIESPONSES IN GMND GEDEH Ql. YMC understand role as follows: P Advise youth on project implementation P Encourage youth to attend YES Program 3 Take care of project of curriculum materials Q2. YES Program provided leadership such as LF, YMC, and YDC in the various communities Q3. The three main challenges were as follow: 3 For youth to understand the value of the YES Program > Compensation was demanded by participants > Running of parallel programs in YES communities by other NGOs. 3 Selection sites Q4. In general, since the introduction ofthe YES Program, relationship between elders and youth has improved and therefire no problem between youth and elders Q5. Relationship has changed in the following way: > Approach to solving conflict with both youth and elders involved Q6. Elders and youth are called together to settle disputes or conflicts Q 7. The role of youth to implement communiQ activities and projects has improved relationship between youth and elders and the communities. Q8. To have projects such as hand pump, rice mill, palava hut, marketplace and farm to market roads in their communities in which they plan in assisting the project implementation. Q9. In the following ways, the program affects YMC > It provided them leadership opportunity SUMMARY NOTE OF LFs NSPONSE IN CMND GEDEM Ql. LFs were selected by their comnzunities Q2. They participants in 5 different training Q3. Trainings conducted by the MTs to the LFs were encouraging, because it improved their teaching techniques and how to serve their communities, LF's were therefore prepare to deliver* Q4. The participants saw the YES CurriculumAessons to be challenging. Q5. When the program started, more people hope were dash, they thought life has finish for them, but due to the massive mobilization and awareness, people started developing interest in the program. Q6. A. Teaching the mndtcleLIess~ns to illiterate and semi-illiterate was challenging. B. To have people understand the goodness ofthe YES program was also challenging Q 7. In term of achievement, the Yes program did extremely well, because of the war divided the youth and other members ofthe communig, but with the introduction of the program youth were united with not only their parents but also with communiQ members as well as elders. Q8. MTS visited communities once a week to motivate youth to anend session and make some correction when necessary. Q9. LFs venture into the following as a result of skills gained from the program: 3 Farming 3 Petite business P Counseling P Blacksmithng 9 Classroom teacher QIO. stipend were used in the following ways by LFs P Pay school fees for chlldren 3 Help build houses P Food wearing for family > Purchase wires to set traps QII. LFs had improved relationship with YMC and other community members SUMMARY NOTE ON MTs RIESPONSE GRAND GEDEE Q1. MET said their training was adequate therefore, they were up to take the task to do their job. QZ. MTs want time to be extendedfir training Q3. When selecting communities for YES Program, MTs looked at thejfbzlowing: N Accommodation for participants (i.e. school building, town hall, church) P That community should have a youthful population of between 35-75 persons or above "r That each community should select two person with at least 10" grade or high school students "r That community should be willing to accept YES Program P Accessibility of road to communities &4. YMC and MT interact once a week Q5. MTs guidance to the selection of YMC to the communities was done the following ways: "r Developmental oriented "r Influential "r Trustworthy "r One must reside in the community Q6. Three (3) biggest challenges of MTs P Learning to ride the bike "r Road "r Trying to gather people Q 7. Three (3) biggest accomplishnaekats of MTs "r Trained LFs to meet the task 3 MTs solve most of the tribal and community matter that exist "r MTs brought youth together by soccer tournament Q8. During the YES Program MTs were able to bridge that governmental gap that have exist between youth and elders in all YES communities. Q9. Eansforming youth to be productive citizens were lesson learned by most MTs Q10. Yes hogram shouEd introduce "Grade *stem" us a reward, because other parallel program like ALP and the conventional school are rewarding grade aito their students. Reduce parlicipants.' age from 18 to 14 years because they were sexually ~ctive 11 Structure should be put into place even if YES leave the communi@ can stay continue or build up upon what YES Program left behind. Q12. YES program built MTs in the foll~wing ways: 3 Improved their human relationshp k Improved their financial ability 3 Improved their teaching techniques SUMMARY NOTES OF YTM GUND GEDEN COUNTY Ql. E'MT response is Yes well prepared Q2. As YTM, conJ2ict resolution should be added aspart of TOT'S curriculumdesson Q3. The foNo wing criteria were set for selecting YDC P Law abiding in the community P Able to mobilize and convince youth to attend YES class. > Able to bring youth and elders together P Was a resident of the community Q4. YTM interact with YDC every week in the aferrtoon. Q5. The guidance in the selection of the YDC was asfollows: P Consultation with YMC in selecting YDC with regard to good character and preparedness to carry on youth activities Q6. The three biggest challenges: P Complaints of LFs about stipend being small P Traveling on muddy roads P Elders who try to put youth a side Q 7. Biggest accomplishments: 3 Youth have taken leader in the community 3 Good worlung relationship between youth and elders 3 Youth cany on project implementation Q8. &in changes: 3 Youth's involvement in project works such as the building of a market house in Zubay Town Q9. One basic that I learn is youth can take leadership role in communig Ql 0. Two (2) main changes in program 3 Have a graduation ceremony to motivate participants ? To increase LF stipend in order to engage them. QlI. It is as folks: > Grassroots soccer should continue P Adult literacy school Q12. Agriculture program Q13. The Program has made me to know my importance in the community ANNEX 9: Interview List Nimba Community New Tappita I I MT Victoria Sonpon 2 YTM Grant Kollie 3 Doeyelay 7 LFI I LF2 Domingo Klee Catherine Wehyah * Wrolay Mabel Y ancy* 8 Marley Stephen B. Grant Kollie Habakkuk M. Zoyah Daniel William Y reah 9 10 1 1 1 ~ahn~uan ( Moses Ziehyee I Nov-24-06 ( M=10 Date of Number of Arrival Participant Victoria Sonon Nov-24-06 Adamu Glee ' 12 Zuatuo Stephen B. Grant Kollie Goanue Gaye NOV-24-06 Grant Kollie Sonpon Victoria Sonpon M=9 F=14 Sarlay Zoulay Gbarmpea F=i 3 Grant Kollie Nov-24-06 G. Robert Guanna Grant Kollie lIaiquan Stephen B. Danquan Victoria Sonpon Daniel Williams M=8 F=16 M=8 F=7 Domingo Klee Joseph Montanvago Eugene Nuah Jr. Arthur Miatonah Grant Kollie Grant Kollie Grant Kollie Nov-24-06 M=5 F=l 1 Nov-24-06 James Tiah E. Leona Miantona James Gborboe James Gweh Albertha Wehyeh* Elizabeh Duo* M=7 F=12 NOV-24-06 Nov-24-06 Nov-24-06 M=l 1 F=13 M=6 F=17 M=9 F=l0 Grand Gedeh LN 1 2 3 4 5 Community Pellezon Gbarbo BehTown Ziah 6 7 8 9 Wulue Town 10 MT Felecia Doe Felecia Doe Timothy Matthias Gibson W. Doe Pouh Dougee Barblor Necko 1 I I Gbolekin I A / 12 S. K. ~obue Wulue I 1 Cephas Krah Gibson w. Doe B'hai Jarzon 12 YTM Prince Dennis Prince Dennis Prince Dennis Prince Dennis Washington Saytue Washington Saytue Elizabeth Don Washington Saytue Elizabeth Dorr Prince Dennis Washington Saytue Kumah LFI,LF2 Hamilton K. Jarbo Monis V. Deh Moses M. Zlah Hamilton Farbah Esther Menyeah S. Levi Dweh Wallace T. Gave Prince Dennis Prince Dennis Prince Dennis Charles Wleh Prince Dennis Trahusoe Wright A. Garla Gee Charles Wleh Felecia Doe Date of Arrival Nov-30-06 Nov-30-06 Nov-30-06 V. Tarle T. Ramcy Gaye William Brown Alex Beh Kraty Goi Ramcy T. Garwah Ezekiel Wrigh t James B. Myers ~mmanuel Doe Eric Zealv # Of Participant F=17 M=10 F=25 M=l1 F= 19 M=9 F=2 1 Dec-1-06 Robert D. duowon Augustine Bantu M=17 F=10 Prince Dennis M=8 F=27 Dec- 1-06 Dec-2-06 Dec-2-06 Dec-2-06 Dec-1-06 M= 1 6 F=l 1 M=25 F= 15 M=13 F=15 M=9 F=24 Dec- 1-06 Bill Freeman Evelvn Gbolo M=13 F=20 Dec-2-06 M=7 F=13 ANNEX 10: Community Visits County: Nimba Implementing Partner: NAEAL Field Administrator: Emmanuel Doe A1 Teams: A & B No. 1 2 3 MT 4 5 6 9 1 Sarlav 1 Cycle 3 1 R I Stephen Dahnkuan / 11/26/06 1 8:46AM 1 New Tappita Doeyelay Wrolay 7 8 New-N Repeat￾R Name Date Vahn Gboanipea SayeTown Cycle Time Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Volay Zoulay 10 11 CounQ: Grand Gedeh A1 Teams: A & B Implementing Partner: NA - Mercy Corps Field Administrator: Varney Gaie Cycle 1 Cycle I Cycle 3 12 1 No. 1 Name 1 Cycle / New-N / MT Repeat￾N N N Cycle 3 Cycle 2 Marlay Zuatuo / Date / Time N N N Yreah Town Victoria Sonpon Daniel Williams Victoria Sonpon R R Cycle 2 Cycle 2 Grant Kollie Grant Kollie Stephen Dahnkuan Cycle 1 1 2 1 5 1 Ziah 1 Cvcle 2 1 N / Gibson W. Doe I 12/01/06 / 10:44AM / 1 1/24/06 1 1/24/06 1 1/24/06 Victoria Sonpon Victoria Sonpon N R 3 4 8:47AM 1 1 :47AM 2: 15PM 1 1/24/06 11/26/04 1 1/25/06 N Pellezon Gbarbo 3 :46PM 7:08AM 8: 1 5AM 1 1/25/06 11/25/06 Stephen Dahnkuan Stephen Dahnkuan Kumah BehTown 6 7 3 :02PM 1 :30PM Victoria Sonpon Cycle 1 Cycle 3 11 12 1 1/26/06 1 1/26/06 Cycle 2 / R Cycle 2 1 N Wulu Niclto 1 1 :08AM 8: 1 1AM 1 1/25/06 R N R Pouh Dougee 12:45PM Felicia Doe Timothy Mathas Cycle 2 Cycle 3 Felicia Doe Felicia Doe Cycle 1 Cycle 1 11/30/06 1 1 /30/06 R N 11/30/06 11/30/06 9:54AM 3 : 02PM N N 9:21AM 1 1 :29AM Gibson W. Doe Washmgton Same Washington Saytue Waslungton Saytue 12/01/06 1210 1 106 1:lOPM 1 1 : 3 5AM 12/02/06 12/02/06 9: 5OAM 12:33PM ANNEX 11 : Evaluation Questions / I. Questions for Participants - FGD 1 1. What have you learned about marriage through the program? 2. What job are you doing as a result of the program? 3. What are you doing to prevent yourself from getting HIVIAIDS? 4. How did the program help you understand ways to prevent and treat malaria? 5. Did you learn anything new about working together or fixing palava? 6. What did the program teach you about what happens to your husband's property if he dies? 7. What did you learn about protecting your environment? How are you doing what you learn? 8. How has the program changed your life? 9. Why did you take the YES class? 10. What was the best thng about the YES class? What did you not like? 1 1. How many of the people here completed all of the cycles? 12. Why do you think some people stop coming to class? 13. Besides writing your name, what else can you read, write, or count? A. M)C 1. What is your role in the YES program? 2. How did Mercy Corps/NAEAL work with the MC? 3. What activities did/does the YDC do? What activities have you camed out? 4. How often do you hold these activities? 5. How much of the youth population are involved in these activities? 6. How do these activities help to involve youth in the life of the community? 7. How do these activities help improve the relationship between the youth and other community members? 8. Does the YDC still meet? How often? 9. How often did you see the YTM? 10. Was there any project done in this community under the YES program? What was it? 1 1. What role did the youth play in the project? 12. Did the project make the relationship between the youth and elders better, worse or stay the same? Why? 13. Who benefited from the project? 1. How did you understand your role in the YES program? 2. Did the YES program accomplish anythmg in ths community? What? 3. What were challenges encountered during the YES program? 4. Do you have problems between youth and elders in this community? Has the relationship between youth and elders improved or gotten worse? Alexa Inc. Deccn? bela 5, 2006 ~f~~~x4~~r~~~~~p~~~6g~~~~;~~w,~~w~~w~w;,~~,,~~:g;~~~d~~~~,~~~~~~~~~.~~~~~7~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~p~~~~~~~~~~~~~w~~~~~~,~,~~~~~m~m~,~. .~~~~,+~~~~z~~~.w~x~:~p~~e~~~~~~x~~~~~~~~~,v*~i~~w~r~~~~rm~m.~~~m~~~~s~*~~a~e~~~~~~ 5. How has the relationshp changed since the YES program? 6 How do you address conflict between youth and elders? 7. What role do youth have in this community? Has it changed since the YES program 8. What is the biggest problem in this community? Do you have a plan to fix the problem? 9. How has the program affected your life? 1 111. Questions for Learning Facilitators - ID1 1. How did you get to become an LF? 2. How many trainings on the curriculum did you participate in? 3. How did you find the trainings conducted by the MTs? Did you feel prepared to deliver the training when you came back to the community? 4. In your opinion, how did the participants find the YES curriculumllessons? 5. Was it easy or difficult to keep the participants interested in coming? Why? 6. What were your challenges as an LF? 7. What do you think the program achieved in this communitjr? 8. How often did the MT visit you in your community? What did the MT do when they came? 9. Besides on the YES program, have you used any of the slulls you gained from the trainings in the comunity? 10. How did you spend your stipend each month? 11. What is your working relationship with the YMC other members? 1 IV. Questions for MTsNTs - ID1 1. Was your training for the job adequate? Did you feel prepared to do your job? 2. Thlnk back to the TOTs? What, if anything, would you have changed about the TOTs? 3. What criteria did you look at when selecting communities for the program? 4. How often did you interact with the YMC in each community you worked in? When did you interact with them? 5. What guidance did you provide the community in the selection of the YMCs? 6. What were your 3 biggest challenges as an MT? 7. What were your 3 biggest accomplishments as an MT? 8. What changes, if any, did you see happening in the relationship between the youth and the elders during the program? Can you provide an example? 9. What lessons did you learn? 1 10. If you could have made two changes to improve the program, what would they have been? Why? 1 1. What follow-on programs could be implemented in the communities that would build upon what the YES program did? 12. What type of programs do you think the communities most needwant? 13. How has the program affected you personally? ANNEX 12: Documents Provided by MC 5 6 ANNEX 13: YES Curriculum Profile 7 8 9 10 11 Module: 7 Modules Sessions: 1-9 Sessions/modules Methodology: BrainstormingIGroup Discussion/Presentation/SZuts/Case Study Reading1 Picture Cards/DrawingslSinging/Role PlaylStorytelling Lectures Monitoring Form Process Facilitation Guide, Module 1 Questions for Focus Group Duration: 2 hours1 4 to 5 monthslcycle Guide for Life Skill Training Focus Groups questions - per Mercy Corps Participants List of Communities First Annual Workplan/Quarterly Reports 1-6 Overview of Pilot-YES to Soccer LTI-Final Evaluation DM & E Tips for Focus Group Discussion Curriculum Evaluatioi~ Format List of YES communities Quarterly Reports on Program -- Overview of HIV/AIDS awareness -- initiative LTI program evaluation Cheat sheet Module Number Sessions Priority Module Title My Identity How I Make a Living Keeping Healthy Peace and Conflict Good Governance Our Environmental Loohg Back, Looking Forward