COr1SLllt:ir1g @. ;USAID FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
SOUTH AFRICA RAPID ASSESSMENT OF THE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE STRENGTHENING PROGRAM (CJSP)
Evaluation Team
Robert W. Page Jr.
Court Administrator
Jill Thompson
Anti Gender Violence Expert
Dr. Biki S. V. Minyuku
Training and Institutional Strengthening Expert
Achieng Akumu
Senior Rule of Law Specialist. USAID Global Rule of Law Bureau
Submitted to:
The United States Agency for International Development (USAtD) South Africa
Submitted by:
DPK Consultin9
605 Market Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, CA 94105
Tel: (415) 495-7772
Fax: (415) 495-6017
DUNS: 824961353
Tax 1.0.: 94-3186394
May 30, 2008
DPK
consull'log
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
INDEX
PAGE
1. Executive Summary 1
1.1 CJSP Program Design 1
1.2 Impacts ofme CJSP 2
1.2.1 Improved Management ofJustice SeclOr Institutions 2
1.2.2 Improved Case Processing and Court Efficiency 3
1.2.3 Improved Access to Justice and Crime and Violence Prevention Strategies 4
1.2.4 Bener Prosecutor-Led Criminallnvestigations 5
1.3 Recommendations for a Strong Finish 5
1.3.1 Implememation Strategies 5
1.3.2 Areas of Focus 6
2. Evaluation Methodology 9
3. CJSP Program Design and Major Activities 11
4. Impacts of CJSP 14
4.1 Indicators Adopted for CJSP 14
4.2 Rule ofLaw Perfonnance Management Plan 15
4.3 Cost Effectiveness aCthe CJSP 16
4.4 Impact ofCJSP on the Crime Situation 16
5. Area Analyses 18
5.1 Court Administration 18
5.1.1 Re Aga Boswa Decentralized Court Management Model 18
5.1.2 Integrated Case Flow Management System 19
5.1.3 Business Process Re-engineering 22
5.1.4 Dedicated Courts 23
5.1.5 DOJCD's Forensic Audit Unit 25
5.2 Training and Development ofJustice Sector Personnel 25
5.2.1 Impacts ofCJSP Training and Development 26
5.2.2 Selection Criteria for Training 26
5.2.3 Institutionalization ofCJSP's USA1D Supported Training Program 27
5.3 Access to Justice 27
5.3.1 Support to SOCA 27
5.3.2 NGO Grants 29
5.3.3 Dedicated Courts 31
5.4 Organizational Capacity of BAC 32
5.4.\ Suppon to SOCA 32
5.4.2 Institutional RelationslBACIDOJCD 33
5.4.3 Organizational Structure of BAC 33
DPK
c<:>nsu I tl ng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program In South Africa
6. Lessons Learned and Recommendations for a Strong Finish
6.1 Lessons Leamed from the Support Provided by USAlD
6.2 Recommendations for a Strong Finish
6.2. t Implementation Strategies
6.2.2 Areas of Focus
6.2.3 Support to NGOs
7. Conclusion
Appendices
35
35
36
36
36
39
39
1. Interviews, Site Visits, and Key Documents Reviewed
2. Program Design: CJSP for Results Package (November 2000)
3. CJSP Projects: 2002-2008 and Impacts of CJSP Training and Development
4. CJSP's USAID Supported Milestone Meetings/Events
5. CJSP-Supported Capacity Building Activities
6. Re Aga Boswa Trainings
7. Evaluation of the CJSP Document Management Assessment Conducted by
Matiole/Mokgabo JV
8. Electronic Document Archive System General Specifications
9. Summary of School Children and Community Leaders Reached
10. Grantee Activities
11. Organizational Capacity of Anti-Gender-Based Violence NGOs
DPK
cc>nsu I t:t ng
Evaluation ofthe Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
Commonly Used Acronyms
ADR:
AJTDP:
AOJP:
HAC:
ARMSA:
eMU:
CMEPP:
CJSP:
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Aspirant Judges Training and Development
Administration ofJustice Project
Business Against Crime in South Africa
Association of Regional Court Magistrates of South Africa
Coordinating Management Unit
Case Manager Extended Pilm Project
Criminallusrice Strengthening Program
CJSP-PMSO: Criminal Justice Strengthening Program-Program Management Support Office
CREA: Creative Associates International
CSVR: Cenrcr for the Srudy of Violence and Reconciliation
OMS: Data Management System
DOJCD: Department ofJustice and Constitutional Development
DSD: Department of Social Development
DVMM: Domestic Violence Multi·Disciplinary Training Manual
E-Scheduler: First phase of development of integrated case flow management system focusing on
scheduling appearances and basic workload data
GBV: Gender Based Violence
GMTA: Grants Management and Technical Assistance
GRIP: Greater Nelspruit Rape Intervention Project
ICFMS: Integrated Case Flow Management System
lAWJ: International Association of Women Judges
IQC: Indefinite Quantity Contract
IJSP: Integrated Justice System Program
Jl\flS: Judicial Management Information System
JOASA: Judicial Officers Association of South Africa
KZN: Kwa Zulu Natal Province of South Africa
LCPT: Local Crime Prevention Tool·Kit
MOJ: Ministry ofJustice
MTEF: Mid·Term Expenditure Forecast
NDPP: National Director of Public Prosecutions
NCO: Non-governmental Organization
DPK
consult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
NPA:
OJTPs:
OPDAT:
National Prosecuting Authority
On the Job Training Programs
Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance and Training (US
Department ofJustice)
PASA: Participating Agency Service Agreement
PFMA: Public Finance Management Act
PtA: Program Implementation Agent
PIC: Program Implementation Committee
PIP: Program Implementing Partner
poc: Program Operations Committee
RAB: Re Aga Boswa
RLA: Resident Legal Adviser
SAPS: South African Police Services
SOCA Unit: Sexual Offenses and Community Affairs Unit
Tee: ThulllUzela Care Centers
VAG: Victim Assistance Officer
WJEI: Women Judges Empowerment Initiative
USC: United States Government
DPK
cc>nsultlr-lg
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Criminal Justice Strengthening Program (CISP) was designed in 2000 to help South Africa
achieve "a more effective and accessible criminal justice system." The CISP was designed {O impact
!.he criminal justice system in four target areas:
I. Improving management ofjustice sector institutions
2. Improving case processing and court efficiency
3. Improving crime and violence prevention strategies
4. Having bener prosecutor led criminal investigations
As the program approaches its conclusion in 2008-2009, USAID/South Africa bas appropriately
requested an outside evaluation of the achievements of me program, lessons learned, and guidance on
appropriate activities for a strong finish to the program. A team of experienced professionals in
various aspects ofrule of law under a contract with DPK Consulting (DPK) carried oU( the
evaluation.
1.1 CJSP Program Design
The CJSP was implemented through a tripartite strategic partnershipl in which Department ofJustice
and Constitutional Development (DOJCD) was the principal client, USAlD was the funding agency,
and Business Against Crimes South Africa (BAC) served as the Program Implementing Partner
(PIP). Using BAC as the PIP, ramer than a US-based consultant finn, was an innovative and laudable
element ofthe CJSP, as from the outset the program was fully implemented by Soulh African
institutions and professionals.
The program strategy was focused on geographic clusters including large urban-based COUI1S and
smaller rural courts that serve a historically disadvantaged population. The program was to be
implemented in a two-pronged priority planning period of two to three years, with more
implementation-focused resources reserved for a second phase. The program was designed lO
continue the implementation mechanism established under the previous Administration ofJustice
Project (ADJP), with some modifications. The implementing mechanisms included:
• Program Implementation Committee (PIC). The PIC includes representatives ofthe DOJCD of
the Ministry ofJustice (MO)), USAID, the Coordinating Management Unit (CMU), the National
Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), the Justice College, the grants management contractor,
and any program implementation agent contracted by USAlD. The PIC is chaired by the
MOJIDOJCD and USAlD.
• Program ImplenumtatiOlJ Agellt (PIA). The original design envisioned using the existing PIA,
which was Creative Associates Intemational Inc. (CREA), and considered, at the end of Phase 1,
the continuing need for PIA services, whether from South Africa or the US. The Cooperative
lin line with a signed (OS August 2002) Declaration Regarding the Strategic Alliance Among The Ministry of
lustice ofthe Government of South Africa (represented by Dr. Penuell Maduna, Minister oflustice and
Constitutional Development), Business Against Crime (represented by Mr. James Fitzgerald, Chainnan of Business
Against Crime) and the United States Agency For International Development (represented by Robert F. Godc:c,
Deputy ChiefofMission, United Slates Embassy to the Republic of South Africa and Eilene Oldwine. Mission
Director. USAlD, USAlD/South Africa)
DPK
c<:>nsult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
Agreement made BAC the Project Implementing Partner early on, and no further use of a PIA
was made.
• Partidpating Agency Service Agreement (PASA). A resident legal advisor from the USDOJ.
• IQC Buy-ill. A buy-in (0 a Global Bureau Rule of Law IQC for sholl-term technical advisors.
• Perso1lal Services Comractors. Direct contracting of FSN and USPSC personnel to monitor the
implementation of the program.
• Small Value Contracts. Direct procurement ofservices for program monitoring and evaluation.
The program was implemented essentially as designed, though some key elements of the original
design were altered. The use of BAC as the PIA bas been noted: in addition, the IQC buy-in was not
used, and the small value conlIacts were used only minimally. The CISP would have been a SlIonger
program had all of its key elements been implemeOled. There is still an opportunity to utilize these
elements to significant advantage in achieving the desired strong finish, as described in the
recommendations ofthis assessment repon.
1.2 Impacts of the CJSP
The CJSP has played an imponaOl role in slIengthening key justice sector institutions and actors to
improve the efficiency of the justice system, as well as heightening awareness and knowledge of the
imponance of the rule of law in South Africa. The following are the key contributions ofthe CJSP to
the goals of the four target areas:
1.2.1 Improved Management of Justice Sector Institutions
The CISP, particularly through technical assistance and training in its early years, was instrumental
in introducing new means of doing business in the key justice sector institutions at the delivery of
service level-DOlCD, National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), and the couns-through more
effective institutional structures, management and automated systems, data-driven management,
inter-departmental and inter-sectoral planning, and coordination processes directed [0 improve
productivity and reduce delay.
The majOrity of the CJSP Projects are "pilot."
The essence of a pilot Is either to roll out
when primary oOjecti_ are obtainable or
cloae It down when the pilolls futile. To this
ptarrt our Ctlllrvatlon is that most of ttMt
CJSP plIot profec:ts are gnred to be either
rolled out andIor institutionalized because
their continued needs and dIImanda are of
greater magnitude. For instance, Ru Ava
BoHm. tM ICFMS, the vtctlm As&istanoe
OffIcers and case Manager and Case
M...r PUot Projectl.. cruc:lalln
stJ uilgthenling the Criminal Justice System.
CJSP 2 Performance Activity Repott 2002-2003,
The key approach [0 inlIoducing new means of doing
business involved establishing demonstration pilot
projects and institutionalizing and replicating pilot
practices in many locations. Replication was achieved
principally through implementing key elements of
pilots versus roll out of all aspects or to all offices.
More work is needed to ensure that the rollouts and
replication continue.
The key example is the Re Aga Boswa (RAB)
decentralized court management model in Kwa-Zulu
Natal. That RAB model is a decentralized court
support management model based principally on decentralization of decision-making and the
introduction of court managers to sUPporijudges and magistrates. The Re Aga Boswa pilot has
driven the overall national introduction of court managers to reduce the administrative load on
judicial officers so they can devote more time to jurisdictional issues.
2
DPK
cc:>nsultlng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in SoYth Africa
Another pilot was the Integrated Case Flow Management System (ICFMS), which was introduced
mrougb the piloting and testing of models in various provinces (Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng.
Kwa Zulu Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Nonhern Cape, Northwest, and Western Cape). Though
still not fully developed or introduced, ICFMS started an imponam process toward data·driven
managemem in the case processing system and demonstrated how technology can aid in iliis process.
Significant additional work, as described under the area analysis, needs to be done to achieve a truly
integrated case flow management system in the courtS, but the process has been initiated.
The Thuthuzela Care Centers (Tees) introduced an integrated, inter-sectoral "one-stQP" system tQ
suppon victims Qfsexual crimes and their families, frQm me time Qftbe incident thrQugh the trial
process. The TeCs were pilQted in fQur sites and then expanded tQ other provinces and other pans Qf
me WQrld. The TCCs have been recognized in numerous publications and forums - including the
former UN Secretary General"s published Researched Repons on VAWC (2006) and Violence
against Girls (2008); the US gQvernment's WQmen Judges EmpowermeDllnitiative (WJEI); and in
me Benoni (2006) and Luanda (2007) Declarations - as an imponant and replicable model for
addressing gender-based violence (GBV). The current Tee netwQrk in South Africa is slated to be
scaled-up and expanded frQm 10 to 80 centers by the year 2010. ApprQximately six one-stQP centers
based Qn the TCe model are currently planned for other countries on the continent.
The CJSP also has contributed tQ strengthening the institutional capacity of the DOJCD,
and c.he courts through multi-sectoral training and multi-institutional coordination and
planning that help to avoid "silo" type responses to issues and crises. Specific institutiQnal
strengthening activities with the DOJCD and NPA have included the creatiQn of prQvincial and
district case flQW management committees (CFMCs), and contributions to the National ActiQn Plan
on Combating Gender-Based Violence. Creating such inter-departmental and multi-sectoral
coordination is often one of the greatest challenges fQr any justice system and while the effons of
CJSP have helped improve this situation, inter-depanmental communication and collaboration
remain a key area for continued imprQvement.
1.2.2 Improved Case Processing and Court Efficiency
ThrQughout the development ofthe CJSP there has been a paradigm shift on the part of
magistrates, judges, and others with regard to training frQm what could be categorized as initial
resistance to the current recognition ofthe imponance oflife-long prQfessional development as a
pathway to improved effectiveness, productivity, and greater sensitivity to key societal issues. There
has also been recognition that the training should focus both Qn technical issues, such as prepa.rn.tion
and prosecution of corruption and Qrganized crime cases, and on key human rights issues, such as
GBV. A notable achievement in the early years of the CJSP was the creation, through the Aspirant
Judges Training and Development Program (2002-2005), of a pool of trained candidates qualified
10 be judges, many of whQm have been appointed as judges or acting judges.
The result ofthe increased training, supponed by the CJSP through the Justice College, the
Association of Regional Magistrates of Southern Africa (ARMSA), and other local justice
institutions, has been a general upgrading of the capacity ofjudicial officers, prosecutors, court
managers, DOJCD managers, and other justice sector personnel, through focused training in
judgment writing, organized crime investigatiQn and prosecution, management issues, and other
training and mentQring prQgrams. Regardless, additional efforts are needed going fQrward to fully
institutionalize me training process and develop training content and materials. There is also a need
for mQre focus on career curricula modules, as opposed to relying on a series of one-off Iype
trainings. Through the pending adoption of the Judicial Education Bill, a unique South African
3
DPK
cc:>osult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
Judicial Education Institute will soon be established, and will provide a vehicle to institutionalize
and strengthen future judicial training programs. This development is testimony to the increased
importance now !,riven to judicial education, in pan due (0 the work done through the CJSP.
In assisting to strengthen court efficiency, the CJSP has contributed human assets, in me form of
case managers and victim assistance officers (at silt Tees/Sexual Offenses Courts), forensic audit
section data capturers (DOleD), data capturers! for the e·schedule system-the current name for the
evolving ICMS syslem- and dala gatherers and interpreters in the community courts. Some ofthese
Slaffmembers have since been incorporated into the permanent staff oCthe DOJCD, a positive
outcome ofCJSP support. The CJSP also has contributed hard assets such as laptops, computers,
printers, scanners, televisions, and the remodeling ofsexual offenses couns. Furthermore, the CJSP
contributed to the development of systems such as the ICFMS, and component elements such as e￾scheduling and the Justice Management Information System (JMIS).
1.2.3. Improved Access to Justice and Crime and Violence Prevention Strategies
The CJSP made a major contribution to the issue of gender justice in South Africa and the
region, through its support for the development and piloting of the integrated Thuthuzela Care CeDler
(TCC) model for sexual assault management, and the related development of needed technical
support such as the creation of lhe Integrated Domestic Violence Training Manual and associated
training modules. Both the manual and the training modules have been used as a model in other
countries, e.g., Ethiopia. Altbough the CJSP investment was relatively small, USAlD support for the
Tces was instrumental in helping Sexual Offenses and Community Affairs Unit (SOCA) pilot and
rollout key aspects ofthe TCe model to six sites nationally. These models clearly demonstrated the
value ofthe case manager and victim assistance officer (VAD) positions to the effectiveness ofthe
TCC model. SOCA has now institutionalized the VAD position at 10 siles nationally and is planning
to continue to expand the model to additional sites.
Other CJSP activities have contributed to expanding access 10 justice for vulnerable groups. The
activities include grants to NODs, to provide and, in some cases, to expand/replicate support services
to victims of GBV to empower victims and facilitate access to the courts; research and development
of a standardized, developmentally appropriate program for child witness preparation (Child
Witness Preparation Project), now currently used by several South African GOs; funding child
wiUless preparation and court support services by Childline and others; conducting public awareness
and education campaigns to schools throughoul the country and to communities with an emphasis
on hot spots (Tiisa Thuto We Strengthen Education Program); and develop training tools for the
NPA to train prosecutors and other inter·secloral role·players to prosecule sexual offense cases and
implement the Domestic Violence Act.
The CJSP also contributed to increased access to justice Ihrougb its support for the creation of
dedicated courts in areas of commercial crimes (Pretoria, Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth, Durban,
and Cape Town), sexual offense courts, and community courts (Western Cape, Gauteng, and
Limpopo). Support for the community courts included development of guidelines for the
community courts (the "Hameld model"), infrastructure (trailers, office furniture), and public
awareness campaigns, as well as supporl for diversion and sentencing alternatives.
! Data capturers for the system are data input staff which pulls needed data from filing and other papers
to update the E-schedule system. In the long run, the data should feed directly into the ICMS system from the source
document eliminating the need to capture Ihis information post filing or hearing.
4
DPK
consulting
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
In the area of crime prevention, USAID provided grants to NGOs to pilot crime prevention,
diversion, and rehabilitation programs for at-risk youth and/or young offenders in schools,
communities, and correctional facilities. USAJD support to Khulisa's ·'New Directions" diversion
program was particularly instrumental in helping (0 institutionalize diversion and youth offender
programs in several South African provinces.
1.2.4. Better Prosecutor-Led Criminal Investigations
The CJSP can be credited with assisting and providing a significant upgrading of the prosecutoriai
function through training and menlaring prosecutors to better investigate, prepare, and present cases
related to gender violence and to organized and commercial crimes.
Upgrading the professionalism of prosecutors has been achieved principally lhrough skills training;
provision of legally trained case managers to me TCe to assist prosecutors in sexual offenses
cases; institutional support to the NPA Directorate of Special Operations (OSO or '·Scorpions'l;
and mentoring activities through USAlD cooperation with OPDAT. The training was implemented
through the placement of an OPDAT resident legal advisor at the NPA for two consecutive years,
followed by an interim legal advisor, both ofwborn advised on prosecuting organized crime and
money laundering cases under the Prevention of Organized Crime Act, and built confidence within
the NPA 10 file cases under this legislation. Technical activities have included support of the
Forensic Audit Unit (located within the DOJCD), and the Asset Forfeiture Unit ofthe NPA.
1.3 Recommendations for a Strong Finish
As the program moves toward a strong finish, there is a need for a strategic review of the 2007·
2008 program plan in lighl ofthe comments ofthis assessmenllevaluation. and to redirect resources
to tie out to the original goals and focus of activities. We have outlined below both implementation
strategies and areas of focus that should be given consideration [0 achieve the desired strong finish.
These strategies and areas of focus are developed in more detail in the assessment ilSelf.
1.3.1 Implementation Strategies
1. The strong finish can be more assured ifsome ofthe concepts outlined in the original project
design are implemented. For example, the original design contemplated the use of external
technical assistance through buy·in to the ROlIQC. The noted drift in focus in recent years
comes in part from the lack ofa strong sense of appropriale next steps for CJSP, particularly in
areas related to organization, productivity, use oftechnology, and court administration. An
effective rule oflaw implementer with knowledge of international best and appropriate practices
could be very effective in quickly helping 10 give direction 10 the CJSP program as it concludes.
Strong consideration should be given to obtaining such assistance to provide strategic advice,
particularly on the court·strengthening program.
2. The original program design also contemplated the use of an external source to carry out the
monitoring and evaluation function. While the CJSP should be commended for the rich detail of
quantifiable data, especially in its early years, there is a need to tighten the monitoring and
evaluation asped:S of the project. USAIO may need to go back, capture, and analyze e,"(isting
data to bener measure acrual impacts in a way that is currently not possible with existing in·
house data and resources. That process would resull in bener measurement ofimpacts, either
according to original indicators or a focused subset ofrhe original indicators.
5
DPK
cc:>nsu 11:1 rig
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
Project Management Unit in DOJ
It Is recommended that the operationaliution
of OOJCO's Project Management Support
Unit be fast·ncUd. To doOlherwise means
courting the disastJ"ous risks of neither skIlls
transfers nor QpacIty building with the
OOJCD by the time the CJSP Cooperative
Agreement lapMs.
(september 2(06) Sixth Performance Report (p.
49)
3. It is critical to address institutionalization and sustainabiJity issues, specifically the transfer of
project management and know how from the BAC to the Program Management Units within
DOleD and the NPA (see text box), in anticipation of program bandover. This activity bas been
contemplated in the BAC mechanism for some time, but now requires significant focus for a
strong finish.
4. There is also a critical need to impro\'e and address existing coordination and inler-agency
relation issues through the POC and PIC mechanisms. The SOCA Unit, for example, no longer
participates in !.he POC and PIC mechanisms, and since the change in the CJSP's trajectory there
has been steady deterioration in me relationship between me DOJeD, the CJSP·Program
Management Support Office (PMSO), and BAC-SA.
1.3.2 Ar••• of Focu.
The Re Aga Boswa (RAB) rollout has not been fully achieved, though significant elements ofthe
model are functioning throughout the country. The MOJ has now decided to roll out the RAB system
nationally. Resistance to this model may still exist allhe regional level, as it prescribes shifts in
responsibilities from the regional manager structure in the DOJ to court managers under the direction
ofjudges and magistrates. CJSP should provide assistance in planning, process re-mapping, change
management, and other efforts (0 rekindle interests. buy-in, and readjustment of the model.
I. A strategic inten'ention is needed to refocus on
the original concept of the as opposed to
the current CJSP focus on a Document
Management System (OMS). Focusing narrowly on
OMS runs the risk of not ensuring the creation of an
integrated ICFMS. The goal is the development of a
true ICFMS, which will incorporate case flow
management, document management, and other
recent advances such as e-systems, etc. There is a
need to strengthen training and hardware for such a
system to be implemented effectively.
The evaluation learn held meetings with DOJCD on issues related to the DMS and its roll-out.
There is general consensus that adjustment is needed in any proposed USAID support for this
program. This should include adoption of an integrated approach to ICFMS procurement. With
regard to the DMS element ofthe system, before committing any funding for OMS support a
careful professional review should be undenaken ofhoth the DOJCD summary of objectives and
also the DOJCD-generated TORs, to ensure that the program is nOl a stand alone/pilOlthat does
not fit into the integrated approach. Specifically, CJSP support should target the procurement
process to clearly define phases of the ICFMS process, what will be required for each phase, and
what can and will be achieved with CJSP support. The key is to ensure that any CJSP support
does not become an isolated "experiment" with no built-in follow on.
2. The strong finish in the area oftraining should focus on issues of institutionalization oftraining
through determining the appropriate structures to house training including the USAlD
supported training programs. The South African governmental goal is to create the Judicial
Education Institute. The most appropriate assistance to support this process of creating the
lnstirute for CJSP support is three fold:
e Generate interest and support for the new institute by holding workshops of key
judiciary figures to discuss organization. curricula, teaching philosophy, e.g., instructors
versus peer-to-peer instruction models and other organizing elements.
6
DPK
ciOnsulUng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
• Use the workshops or training needs assessment as the basis (0 create an outline for a
curriculum and set of detailed offerings, e.g., courses for new judicial officers, courses on
intemationallaw issues such as on international human rights, intellectual propeny rights and
others.
• Analyze how new technologies such e-Iearning techniques can be built into curriculums to
expand the reach of training.
3. Training programs have had an ad-hoc quality and need to be less demand driven. reactive,
and more related to specific DOJCD-CJSP activities and strategic objectives. There is also a
redundancy in the program supponed by CJSP directly and those offered by the Justice College.
In some areas, there is a rejection ofthe Justice College model arusing peers as mentors versus
full-time trainers. The activities that should be undertaken to strengthen training are as follows:
• Re-assess Justice College curriculum per recommendations of previous impact assessments,
conduct a skills audit to ensure that training is addressing identified gaps in skills, and
develop model curriculum for judges, magistrates, and coun administrators that can guide me
developmem oftraining programs. Specific curriculum issues and needs that were identified
during the evaluation are:
Institute coun and office manager training programs to rie out to RAS and the ICFMS
Adjust social context training to current needs
Offer programs in emics as a part ofthe anti-<:orruption program
• Specific CJSP assistance intervemions could include:
Undenake a judicial skills audit to be used in defining training needs
Suppon, as a reasonable proxy for a skills assessment, convening ofregional coun
presidents, chief magistrates, and provincial deputy public prosecutors to discuss their
perceptions oftraining needs which would also reenergize the program
Assist to develop appropriate curricula/training modules for judges, magistrates and non￾judicial personnellhat will define clear professional development training paths for each
Determine and provide any assistance that can be provided to fast track the Justice
College accreditation process
Provide specific technical assistance through an international or other expert to help with
the development of the organization, curriculum, staffing, finances, and administration of
the new Judicial Education lnstitute
4. The dedicated court approach needs to be rethought so as to take into account the human
resource issue, namely that judicial officers bum out and may be underutilized in a dedicated
court environment, while at the same time retaining the needed specialized knowledge required
to handle sensitive and complex maners. Specifically:
• Sexual offenses courts need to have the specific suppon services, facilities, and equipment
for these matters, including close ties to the TCes where they exist. Wherever possible,
sexual offenses cases should be tried in dedicated courts and not diverted to orner coons but
may need to rethink the human resource issue. It may be wise to consider rotation oftrained
magistrates into these coons versus permanent assignment to avoid issues of burn oul. \Vhat
is needed is a strategic intervention for an "in flight correction." CJSP support can and should
be directed to define the way forward for dealing with sexual offense mallers by providing
technical assistance to review metrics on performance, convening multi-member groups to
consider the way forward, etc.
7
DPK
consulting
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
•
•
Community courts are in need ofre-engineering. These courts currently are structured as
full-fledged courts wilh all the elements that make for a high-cost model. are now hearing
Donnal criminal matters, and have naturally de-emphasized the community dispute resolution
element aCme community coun concept. The model needs to be revisited to emphasize more
informal mechanisms for resolution, such 85 ADR and diversion. Most cost effective
methods, such as the use of quasi·judicial officers, volunteer mediators, and involvement of
traditional leaders and slrUclUres need to be built into the model. The community coun
program also needs (0 refocus efforts 10 ensure it delivers programs [0 rural areas. CJSP can
support this process by developing white papers, bringing to bear international models,
reviewing legislation, and other means.
Commercial courts have created a model for exclusive jurisdiction over commercial crime
cases and development of expertise among the judiciary in chis area. While me results of me
model demonsltate high conviction rates, the overall case volume of me commercial courts
remains consistently low. There are queslions as to me costs and henefics of having separate
commercial courts in lerms of maximizing the use ofscarce judicial resources. CJSP can
provide important information to the review process by sponsoring an assessment ofthe costS
and benefits ofthe currenl "pilol" approach, and whemer il should be rolled OUI further or
commercial cases should be rolled back into the normal rolls ofthe courts.
5. Support for NCOs should he given greater focus
For the NOO sector 10 provide more consistent and expanded services, particularly in the
courts and TeCs,mere is a need for the DOleD and NPA to formalize their relationships
with NGO service providers (as il bas been done to some extent in the Western Cape), and 10
identify and implement mechanisms for long-term financial suppon [Q NGOs in order 10
ensure the sustainability of current services and facilita[e the expansion of good programs 10
couns and TCCs in under-served areas. CJSP can assist in this process by convening
workshops between the NOO and governmental sectors [0 define how the two groups can
work togelher in the future.
•
•
Future grant funding under CJSP/WJEI should focus on expanding/replicating
successful programs in the area of victim empowerment and dh'ersion, including grants
to support the training and mentoring of local organizations (10 provide specific
programs/services) by more experienced NOOs. Access to justice grants under CJSP/WlEI
could also be expanded to include a specific focus on helping poor women obtain child
support orders under the Maintenance Act.
Support to the CBV seclor during the strong finish should emphasize sustainabilit)'.
Either through CJSP or WJEI, there should be more training to government personnel and
direct services to victims ofGBV, in part by helping government identify and/or develop
mechanisms for out-sourcing in Ihe criminal justice/viclim empowerment sector. CJSP or
WJEI should also playa more active facilitative role between DOleD, NPA, and NGOs
around the issue of child wimess preparation so that USAlD's substantial investment in this
area has a chance to bear fruit CJSP specifically could support the commission ofan in·
depth analysis ofgovernment funding/procurement options for 'GO service providers, with
panicular emphasis on the justice sector (GBV, diversion, etc.), while continuing to provide
shon·term granlS or "bridge" funding to NOOs during the remaining period ofthe CJSP
program.
8
DPK
consult:lng
EvaluatIon of the Criminal Justice Stntngthening
Program in South Africa
2. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY
DPK fonned a team that brought a variety of needed experiences and both international and local
knowledge so the different areas of focus afthe CJSP could be addressed by a knowledgeable
professional from that field. The team included Robert W. Page Jr. as court administrator and DPK
Team Leader. Mr. Page is a former court administrator in both the Federal and state court systems at
the highest levels, a founder of DPK, a fonner rule oflaw chief of party, and has participated in
numerous rule of law assessments in many regions ofthe world. He brought unparalleled experience
as a court administration professional and in rule of law development work. Jill Thompson is a
lawyer with extensive rule of law and gender rights experience in South Africa. She served with
USAID during the early years ofthe CJSP, so brought invaluable institutional memory. She served as
the Anti-Gender-Based Violence Specialist but connibuted to all areas ofthe evaluation. Dr. Biki
S.V. Minyuku focused on training, although his rich experience as fonner CJSP Director was
invaluable to clarifying the history ofthe program's development and understanding of where and
why tbe program is where il is today. His insights imo both the history of the program and the way
forward were invaluable. Although not technically a part of the DPK team, Achieng Akumu, Esq., a
rule oflaw specialist with me USAlD Global Bureau Rule of Law Program, fully participated in
evaluation activities and contributed significant inputs, especially in the areas of activity related to
access to justice. She also served as overall coordinator ofthe evaluation.
The methodological approach used for this evaluation/review included:
• Consultalive/roundlable meetings with stralegic partners
• Entry meetings with USAlD to clarify the TOR
• Exit meetings to share and establish sufficient consensus on draft findings and recommendations
• Review ofsubmitted strategic and supporting documentation
• Site visits to courts, including Community Courts, TCCs, the Justice College and (through the
urging of me CJSP-POC Chairperson) the Constirutional Court
• Focused group discussions with strategic partners, sponsors, consuhants, and program/project
managers
• Face-terface structured discussions and guided telephone interviews
• Out briefings and discussion sessions to vet ideas and findings
The team reviewed/evaluated the relevance, results, and contributions of the CJSP toward achieving
its objectives within the CJSP's primary components. The team focused on reviews of project
documentation including the 2000 Project Design for Results Package No 674-0322.1 Criminal
Justice Strengthening Program, BAC Annual and Interim Reports on the program, DOJCD plans, the
lnterim Evaluation by Decipher Consortium, specific technical documents like the Document
Management System Audit and Proposal carried out by MatioleIMokgabo N, and other relevant
documents. The team also reviewed statistical data to the extent that it was available.
The CJSP Assessment Team conducted interviews wim numerous key personnel and several
individuals were interviewed on multiple occasions throughout the evaluation. Interviews with
beneficiaries ofthe CJSP programs focused on impacts and effectiveness, any problems encountered,
how assistance might have been implemented more effectively, reoccurring problems and how they
were addressed. the CJSP implementing mechanism, and the way forward.
The interviews were driven by the key questions that USAID/South Africa posed for this rapid
evaluation. Interviews with USAID, BAC, NPA, and DOJCD leaders focused on the implementing
mechanism, the tripartite arrangement outlined in the Cooperative Agreement (USAID, BAC and
9
DPK
cc>nsult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
DOleD), and whether and how the implementing mechanism worked. During the course ofthe
evaluation, the team bad many informal interviews with practitioners in various justice sector
institutions, including large focus groups such as the approximately 20 clerks in the Johannesburg
Magistrate Court and with key personnel at the Cape Town Tee and in Durban. A list of major
interviewees, site visits, and major documents reviewed is included in Appendix I.
The team reviewed the content, rosters of attendees, and evaluations oftrainings conducted and other
sources. As stated in the original proposal, there was not time, nor did we understand it as tbe intent
of USAID/South Africa given the time allocated for the rapid evaluation, to develop independent
data gathering such as closed-case sampling and opinion surveys that we utilize in our methodologies
for more in-deplh assessments. More in-depth, independent data gathering and analysis should be
part oflhe final evaluation design, and we have pointed out in Ihe evaluation areas where more in￾depm data gathering may be both necessary and useful. Where available in current documents such
as the CJSP annual and other progress reports, we reviewed statistical data 10 get a measurement of
CJSP impacts.
The team conducted several site visits. CJSP-supported programs were visited in Johannesburg
(magistrate courts, Constitutional Court), Mmabatho (Northwest Division, TCe) Pretoria (DOJCD,
BAC, magistrate courts), Cape Town (DOJ regional office, Thuthuzela Care Center, various NGOs),
Polokwane (Community Court); Thohoyandoll (an NGO); and Durban (Ra Aga Boswa Model
Court). During site visits the team both observed and conducted interviews, and reviewed local data
sources and oilier documents.
In and out-briefings were conducted with USAID and the key counterpart, the DOJCD. The in￾briefings helped to orient the evaluation and dIe Qut-briefings allowed the team tQ share and discuss
findings. SQme appropriate readjustment resulted from these out-briefings.
As documented in the evaluation, the team fQund that although baseline measures and indicatQrs
were in place, and while periodic mQnitQring and internal CJSP-PMSO reviews and independent,
third-party evaluations were conducted (Decipher Consortium), a rigorous and consistenl monitoring
and evaluation component to the CJSP was not in place for the majority of the program life and there
were no firmly established baselines from which to measure progress in a consistent manner. For that
reason there was not consistent measurement of impacts, especially in the later years of the program.
There are numerous measurements of impacts of pilot activities, but they are difficult to extrapolate
into an overall quantitative measurement. For the final in-depili evaluatiQn ofthe CJSP, consideration
should be given to some in-depth statistical analyses from secondary sources to the CJSP, such as the
DOJCD, NGOs, and the courts, to gain greater insights into the impacts of the program relative to
more counterpart-generated metrics.
The team is confident that the comments made in this evaluation reflect a cQnsidered view of the
reality, and are particularly relevant 10 the way forward for continued progress on upgrading the
justice sector in South Africa. The report analyzes key problems and overall conditions ofthe justice
sector to reflect South African reality.
10
DPK
cc>nsult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice StrengthenIng
Program in South Africa
3. CJSP PROGRAM DESIGN AND MAJOR ACTIVITIES
CJSP was designed to help South Africa achieve "a more effeclive and accessible criminal justice
system." The original program design focused on four substantive areas as follows: I) improved
management ofjustice sector institutions; 2) improved case processing and court efficiency; 3) crime
and violence prevention strategies implemented, and 4) bener prosecutor-led criminal investigations.
A detailed summary of original program elements and activities ofIbe original CISP program is
available in Appendix 2. Over time, these focus areas evolved somewhat to meet changing priorities.
Crime prevention became more focused on "access to justice;' whereas prosecutor-led investigations
became subsumed under the general calegory of capacity building and training.
The operational structure ofthe CJSP consists of policy oven:ight through the Program
Implementation Committee (PIC}---composed ofCJSP strategic panner representatives including the
DOJCD, the NPA, USAfD's Democracy and Governance Section and Rule of Law Unit, BAC-SA,
and the CJSP team-with overall responsibility for setting the CJSP's strategic direction, budgetary
requirements, and governance of the program. PIC is chaired by D01CD's Director General. The
daily operation ofC1SP is overseen by the Program Operational Committee (POC), made up ofthe
C1SP's sub-program sponson: (at its operational peak, CISP had nine sub program sponson:), the
USAID's Rule of Law Unit leader, and the CJSP director. The POC is responsible for programmatic
planning through budgets and annual work plans, project implementation guidance, and ensuring
prObrram implementation according to agreed upon perfonnance indicators, budgets, and timeframes.
The POC meets on a monthly basis to track, review, monitor, and evaluate the performance and
progress of approved projects. The POC is chaired by DOJCD's Court Services Sub-program
Sponsor. The PIC and POC are supported by the Program Management Support Office (PMSO) or
the BAC operational team. Led by the CJSP-PM 0 Director, the CJSP-PMSO is responsible for the
strategic leadership and management ofthe day-to-day C1SP activities and program operations as
well as providing technical assistance and advice as needed across the C1SP spectrum. The CJSP·
PMSO has a small complement of technical services providers and administrative support staff,
which worked closely with CJSP project managers in a team approach.
The CJSP program has consisted in a number of activities, including some high level strategic
initiatives, while others were more demand driven 'one time' activities such as a specific training
course. Throughout the life ofthe CJSP, the major areas of activity developed under the program are
as follows:
• Court Services
• SOCA (Sexual Offenses and Community Affairs)
• Justice College Capacity Building
• Transforming the Judiciary
Capacity Building within the D01CD
External Corruption Initiative
• Social Crimes Prevention Initiative
• Capacity Building with the NPA
• CJSP VAT Reclamation (for establishing community coons)
• Facilitating NGO Support
• Grant support to NOOs
11
DPK
consu I t;I"8
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
As the CJSP developed, reporting on these areas of activity changed somewhat due to a change in
leadership at both the CJSP·PMSO and BAC. We have identified the major project initiatives that
were undertaken under the CJSP as implemented through the BAC mechanism. That list which
includes 43 separate projects is presented in Appendix 3. In some areas, the sub-projects are larger
than me project under which mey are listed. We have not attempted 10 reclassify projects and have
adopted me approach used by BAC. The listing ofthe project provides some insigbt into the range of
activities mal were undertaken WIder the BAC program during its development
Throughout the development ofCJSP the program offered a series of meetings, workshops, capacity
building activities and other events that served to support and guide the work in the various areas of
specific activities. In Appendices 4 and 5, there is a listing ofthe most important ofthese events
Although the CJSP, as administered by BAC, is the core ofthe USAID rule oflaw program, in the
early years of development there were other component elements. When the program was launched
in late 2001, the program had at least three different components and implementing mechanisms. In
addition to the cooperative agreement with BAC, USAlD provided a wide-range ofsupport to the
NPA and civil society organizations through a grants management and technical assistance (GMTA)
contract with Creative Associates (Crea), as well as training and technical assistance to the NPA
Directorate of Special Operations (DSO or "Scorpions") through aD inter-agency agreement with the
US Department ofJustice OPDAT program. These components of the CJSP continued UDtiI2004,
when USAID's contract with Crea came to an end and the US Embassy assumed responsibility for
continuation ofthe OPDAT Resident Legal Advisor program.
Between 2000 and 200 I, support 10 the NPA consisted of both technical assistance and training
aimed at two oflbe CJSP's four lower-level results: improved management ofjustice sector
institutions and better prosecutor-led investigations. Under the first category (inslitutional
strenglhening), USAID-supported initiatives included an organizational development study,
prosecutor salary survey, strategic planning, development of manuals and training on asset forfeiture
and forensic auditing, training for managers on the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) and
Batho Pele (customer service) principles, and improvements to the witness prOleclion program.
These activities were designed to support and consolidate the NPA, which was at that time a new
instiwtion in South Africa (established 1998). As a second component, USAlDfSA sought and
received ESF funding to place two consecutive OPDAT Resident Legal Advisors (RLAs) in the DSO
from approximately 2000-2003. The DSO, or the "ScorpioDs," is a special uDit within the NPA with
both investigative and prosecutorial powers, focused on high-priority and complex crimes such as
organized crime, fraud, corruption, and money laundering. In conjunction with the CJSP, me RLAs
worked closely with the DSO 10 mentor DSO prosecutors, build capacity in technical areas such as
money·laundering and corruption, conduct a DSO case audit, develop guidelines (based on US
models) for prosecuting complex organized crime, and operationalize the concept of prosecutor-led
investigations.
During this time, USAID also provided funding to implement specific activities recommended by the
RLA and OPDAT, including national money-laundering training, anti-corruption workshops, and a
pilot program on plea bargaining in the Western Cape. Selected DSO members were also sponsored
for training in the US on money-laundering and financial investigations. USAID provided support to
various non·governmental organizations working to strengthen me criminal justice sector and
increase access to justice for vulnerable groups. Grants were solicited through an APS and awarded
12
DPK
Ce>rlSU I t.I 08
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
primarily 10 organizations working to prevent violence against women and children andfoT to suppan
and empower victims afGBV.
During me same period, and in cooperation wilh the US Embassy (and with ESF funding), USAlD
also supported a number of NGO programs providing positive interventions for juvenile offenders
and other "at risk" youth. These included support for development and piloting ofa diversion
program in Alexandra Township (aimed at providing intensive intervention programs for young
offenders as an alternative to prosecution in the criminal justice system), as well as prison-based
rehabilitation programs for children awaiting trial and incarcerated youth offenders. These programs
were reported to be effective in reducing recidivism by young offenders. Khulisa's exemplary
programs are now in high demand across the country and have been institutionalized by lbe South
African Depanment ofCorrectional Services in at least IWO provinces.
Through the CJSP grants program., USAlD supported various research and developmem initiatives
aimed at strengthening tbe criminal justice system in South Africa. These included suppon to Ibe
Institute for Securily Studies to establish an independent criminal juslice monitor to track and
analyze developments in the criminal justice sector, development of a standardized and
developmentally sound preparalion program for child wltnesSes testifying in court, a sexual offenses
prevention program for ai-risk youth, and a resource manual outlining besl practices in juvenile
justice and diversion programs for use by probalion officm and the courts. We have not provided
further analysis in the following sections on these other components oflbe rule of law program. in
favor of concentrating analysis on SAC-implemented programs. Activities, such as NPA institutional
strengthening, led to the work thai is being carried out through the CJSPIBAC mechanism today to
form the foundation ofthis evaluation.
13
DPK
cc>osult:lng
Evaluation aftha Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
4. IMPACTS OF CJSP
CISP monitoring and evaluation has been marked by a rather uneven attention and a shifting of the
indicators. We reviewed the CISP indicators adopted at program initiation and firsl reported in the
CISP first annual repon and the overall Rule of Law Management Plan for USAID. We also looked
at the cost and organizational effectiveness ofthe implementing mechanisms as proxies for
measuring impact of the CJSP program, and have included those analyses in this section.
4.1 Indicators Adopted for CJSP
The indicators adopted by CISP through the tripartite arrangement are ambitious and focus on
appropriate areas of needed measurement (see Table 1, below). The initial set of indicators suffered
from a lack ofspecificity in definition, making any measurement difficuh because the definition of
the indicator and its proposed value were not clear. For example, how one measures the self
confidence of the public, and further how one measures a 50 percem increase in that level, were not
defined clearly, leaving the indicator open to wide interpretation.
Table 1 CJ$P Indicators and Objectives
Indicators Proposed Values Comments
Increase Conviction Rate By 10 percent nformation available in DOJCD,
ndividual courts, and NPA and in early
reports on a pilot specific impact
asis
ublic Confidence +10 percent INot measured systematically
!Customer Focus +10% INot measured systematically
ublic Awareness and Public +25% INot measured systematically
onfidence
Self Confidence of the public +25% \Not measured systematically
Trust in the Criminal Justice +5% INot measured systematically
ISvstem
Court Hours From current 3 to 6 Information available in individual courts,
ational and regional DOJ offices and on
ilot activities of CJ$P in project reports.
E-scheduler now assists in generating
his information
Improve the quality of trials and +10% INot measured systematically
Isentences
Improve the morale and motivation +50% INot measured consistently
f staff
Decrease Case cycle time From 9-18 to 6-9 months roject generated measurements in
arious courts on a oilot basis.
Decrease case backlogs ·10% roject generated measurement in
arious courts on a oilot basis
!Decrease secondary victimization -10% !Data available in courts and DOJ
Decrease sexual victimization -10% lData available in courts and DOJ
lDecrease sexual offenses and -10% lData available in courts and DOJ
omestic violence
ncrease court accessibility +50% IUse of the community courts can serve
s a nro'l'V for this indicator
managerial capacity +50% 1N0t measured consistently
14
DPK Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening Program in South Africa
Table 1 CJSP Indicators and Objectives
Indicators Proposed Values Comments
Build confidence in Magistrates +10% Not measured consistently
nd Prosecutors in rural courts
Source. First Annual Report alCJSP
While me annual CJS? reports from the early years were rich with data OD specific project impacts,
the tracking ofCJSP indicators lhraugh systematic and methodologically sound measurement
throughout the program life is DOt evident. The team also observed mat the general availability of any
quantitative and qualitative impact measurements bas declined in the recent years afthe project.
The learn is aware there was significant effon by the USAlD
program office to have the SAC team give closer attemion to
methodologically sound monitoring and evaluation of
progress. We believe that there simply was not an acceptance
of tbe importance of performance reporting according to
either the adopted indicators by the BAC or the critical
narure ofthis reporting in adhering to USAlD reporting
needs and regulations.
We therefore recommend that the Program
management deveJop clear obledi- and
Indicators speciflc to each and
project where these ha.... not yet been
de.....oped. These specific obIeeli_ and
IndIcators need to be aOdressed
appropriately fOf the current phase of each
project and enable monitoring of the
effed:l....oeu of each sub-program and
project on its own.
/rlWI'n EYalsabon by the DecIpher Consa1I'lnl.
quocedin the Petformance Aetr\IIlIes Repotf fI'.
"so.
An interim evaluation was carried out by Decipher
Consortium. ThaI evaluation did not address the indicators package for the CJSP and indeed made a
recommendation mat me indicators be changed to be more activity specific (see text box). In
retrospect, rhe contracting of an outside consullant or firm with a clear SOW to focus on the
indicators package or the crearion of a dedicated monitoring and evaluation unit in RAe would
have been wise.
4.2 Rule of Law Per10rmance Management Plan
The overall proxy for progress in the rule oflaw area, established by the South Africa mission for its
annual reporting, is me rule oflaw indicator. There were twO indicators in use during the CJSP
period. The original indicator for rule oflaw was the toral number of cases outstanding, less the
total number of cases finalized at both rhe district and regional courts nationall)'. The target was
a 10 percent reduction per year. The observed figures as reponed in me USAID/South Africa annual
report were:
Table 2 Total Number of CJses Outstandmgless Number of
Cases Flnahzed
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 baseline
Target - 120,200 108,180 97,362 87,626
Actual 133,556 118,183 107,747 104,112 119.050
The actual number ofoutstanding cases exceeded the target, especially in 2004, but as is well
documented, mere have been increasing pressures on the justice system due to the increase in me
crime rale. In 2005. me mission revised its indicator to me percentage of cases finalized at district
couru, i.e., toral number of cases finalized divided b)' new cases filed. 80m indicators utilized
aimed to measure me reduction in case backlog nationally, almough one was expressed as a number
and the omer as a percentage.
15
DPK
c:e-nsult:.lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
2005 2006 2007
We were not able to obtain the percentages for 2006 and 2007 for this analysis and can make no
further comment on the indicator.
4.3 Cost Effectiveness of the CJSP
The CJSP program was funded since 2002 through me original Cooperative Agreement, subsequem
modifications 10 mat agreement, and then funded incremenlally.
Table 4 Cosl EHectl\/"eness of the SAC
BAe Costs including
Funding Date Amount Technic:al Assistance Audit
S %
February 8.2002 55,460,000 54,503,000 5857,000 15.7
November 19, 2004 53,841,931 53,247,907 5594,024 15.5
September 26, 2006 52,792,000 NA NA NA
15.2
Total $12,020,956 (including 59,553,344 51,587.612 exduding 5900,000 for WJEI) WJEI
Costs
The overall costs afthe rule of law program during the period are somewhat higher, as there were
different elements to the program nOl reflected in the SAC Cooperative Agreement. The SAC
implementing mechanism represents approximately 15.2 percenl ofthe total funds in the cooperative
agreement The SAC work is a combination of administrative and technical suppon work, so il is
difficult 10 make any comparisons to other ahemative mechanisms that could have been used or
might be used in the future. The evaluation team is aware that costs for an implementing partner to
administer the program would incur the normal indirect COSI rate Slructures of fmus, sucb as holders
oftbe Rule of Law IQC. While the evaluation team has not done an exact study, we are aware the
range ofindirect costs to direct cos{s in the industry is in the range offrom 20 10 35 percent.
The evaluation team found lhat costs for the SAC's suppon oftbe CJPS are reasonable and represent
a cost effective approach to project implementation. On the other band, established rule of law
implementeI'S such as through the IQC mechanism bring a wealth ofinternational capacity and
institutional strengthening experience that is missing in the current arrangement. We still believe this
technical knowledge could have been brought to the program through a smaller, limited. and
impactfultechnical services contract through the Rule of Law IQC.
4.4 Impact of C.JSP on the Crime Situation
SAC CEO Mr. Siphwe Nzimande, commenting on the CJSP, stated that, "the USAID funding has
been useful, but in its current form may not resuh in a rapid improvement ofthe justice system." This
comment highlights how the impact of the CJSP should be viewed in our opinion. First the size of the
USAID contribution, although significant, is only one element in a much larger effon to reduce or
control the overall crime rate and second, that the SA justice system is in a self-named process of
transformation mat will take considerable time to implement and institutionalize. The work does
16
DPK
Cc..>nSUILlng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Stlllngthening
Program in South Africa
not require simple adjustments to the system in place, but rather at times zero basing systems such as
the administrative structure aCme couns, attitudes ofjustice sector personnel, and creating a whole
set ofleaders and champions in the transformation process. The focus of the CJSP was principally in
institution strengthening within the criminal justice system, so the impact on the crime simarian is
more indirect than other mechanisms more directly focused on law enforcement or social crime
prevention. Through iliis leos, although the change has not been rapid, the contributions of CJSP
have been notable.
• Justice sector institUlions now increasingly work together to resol\'e issues in an integrated
manner and have imer·institutional planning and sharing of infonnation mechanisms in place.
• The capacit)' ofjustice institutions bas been increased to confront their workload and increased
productivity is manifested.
• There have been specific impacts in couns that were target areas for CJSP interventions and
pilot suppon activities. These specific impacts have quantifiable positive results and impacts on
the crime situation. These examples include increases in the volume of cases heard and
conviction rates in sexual offense cowts where conviction rates have ranged from 60 to 90
percent. and in commercial crimes couns where the conviction rates have consistently stood at
the 90 percent level.
17
DPK Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening Program in South Africa
5. AREA ANALYSES
CJSP?" PerformanC6 Activity
Rflpotf (p. 60)
The evaluation team bas outlined perceptions and measurement of the r---------- "Since CJSP's IllCeption and broad impacts afthe CISP in the executive summary. In the area throughout Its Implementation
analysis section that follows, the major programs afthe CISP are the CJSP's emphasis remains
analyzed and commented on the specific impaclS of !.hose programs capecity building with the OOJCD and NPA."
and analyzed how these individual programs have contributed to the
overall impact ofthe CISP. The emphasis in the evaluation is through
the lens of capacity building of the institutions ofjustice consistem
with bow those who worked on the program themselves saw their
work (see text box).
5.1 Court Administration
The work in the area of court administration has focused on three key elements: the Re Aga Boswa
Decentralized Court Management Model, the Integrated Case Flow Management System, and the use
of dedicated courts. In 2007-2008 there also was assistance for the Forensic Unit in the D01CD
which falls generally under the heading ofthe court administration component. The following
sections analyze the above-listed activities and their impacts.
5.1.1 Re Aga Boswa Decentralized Court Management Model
The Re Aga Boswa was designed to introduce modem management models into the courts to achieve
two goals: I) reduce the time judicial officers have to spend on non-jurisdictional matters thereby
increasing their time to adjudicate cases and the productivity rales ofthe courts, and 2) create an
administrative model Ihat is overseen by and reports to the judiciary itself versus an executive branch
agency, the D01CD. The key elements ofthe design are:
• Focus on providing effective support functions 10 the courts to allow judicial officers iO focus on
their core business functions
• Create a court service unit to provide decentralized administrative support and to be run like a
business utilizing a performance management based system
• Create clear lines of accountability and decision making among the judiciary, prosecution, court
service, court support service centers and other components
• Establish court managers to provide adminislrative support and service delivery to judicial
officers and prosecutors
• Insert a customer relationship focus into administrative and other processes
• Have the court support services at the closesl point to the customers, i.e., at the court level
• Use clustering arrangements to achieve economies of scale in providing administrative and other
support
• Decentralize delivery ofservices and have a single point of entry and accountability for court
services
The model was operationally designed and piloted in Kwa-Zulu-Natal (KZN) with 58 courts
involved with substantial positive results. The plan was for a roll out to additional courts in Free
State (77 courts), Western Cape (54 courts) and Gauteng (32 courts) and subsequently, 10 all the
remaining provinces. A key element of the program was to provide court managers or administrators
18
DPK
consulUng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
to the courts. As a part ofinrroducing the model, the CJSP assisted to provide trainings to over 3,000
coon employees. Detailed listed oftrainings related to the Re Aga Boswa model is provided in
Appendix 6.
The process for me roll out of the Re Aga Boswa model has been slalled for several years. The roll
OUl was '·put on bold since April 2004 pending refinements and realignments requested by the new
DOleD's Ministers'.} DOleD indicates now that they are ready to roll OUI the system with some
modification (0 the original design aCthe model"
The original model is functioning and functioning well in KlN. The professionals working in me
model cite that they have needed authority and decisions can be taken locally more rapidly (0 provide
needed support. The customer service element ofthe program is strong. Magistrates and judges have
had significant reduction in administrative dmies resuhing in more time for jurisdictional duties and
higher productivity. While me model has not been "fully rolled out" on a national level, key elements
ofthe program have since been implemented in other provinces, specifically the introduction of coun
managers.
The decision ofthe DOJCD leadership to move forward with me nation-wide rollout of the model
represents a major opportunity for the CJSP to provide additional support to DOJCD to ensure the
roll out is swiftly and successfully implemented. In this regard it critical that the CJSP leadership
respond quickly to adequately address the needs ofthe DOJCD and assist in the development and
implementation of a nationwide roll out strategy. A thorough review ofthe original Re Aga Boswa
roll out plan will be necessary to determine the appropriate strategy and sequencing of activities to be
undertaken. This process should include:
• Planning for priorities and sequencing in the roll out
• Workshops to introduce the model and motivate the judges, magistrates, and others.
• Develop organizational framework ofthe model adjusted for new elements to the original design
• Re mapping of processes that will govern the operation of the model adjusting for changes that
have been introduced
• Provision of bardware, software, and infrastructure needed to support the rolled out model
• Training for the court. prosecutOrial and related personnel that will work in the system
• Technical assistance in the actual roll out ofthe model
The CJSP should integrate specific elements ofsupport that can be provided for this process as a part
of its strong finish plan based on conversations and planning with the DOJCD and judicial
leadership.
5.1.2 Integrated Case Flow Management System
The Integrated Case Flow Management System (lCFMS) was defined in several of the CJSP reports
as the centerpiece ofthe CJSP. The developmeot ofthe ICFMS has been inconsistent and with a lack
of clear direction as to the desired goal, although there have been significant achievements. A key
J RAC 5110 asp Annual Report, October 2003-September 2004, p. 25.
The DOlCD has requested that the modd be adjusted to require all registrar'S who perform quasi judicial functions
to be lawyers.
19
DPK
CC>rlSU 11:1 ng
EYoiIluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
positive step has been the development aCthe E-scbeduling systemS lhal is a natural evolution from
US and Lbe foundation for the development of an integrated ICFMS. That system is now the "official
infonnation source wim regards to statistics relating to criminal maners.'*There are other
individually developed applications in me couns such as a OMS system mat was created and
implemented in the Wynberg Coun in July 2007.
The ICFM system started in 2002 with the development of a manual and was introduced in four
courts. They were Soshanguve, Durban, Wynberg magistrate courts and Cape High Court. The
activity in lhese courts slowed and the roll out and continued development of the ICFM did not
follow a continual path of growtb.
Upgrades in the current systems in use are needed. For ex.ample me e-scheduler system only captures
one named defendant so that in multi-defendant cases the name of only one defendant is captured.
This is a serious deficiency and must be addressed for the system to have accuracy and to allow for
needed review ofthe number of cases pending against a perwn in the court system and other
activities. It should also be noted that the current usc: of the c:-scheduler system is limited to criminal
cases in the magistrate's coun. The use of this system should be expanded to civil matters and to the
district courts.
Most recently. in 2007-2008, the OOJCO decided to focus on the development of a document
management system (OMS) to address some unfavorable publicity regarding lost, stolen., or sold
court files. The idea was that digitalizing/scanning court documents would save time in tracking and
tracing misplaced or stolen documents and improve the security ofthese files. With the assistance of
the CJSP, the DOJCO commissioned an audit of me business processes in five busy courts with the
objective to make recommendations regarding a OMS that would be appropriate to the coun
environment. A competitive bidding process was held and MatlolefMokgabo JV was selected for the
work.
Bet:ause some of the way forward activities ofthe CJSP could involve supporting the development
and roll out of the OMS, the team spent considerable effort in reviewing both the audit and other
related materials to provide appropriate guidance on this issue (see Appendix. 7 for a more detailed
analysis). Briefly stated, the Matlole/Mokgabo JV audit is flawed because it did not reflect a solid
knowledge and understanding ofthe coun-working environment. This lack of understanding is
reflected in the audit's failure to: 1) outline a clear strategy for tying out the OMS to the ICFMS; 2)
address the current use oftet:bnology in the subject couns; 3) identify limitations on scanning in the
legal framework; and 4) provided a detailed cost analysis reflecting various OMS alternatives. The
Solution Analysis Volume ofthe Audit did not outline a workable strategy to move forward. As a
result. the OOJCO has chosen not to accept the recommendation ofthis repon to define a sU"ategy for
the OMS.
Ln more general terms, the Matlole/Mokgabo JV audit repon7 did recommend the way forward
should include the development of a document management system. That recommendation is
consistent with emerging international best practices as long as the system is integrated into the
J The E-scheduling system is somewhat misnamed as Ihe sySlem is evolving to be the base ofthe ICFMS. The
system is being built up in the criminal area to include infonnation on scheduling, case history and other relevant
information associated with a case management sySlem. A renaming of the E-scheduling system is probably in
order.
6 DOleD internal memo to statTFebruary 8, 2008.
J This finding was also supponed by another analysis conducted by Price Waterhouse Coopers.
20
DPK
cc>nsult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
ICFMS lbat presently consists afme E-scheduler and the JAMIS system. after needed business
process re engineering is carried out.
The team believes that that the way forward for the DOJeD and courts and for CJSP support of born
consists in returning to the basic concept of the ICFMS and in carrying out systematic steps to move
the judicial branch along the continuum of development. The first step is lO defme clearly what the
elemems ofme ICFMS should include. They go beyond I.he mere introduction of new technologies
ahhough technological advances are key elements. The required elements that we see are:
• Business Process Re-Engineering of Current Court Processes, Efficiency, and Security of
Documents (Case Files). The current business processes in the courts must be upgraded, refined
and strengthened in their manual state 10 ensure that any technological system introduced is built
on a strong foundation. This process should be considered iteratively and periodically repeated.
• Automated Case Flow Management System. Achieved by upgrading and developing the
ICFMS-based on e-scheduler and enhancements, i.e., South Africa Justice [megrated Case Flow
Management System or other more comprehensive name.
• Document Management System (OMS). Develop a document management system that is based
on analysis and definition of what documents should be dif:,';tized; what SA law allows, and is
integrated into the E-Scheduler or renamed as the South Africa Justice Integrated Case Flow
Management System.
• Use other Appropriate Technologies. Advances have been made in the use of video
conferencing, methods for \'erbatim recording. Such technologies should be reviewed and
considered.
• Performance Standards and System of Analysis and Feedback. Develop performance
standards by which the condition of each COUf!. and prosecutors office can be measured and
through the use ofthe JMIS data management system carry out systematic analysis and feedback
to the local office through regular statistical reports.
• Continued Institutional and Inter-Institutional Work on Case Flow Management.
Strengthen and create as needed provincial and district working committees, forums and case
flow management meetings to adopt strategies to improve productivity and reduce delay and
backlog (staned under the Re Aga Boswa program).
• Training. Carry out uaining to upgrade the skill levels ofstaff to be able to absorb new
technologies and systems once inuoduced.
As outlined above, the solution set for the DOJCD and the courts should re focus on the ICFMS
concept. There naturally is a risk to have the effort be too dispersed among the various elements and
areas of activities but by keeping the basic concept that this system is an integrated one, the CJSP
will avoid some of the "stove piping" and "siloing" that has crept into the CJSP program in recent
years and has culminated in the current view ofthe DMS as a more stand alone rather than an
integrated system.
Regarding assisting on any procurement of any upgrading to the e-scbeduling system or inrroduction
ofthe DMS element to address needed current deficiencies and needed enhancements, the team
21
DPK
cc:>osult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Stntngthening
Program in South AfriCil
believes that such support is appropriate but we are uncertain as to whether procurement
requirements of the SA government which requires automation type procurements to go through an
extended process with SITA in order to ensure compatibility ofsystems and of USAID itself will
allow for any procurement to be carried out in the remaining time frame of tbe CJSP. We are quile
certain thaI those requirements will result in minimal rime for appropriate evaluation ofimpact.
We recommend that a careful analysis by professional(s) with experience in the automation of case
management and document management systems be carried out to ensure that me system is feasible,
maintainable, integratable and satisfy other characteristics prior to any commitment ofCJSP funds
along with a careful analysis ofthe timing issues related to procurement and the life of the CJSP
program. To contribute to the general knowledge in mis area, we have included in Appendix 8 the
tenns ofreference for a OMS system that OPK issued in Jordan where we are working with the
Ministry ofJustice on a similar program as here in South Africa. The difference in the Jordan project
is that we first developed and installed a state ofthe art eMS in the courts and me OMS will be
integrated into that system. In South Africa more development on the E·scheduler is needed.
5.1.3 Business Process Re-engineering
The process of process re-engineering should be undertaken now while the automated s)'slems
are in furl her development The goal is to have a solid manual or semi automated system on which
to overlay me automated systems. We believe that this business process re-engineering if
implemented correctly have significant impact on improving efficiency in case processing and also
the integrity and security of coon records. For example, one underlining driver of the OMS is me
high level oflost or stolen papers from the court records. While OMS will help improve this situation
by creating an electronic record ofthe documents scanned, the system of using hard copy files will
continue for the foreseeable future and even after a scanning system is implemented.
Our initial review of the current court practices regarding the handling of case files suggested that
some basic manual records-management practices will significantly improve the current situation in
some courts even without the OMS. These include:
• Create an index to the case file so all documents in the case file are identified and any missing
document can easily be identified
• Number each page ofthe case file consecutively so that any missing pages can be easily
identified
• Secure all documents in the case file with an fasteners so no papers in the file are loose
• Use color coding to identify different case types
• Use out cards to indicate the location of any case files
• Create anorney/party reading rooms where case files will be reviewed and researched under
supervision and do not allow auorneys andlor parties in the archive areas
The above are basic records management practices. We are not suggesting that some are not in place
in some courts, but we did observe that many were nOI in [he site visits that we made during this
evaluation.
22
DPK
e>ns 111:1 ng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
5.1.4 Dedicated Courts
The issue of dedicated courts as they are called by me South African justice sector is a complex one
in the administration ofjustice. On the one hand. dedicated courts give great focus [0 the work ofthe
judge or magistrate in terms ofthe type of case iliat be or she will be hearing, the type of laws and
jurisprudence that he or she should be current 00. This clarity of focus can be particularly beneficial
when dealing with a highly backlogged subject area or an area such as sexual crimes where the
mauen are both sensitive and dealt with historically in ways that are being redefined today. On the
other hand. the work for judges, magistrates, and other personnel assigned to dedicated courts that
deal with sensitive matters such as sexual crimes continuously can be trying and lead to '-bum out.
Coun specialization also can be inherently inefficient in the management of buman resources. At
any given time, the need for judicial resources may be in areas orner than in the specialized areas.
The above is important in evaluating the impact ofthe dedicated couns as we found mem at work..
Because of these issues, there has been a trend to undercut the exclusivity ofthe specialization in the
areas ofsexual crimes, community courts, and 10 some extent commercial courts and to have them
more and more take on a wider variety ofsubject matters. This trend is not inconsistent with me
overall movement towards a unified judiciary, which will gradually eliminate the differences
between magistrates, regional magistrates, and judges, and assign all case types to each.
Commercial Crime Courts. The dedicated commercial crime couns were designed to focus on white￾collar crime issues including corruption in the private sector and government. They were established
at the urging oftbe business community. The three initial courts established were in Durban,
Germiston, and Cape Town. Subsequent to the establishment ofthese courts two additional couns
were created in Cape Town, and Port Elizabeth. The performance of commercial crime courts is
characterized by a low volume of cases but with high conviction rates. The courts tried and convicted
several high profile defendants in their earliest years but now have become associated with more
normal case processing but with the commercial crimes focus. The position of the DOJCD is that this
type of dedicated court should be used minimally and that other means be found to give focus to the
issue of commercial crimes.
Community Courts and the Application of Restorative Justice The restorative justice model is
incorporated into the concept of community couns. The official motivation for establishing
community courts stems from President Thabo Mbeki's State ofthe Nation Address of May 21
where he st'ated:
We will establish at least two community courts in each province, modeled along the Hatfield
Community Coun in me City of Tshwane, which in the first month ofits operation, has
finalized 200 cases with 100 percent conviction rate Guidelines/or the Establishmenl and
Functioning ofHarjield·rype Community COUTIS. December 1006. p 3.
The community courts as outlined in the Hatfield model were advocated by the business and
university communities in response to an increase in quality of life type criminality near their
infrastructures (see text box). The courts, in the original structure, are a bit of a misnomer then as
they have full magistrate jurisdiction.
23
DPK
cc:>nsulLlng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
Accen to lu-tk:e by providing court
services to communities
handling of certain min
lower court caMS
Hearing III distrtct court type cases
espedaIly petty crima
Fast ndI: c.ua and no cae
back'o;s
Imfl'O'" con"oliCtiOrl ra_ but ensure
qAllty of Justice
Utilize rutoraIi.... justice
partnef$hips
Impro.... community -.arenas and
participation
Communi£)' courts were considered as a viable model (among others) to expand access to justice and
test how restorative justice could be incorporated into the mainstream system. The model that exists
is one ofhaving a court that is a normal district criminal court with nonnal jurisdiction. The only
difference is in the way it operates, e.g., lhe idea is to imegrate services by businesses, NGOs,
universities etc" community policing forums, etc., and the use of alternative sentencing to diven
cases away from the court rolls. The original aim was to extend a more affordable and accessible
justice system in geographic locations where the formal courts lack a presence. The focus of the
community courts was to be on quality of life and petty issues rr.;;;;;-;;;;;;;-"",;;;;;;;;;;;;;-;o;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;-l
of tbe community. The couns would require intimate links Goals ofth. CommunitY Court Model
with their constituencies in order to Wlderstand how
communities experience violations of the law and the
requisite appropriate measures or methods ofredress. In
creating the commWlity courts, the DOJCD was cognizant of
the fact that there exists a strong traditional strucrure that
utilizes restoralive juslice principles and praclices, and sought
to incorporate restoralive justice principles, diversion and
some ADR inlO me community court concept
Of me original plan 10 have !wo per province, there were
actually six established. Those six include three in Western
Cape, one in Polokwane (Limpopo) and one in Hatfield (Gauteng) and KwaMashu (Kwa Zulu
Natal). These courts are not located in me particularly rural areas so a critical element ofthe
community court model, Le., to bring the justice system 10 !be rural areas is not being fulfilled merely
by meir localion.
In the following is some dala from the Mitchells Plein and Cape Town community courts.
Table 5 Mitchells Plein and C.:Jpe Town Commumty Courts
Apnl1 2007-0ecember 31 2007
Cases
cases Finalized Location New Cases Removed with with Verdict Diversions Pending Verdict
Mitchells Plain 1,811 976 880 464 169
cape Town 4,595 126 4,023 72 197
Source: DOJCD
While the data indicates Ihat the goal ofhaving few pending cases is being achieved, the idea that
there would be heavy use of ahernative sentencing and diversion has not been born out. The
diversion cases represent only 536 or 8 percent of me 6,406 cases file in the two courts. These couns
have a profile that is more akin 10 a lraditional court than the concepl ofthe community courts. An
important reason for this, reported by provincial authorities in Western Cape, is the lack of diversion
programs for adults in the province. At present, USAID is providing a one·year ESF grant to the
NGO NICRO to provide diversion and alternalive sentencing programs for young people in support
afthe Western Cape community courts. While helpful, it has nol been sufficient to meet demand and
is set to finish in July 2008. NICRO is among (he NODs with whom the provincial DOlCD has
entered into a formal "public-private partnership agreement" to provide services to the couns. The
agreement does not include any funding support from the DOJCD to implement or expand the
program.
24
DPK
e>nsulll g
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
The community courts that have been established are nol true to the concept of bringing in
more community invoh'ement, use of restorative justice mechanisms and create better access to
justice in the rural areas. They have become more an extension ofthe formal coun system and DOl
a real alternative community court model. It is unclear whether there is significant community
involvement at each site.
There is a movement to create andlor strengthen traditional COun5. There is a bill that was drafted on
lhis issue but has been tabled in the parliament. The concept ofthe uaditional courts is to enhance the
use of dispute resolution through customary law and relying on village elders and leaders as the
dispute resolvers. Such traditional courts and their procedures are consistent with me concept of
community courts and developments in this area should be followed The teams learned from the
Judge President ofthe Nonhwest Province that the community courts in the NW Province will be
established in rural communities and utilize traditional leaders and applicable traditional
remedies/customary law and restorative justice principles that are in line with the recently adopted
Traditional Leaders Bill.
5.1.5 DOJCD1S Forensic Audit Unit
The USAJD support for the forensic audit unit has consisted ofthe provision for hard assets and also
the provision of data gatherers for the unit. This unit has begun to provide critical information for
ami-corruption and accountability type ofactivities within DOJCD that then feed imo the
investigation and proset:ution ofrelated crimes. We find that the activity is a positive one, if
somewhat an indirect one, in terms ofhelping strengthen the prosecutorial function.
5.2 Training and Development of Justice Sector Personnel
There has been a wide range of training for prosecutors, magistrates, other court officials, and
officials of DOJCD offered through the CJSP. Training has been a core activity and has increased in
tenns of the focus of the CJSP in recem years. A list ofjudicial training and development activities
and number ofparticipams is provided in Appendix 5. We believe the trainings provided in general
have been effective as it has contributed to the recognition on the part ofthe judiciary and
magistrates for life long learning. In this sense, the training offered by the CJSP served as a
foundation for the paradigm shift that has occurred with judges and magistrates to embrace the
concept of life long learning and continuing legal education.
The training has emphasized hard knowledge type of training particularly with prosecutors in the
areas ofsexual offenses, organized crime and commercial crimes cases. There also have been tool·
building types of training such as judgment writing courses. Finally Lhere has been a series of courses
directed toward softer but important issues sucb as leadership and change management.
The acbievements ofthe training program can be summarized as:
• Creating a paradigm shift on the part of magistrates and judges and others in the DOJCD
and NPA with regard to training and towards creating the recognition of and comminnent to
the need for lifelong learning through suucrured human rights and continuing legal education for
judicial officers
• Creating a pool of trained candidates througb tbe aspirant judges training and
development program qualified to sern as Acting Judges, many ofwbom have since been
appointed as judges
• BUilding the capacity ofjudicial officers, prosecutors, court managers, DOJCD and !'rl'PA
managen, and other justice sector personne.ltbrougb focused training in judgment writing.
25
DPK
nsuJ lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justica Strengthening
Program in Sooth Africa
organized crime investigation and prosecution., management and leadership issues, and other
training and mentaring programs.
5.2.1 Impacts of CJSP Training and Development
In Appendix 3, we have provided a series oftable that outline the impacts afhe training programs
including number of beneficiaries, amounts invested in course support and the types of courses
offered.
5.2.2 Selection Criteria for Training
The evaluation team found that the selection oftraining courses has not been systematic and recent
training prograJm tied out less closely [0 the core pillars afthe CJSP panicularly in the key area of
court services. The team found that the training topics were often not sufficiently tied to specific
CJSP activities and strategic objectives. Much of training was demand drinn and reactive to a
request versus being based on solid needs assessment. The team found some voids in the training
particularly in the area ofupgrading the skills ofoon·judicial managers. We do not see training
related to the critical activities ofthe ICFMS and the Re Aga Boswa model nor did we find the CJSP
supporting the DOJCD IT solutions with training programs.
We would recommend that for future trainings, there be more attention to measurement ofimpacts
and also whether trainings are then institutionalized into ongoing curriculum. Evaluations can be
conducted ofhow trainees incorporate me lessons learned in trainings through review of work
products, judicial decisions; case files, etc. 10 see ifthe actual work product incorporates the lessons
of what are hopefully practical results focused training programs. Specifically, the impact assessment
of the justice college and the developed tool to assess tbe offerings of the justice college which were
developed under CJS? have not been implemented by the Justice College which reportedly has dated
and unattractive offerings and has resulted in other training programs being developed outside of the
college and a reduction of the sense ofthe college being the source of training for the judicial branch.
The evaluation team's view is that the strategic parmership and DOJCD and USAID in panicular
have allowed for diffusion ofthe training program to several different training venues. The CJSP
program has supported training through the justice college, through the ARAMSA training program,
and through one off independent training programs directly supported by the CJS? The NPA
training programs have supper! through OPDAT programming also. There needs to be even greater
coordination among the USG programs to ensure that training does not overlap and meets overall
USG strategic programming goals.
The evaluation team believes that the impact oftraining programs ",ill be increased by adopti.ng
needed criteria and priorities for training between the CJSP and the government and to adhere
to such criteria. We also concluded that training directly related to delivery ofsenrices and
productivity should be given high priority. The team found that the proposed study tour to the United
States was consistent with the goals ofthe CJSP program as long as it emphasized real life models in
action and peeNe>-peer discussions versus lecture £ype activities. Review of the preliminary study
tour program suggested that some adjustment in the program needed to be made to allow the
participants to spend more time in justice sector institutions versus in classroom settings and that key
focus areas ought to be on observation of counterpart judges managing caseloads, review and
observation of effective integrated case flow management and document case management systems
and visits to administrative offices that are similar to the Re Aga Boswa model.
26
DPK
consult..ing
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
5.2.3 Institutionalization of the C,JSP's USAID Supported Training Programs
There is a need for the CJSP program to concentrate on institutionalization issues during its strong
finish even to the exclusion of offering some training programs in favor of focus on the institutional
framework in which training will be offered in the future. There are various issues related to
institutionalization:
• What will the organization, focus and impact be of the new Judicial Education Institute?
• Will the Justice College be accredited and what will be the net effect and impact ofsuch
accreditation?
• Will the Justice College and tbe new Judicial Education Institute be brought together under
the umbrella of a Justice Sector Academy to allow for economies ofscale in facilities and
administration as favored by the DOJCD?
• Should effort be made 10 bring programs like ARAMSA's separate training programs into
one training umbrella?
• Can training be used to promote the goals of a single unified judiciary, i.e., magistrates and
judges trained together?
• Can appropriate comprehensive curricula be developed that encompass the full range of
established needs for judicial officers, prOSef.:utors and non-judicial personnel?
5.3 Access to Justice
In furtherance of the CJSP high-level objective, "a more effective and accessible criminal justice
system," USAID implemented a number of projects and activities aimed at increasing access to
justice, including improved access for victims of sexual and gender based violence. Key programs
included, in particular, support to the NPA's Sexual Offenses and Community Affairs (SOCA) Unit,
the development and roll-out of the Thuthuzela Care Centre (TCC) model, and grant support 10 non￾governmental organizations. Activities in support of SOCA and the dedicated courtS were
implemented as part of the CJSP through SAC, while grants were awarded and managed via two
USAID institutional contractors, Crea and PACT (2006---2007). USAlD support for
dedicated courts was also aimed at increasing access to justice.
USAID programs in support of access to justice cut across several CJSP lower-level objectives,
including improved management ofjustice sector institutions, improved case processing and court
efficiency, bener prosecutor led criminal investigations, and to some extent, crime and violence
prevention. Although it appears that the DOJ (and some grantees) have collected statistical data
relevant to these objectives, this data was not available for the team to review (or verify) in
connection with the rapid assessment.
5.3.1 Support to SOCA
The CJSP enabled SOCA to implement the following activities aimed at increasing access to justice
for vulnerable groups:
• Public awareness campaigns in schools and rural communities to educate stakeholders about
sexual violence, domestic violence and maintenance (child support), the rights of women and
children to bring legal action in these matters, and services available through SOCA and the
courts. According to SAC reports, over 325,000 children and 5,286 community members
received infonnation on accessing justice through the campaigns. (See details at Appendix 9).
• Development and implementalion of training programs and manuals for prosecutors and
27
DPK
coon-sult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
magistrates outlining legal and policy issues and recent developments in sexual offenses
legislation/jurisprudence;
• Specialized training for prosecutors on techniques for handling cases involving child victims;
• Piloting and placement of victim assistance officers in six one-stop Thulhuzela Care Centres
(Victim Assistance Officer Extended Pilot Project);
• Piloting and placement of case managers in six dedicated Sexual Offenses Courts (Case
Manager Extended Pilot Project) affiliated with TCes.
Of these activities, USAlD support to the TCes was among the most important in tenns of its overall
contribution to gender justice in South Africa. Under SOeA's leadership, the Tee Program has
developed from a pilot project in 1999 to a network of 10 sites across the country. With USAJD and
other donor suppon. SOCA plans to funher expand the Program to up to 80 new sites in the next 3 to
5 years.
Tces are one-stop facilities for rape swvivors located in public hospitals with links to dedicated
Sexual Offenses Cowts. The purpose of me TCC is to provide survivon; with a broad range of
essential services-from emergency medical care and PEP to counseling and coun preparation-in a
holistic, integrated and victim-friendly manner. By integrating victim suppon with prosecutor
directed investigation and dedicated court processes. the TeCs reponedly improve conviction rates
and reduce the time to court, while protecting rape survivors from secondary victimization. Most
slakeholders interviewed felt that the TCCs ha\'e made an imponant contribution to improving the
management ofsexual violence cases in South Africa and to improving me way the justice system
handles rape cases and treats victims.s The evaluation team was nOI able to independemly assess the
effectiveness of me TCCs in connection with this assessment, it does appear that the TeC model bas
excellent capacity to suppon and empower survivors and improve access to justice when fully and
properly implemented.
In conjunction with SOCA, me CJSP supponed the piloting and placement of case managers and
victim assistance officers at six TCC sites. Based at the sexual offenses court. the case manager is
responsible for tracking the progress of each case and liaising with the prosecutors with respect to the
investigation and preparation of me case for trial. The victim assistance officer (VAO) worked with
the case manager to communicate with rape victims and caregivers regarding me status oftheir coun
case, and where needed, to prepare victims to testify in coun. These positions have now become part
ofthe standard Tee model or "blueprint" and have been institutionalized by the NPA.
During the evaluation, the team met with the TCC case manager assigned to the Wynberg coun in
Western Cape. From our discussions, it is clear that the case manager not only plays a critical role in
making sure that dockets are complete and cases properly documented, but also in working with
victims, prosecutors and court personnel to ensure that sexual offense cases are not unreasonably or
unnecessarily delayed or dropped from the coun rolls.
USAlD bas already taken steps to build on its suppon for the Thuthuzela Care Centers under the
WJEI and to suppon the expansion ofthe TeC network in South Africa. To this end, WJEI grants
under the proposed contract mechanism should focus primarily on expanding services to specific
• The implementation ofthe Tee model is not without its challenges, as indicated in a 2007 assessment of the Tees
contracted by USAID for PEPFAR. USAID is cognizant ofthesc: challenges, however. and has included activities to
strengthen existing Tees as part ofthe Tee roll·out planned under the Women's Justice Empowennent Initiative
(WJEQ.
28
DPK
consult:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
Thuthuzela Care Centers and affiliated sexual offenses courts, while other grant mecbanisms can be
designed more broadly to include diversion programs for both youth and adult offenders as well as
court support services for victims of domestic violence (such as those currently offered by Mosaic.)
Access to justice grants under CJSPIWJEI could also be expanded (0 include a specific focus on
helping poor women obtain child support orders under the Maintenance Act.
To the extent that USAID wishes to support NODs providing services in conjunction with existing,
new or planned Tees, USAlD should be very specific about the type or service required, where it is
required, and the minimum standards for service delivery-it should not rely on a broad APS
mechanism to fill this gap.
USALD support to the GBY sector during the strong finish should emphasize sustainability. USAID
should take steps to facilitate greater institutionalization and government support to NGOs providing
training to government personnel and direct services to victims ofGBY, in part by helping
government identify and/or develop mechanisms for oUHourcing in the criminal justice/victim
empowerment sector. USAlO should also playa more active facilitative role between DOJeO, NPA
and NGOs around the issue of child witness preparation so that USAlO's substantial investment in
this area has a chance to bear fruil.
5.3.2 NGO Grants
In addition to the activities implemented by BAC, USAlD provided grant funding from 2002-2004
(and in some cases 2006-2007) to various NGO Programs aimed at increasing access to justice for
vulnerable women and children (See details in Appendices 9 and 10):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mosaic: Court support program to assist victims of domestic violence to apply for protection
orders pursuant to the Domestic Violence Act (direct victim assistance at thirteen courts in
Western Cape, as well as training and suppOrt for court personnel);
Childline: Comprehensive services to chird victims of sexual violence and abuse, including child
witness preparation and court support programs in (Kwa Zulu Natal);
Thohoyandoll Victim Empowerment Program: Comprehensive services to victims of rape and
domestic violence, including shelter, hospital and home-based support services, case monitoring,
advocacy and court support, as well as community outreach and public education in rural
communities (Limpopo);
Centre ror Criminal Justice: Paralegal advice centres and court support services in rural areas
of K.ZN. legal rights education and community outreach;
GRIP: Comprehensive support services to rape victims at rural hospitals in Mpumalanga,
advocacy and case monitoring, inter-sectoral training and outreach;
Centre ror Social Legal Studies: school·based education campaigns for learners, educators, and
school management in Kwa Zulu Natal and Eastern Cape on GBY and sexual harassment/abuse;
Child Witness Preparation Project (Vista University): research and development of
standardized Program to prepare child witnesses in Soum African courts.
Ofthe above grantees, USAID support was provided most consistemly to the following (other
grantees received funding for only one year, from 2002-2003):
Mosaic: Mosaic is a Cape Town based NGO established in 1999 that focuses on prevention and
mitigation ofdomestic violence. USAID support has focused on the delivery of Mosaic's coun
support program. This program assists victims of domestic violence and abuse to apply for interim
29
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
protection orders plmuant to the Domestic Violence Act. Housed within the magistrate's courts,
Mosaic guides applicants through the often complicated and confusing system of applying for a coun
order, helps applicant's complete necessary fonns and affidavits, and provides emotional support and
referrals. (Although this function should be provided by the court clerks. most courts do not have the
capacity to provide this function effectively). With assistance from USAlD, Mosaic bas expanded it
services from 8 to 13 courts in Cape Town and surrounding areas during the period 2002-2007. The
court support program is implemented by volunteers (given a stipend) under me supervision offull￾time Mosaic project managers.
Mosaic also supports the courts by rraining and debriefing clerks oftbe court to enable them to
provide more efficient and sensitive services to applicants, and has also established role player
coordination committees at several courts to provide forums for problem solving and better
communication. This program has been identified as one with good potential for replication in other
couns in Soum Africa. Replication has been limited to date because of Mosaic's dependence on
donor funds. According to USAID documents, Mosaic assisted 64,407 victims of domestic violence
to obtain protection orders from 2002-2004. The organization is well regarded and appreciated by
the DOJ in the Western Cape. who recently entered into a public·private pannership agreement with
Mosaic to formalize its relationship.
Thohoyandou: TVEP was established in 2000 and has grown steadily over the past 7 years. It
currently runs two hospital-based crisis centers and shelters for victims ofrape and domestic violence
from which it provides a wide-range ofsupport services, including HIV counseling. PEP adherence
support and fol!ow·up, home visits and psych<rsocial counseling. TVEP also runs an "access to
justice" program from its central office that provides information and support to victims in
conjunction with the criminal justice process and monitors the investigation and prosecution of any
court case. Other program activities include: monitoring the delivery of health services provided to
victims; training other stakeholders (including nurses, police); conducting outreach and awareness
campaigns in rural communities; manning GBV "help desks" in rural areas; lobbying and advocacy;
and providing support and mentoring to local CBOs working on a range ofsocial issues. USAlD
support for TVEP enabled the organization to provide case monitoring and court support services to
more than 2000 victims ofrape and domestic violence from 2002-2004 and to conduct an outreach
campaign to more than 76,000 people in rural communities.
ChiJdline: Childline is a national NGG that specializes in providing holistic services to abused
children. In Kwa Zulu Natal province, Childline operates twelve satellite offices in disadvantaged
communities, including hospitals and courts. From 2002-2004, USAID funding supported a broad
range ofChildline services in I<ZN including therapeutic services, forensic assessment and court
preparation for 3669 abused children. From 2006-2007, USAID support to Childline focused
primarily on the establishment of child witness support offices in five local courts and the
development, piloting, and implementation of a child witness preparation program. According to the
Director, the success ofthe program was due in large pan to the quality ofthe preparation program
(curriculum and training), the close supervision and monitoring of court support volunteers by
Cbildline professionals, and Childline's capacity to provide this service in the context of a broader
range ofspecialized services (sucb as therapy and family interventions).
30
DPK
o suiting
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
All three programs are well regarded in me victim empowerment sector and were featured as project
"success stories" on the US..<\lD website.'
The review conducted for r.h.is evaluation indicates that the impact nftbese programs at me individual
and local level was and is significant. Beneficiaries included the victims and families who received
direct services as well as lhe COWlS and other justice sector institutions involved or effected by the
NGO Programs. The programs also provided poteotial models for effective replicable programs in
other areas. What is also clear is that the impact of lbese activities was limited by lack of consistent
and insufficient funding and lack ofinstitutionalization or integration into the larger CJSP Program
As an example, USAlD/SA directly funded me research. development, and pilol testing of a highly
effective standardized program for child witness preparation that has been successfully implemented
in South Africa by various NGOs. The program was funded directly at the request ofthe DOJ. The
program was not included as an official component ofthe CJSP and not institutionalized in the
courts. It now appean that the NPA is rolling out its own (reponedly less effective) witness
preparation program and "cbasing out" NGOs such as Childline from the couns where they have
been providing these programs to children (with USAID funding). Lack of funding also precluded
USAID from supporting the expansion or replicarion ofsuccessful NGO programs thereby limiting
their impact to the immediate communities in which they were implemented rather than improving
access to justice on a broader scale.
At the narionallevel, USAID suppon to NGOs in the anti-GBV sector has not resulted in better
partnerships between government and civil society. Although USAID-funded NGOs generally
reponed good working relationships with the DOJ and other justice institutions at the local level,
none reported a strong relationship wilh the DOJ-CD or NPA at the national level. (See discussion on
organizational capacity of anti-GBV NGOs at Appendix II). Moreover, although some NOGs such
as Mosaic have entered into a memorandum of understanding with the DOJ to provide services in tbe
courts, most anti-GBY NOGs do not have any formal agreement with government. Even where
NGOs provide services that are the responsibility of government, none receive funding from the DOJ
or NPA to provide these services. A major and ongoing challenge for NGOs in this sector is that the
DOJ and NPA reponedly do not have any mechanism by whicb to outsource NOOs to provide
essential services such as victim assistance and training ofjustice sector personnel. NGOs are thus
dependent on donor funding which is usually short-term and unreliable in the longer-term. If
government and USAID want to see effective NGO programs expanded and institutionalized in
justice sector institutions, it will be necessary to identify or develop a longer-tenn strategy for
sustainable funding.
5.3.3 Dedicated Courts
USAID suppon for dedicated courts also contributed to access to justice in some imponant ways.
First, petty cases which were backlogged in the system were pulled out and adjudicated quickly and
efficiendy in the community courts. This reduced the overall court rolls and contributed to the
perception in the community that crime was being addressed. In the same way, complex commercial
cases and some sexual offenses cases were taken out ofthe normal court rolls and adjudicated in
dedicated courts. This reponedly resulted in better outcomes (higher convictions, less time to court)
and greater satisfaction on the part of complainants.
'See Women Court Workm: Breaking Cycle ofViolcnce in South Africa (Mosaic); Protecting Children and their
Families from Violence and Abuse (Childline); Reducing Violma and Increasing Justice (TVEP), available al
http://africastories.usaid.gov.
31
DPK
consu I (.1 ng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
5.4 Organizational Capacity of SAC
The decision (0 fund the CJSP through an implementing panDer mechanism was born out oftwo key
facts. First, me South African justice sector expressed a strong desire [0 work through local
implementing partners versus the use of international partners such as a US based rule of law
consulting firm. Second, efforts to directly fund to the DOleD were nm considered feasible given the
issues that had been raised in successive audits afthe DOleD regarding its handling and accounting
for funds.
These two issues led USAID to consider local implementing partner options that resulted in the
cooperating agreement with BAC. Some rule oflaw activities prior to the agreemem and even after
the signing ofthe cooperative agreement were carried out through Creative Associates International
Inc. as the implementing partner. The decision implemented in 2002 was to have BAC become the
implementing partner, fulfilling the Government of South Africa wish to have local participation and
implementation.
Linkages of the CJSP with the existing Integrated Justice System Program (IJSP) administered
through the Business Against Crime (BAC) and the Department ofJustice and Constitutional
Development (001CD) are reflected in Project Implementation Letter number 38 of December 28,
2001, represented both a strategically and synergistically sound choice on the pan of USAID. The
approach resulted in tying together concurrent and compatible efforts versus creating parallel and
inevitably conflictive paths. The ultimate implememation ofthis relationship had and has inevitable
issues as would be true with any implememil1g mechanism but the underlying soundness ofthe
approach cannot be questioned and indeed reflects enlightened thinking on the part of USAID at the
time, especially given the strong preference for local implementers expressed by the South African
government.
While the BAC, DOJCD, and USAID tripartite relationship has been a generally positive mechanism
for project implementation, the CJSP implementation has raised some issues. For example, the strong
and positive move and need for the judges and magistrates to assert the independence of the judiciary
has raised questions and some resistance among them as to why the CJSP is located in the DOJCD,
which is an executive branch agency. Similarly the fact that BAC represents the business community
has raised questions among some judges and magistrates as to the appropriateness of such an
institution implementing programs related to the operation ofthe courts. While the evaluation team
saw no evidence that the relation with the business community affected in any way the actual
implementation of the projects under the CJSP, we can fully appreciate the issue of appearances at a
time in the transformation of the justice sector when the issue ofjudicial independence is an
especially sensitive one.
The evaluation team's conclusion is that the BAC mechanism was a good idea but there is an
inherent problem and challenge with the relationShip as there are inherem tensions in the relations
with business and the courts and the DOJCD with the judiciary. What was initially considered to be
potentially powerful joining of parties has in essence now become what one commentator has called
a "marriage of convenience." Some reflection on whether having the program implemented by a
more "neutral" body would have eased implementation issues is merited.
5.4.1 Staffing of the SAC to Implement the CJSP Effectively
There are notable issues related to the sraffmg of BAC to implement CJSP. There have been repeated
concerns expressed by counterparts and by the BAC leadership that stafftumover at the CJSP has
been a problem, especially in recent years. There are various reasons given for this including the fact
32
DPK Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening Program in South Africa
mat the SAC staffbecomes very marketable and so are quickly offered positions in other sectors to
the assenion that the style of management in SAC is nOl conducive (0 high staff morale. Whatever
me correct reason and it probably is a combination of factors, both SAC and the direct counterpart
DOleD acknowledge mat me staffrumover has hampered progress in both the sense of having
strong technical capacity and also in terms oftuming around initiatives so that there will not be
delays in implementation ofIhe CJSP program.
There is a recent gap in tenns of BAC's technical capacity. For example, though the development,
implementation and success afthe Re Aga Boswa model were largely due to a slrong PMSO
anchored on a strategic partnership, and by all accounts this appears to have been functional.
However, more recently the OMS assessment suffered from a lack of clarity of objectives that
resulted in an end product that was not helpful. Some technical assistance in orienting that work
would have proved useful. Some ofthe responsibility lies with the D01CD project managers.
Keeping counterparts focused on project activities is a key role for the BAC team, given that the
implementation of lhe CJSP is primarily performed by counterpan institutions.
5.4.2 Institutional Relations/SACIDOJCD
The current relationship between BAC and D01CD is weak and characterized by a muruallack of
recognition of institutional requirements and a general feeling lhat each institution is hindering the
development of programs by not maintaining a consistent focus and acting rapidly to take needed
decisions. Another institutional partner, the l\rpA's SOCA Unit, bas been removed from the BAC
implementing mechanism reportedly due to difficulties in coordinating between the ClSP and the
SOCA Unit. Consequently, the SOCA Unit's programs have since been transferred to another
contracting mechanism (RTt).
The DOlCD leadership states that there has been a pattern of decisions being made without proper
consultation with DOleD and some of the programs that have been implemented are not reflective of
DOlCD priorities. They also question whether some ofthe programs that have been implemented are
truly focused on the criminal process. At the same time, there has been a sense on the part of BAC
that the leadership ofDOlCD has not been consistent with its priorities and its decision-making and
tbat, as a resuh, there have been delays and shifts in direction.
5.4.3 Organlutional Structure of SAC
The strengths ofthe organizational structure of BAC rest largely in it being a South African
institution. That fact has led to some ofthe positive aspects in terms building relationships with
governmental pannen:. The BAC CJSP office was housed inside the DOlCD, which led to improved
day-ta-day coordination and cooperation between the implementer and the counterparts. This
location also gave the ClSP program a starns and profile not otherwise possible ifthe office was
located at BAC-SA's headquarters or in a commercial building in which case, the ClSP would have
been seen as an appendage and not as pan ofthe justice system.
A major weakness of the organizational structure ofthe BAC is that it did not bring expected
institutional capacity and knowledge to the CJSP. The evaluation team found that BAC lacked the
technical knowledge that would have been an important input at \'arious points in the
development of the CJSP particularly in areas related to improved management of the justice
system and improved case flow management processing and court efficiency,
The hope in defining the tripartite relationship was that the BAC would bring the value added of the
knowledge and skills in areas like management, industrial engineering expertise, organizational
))
DPK
nsull:lng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
management and business processing re-engineering to the CJSP relationship. There have been
instances where SAC have been seconded to justice section departments and that is a
positive aspect ofthe relationship, but these have been one off()'pe ofsituations. The idea that
USAlD bad in entering into the Cooperative Agreement that the symbiotic relationship of
joining tbe private and public sectors through the SAC mechanism and enjoy the benefits of
both simply bas not happened.
According to SAC CEO Dr. Siphiwe Nzimande, SAC itself detennined in 2006 that its efforts were
nOl ··payingthe dividends that they expected." They have since gone through a restructuring that is
not necessarily directed 10 the CJSP but reflects that SAC itself believes that there is some need ofits
own organizational change.
The evaluatioo team would like to emphasize that it believes mat the SAC mechanism was an
innovative and very worthy approach to me implementation of me CJSP and applauds USAID/SA
for me initiative even though !he matured relationship is now probably bearing less fruit than when
the relationship Slarted.
34
DPK
consulting
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
6. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A STRONG FINISH
6.1 Lessons Learned From the Support Provided By USAID
The following are several findings and lessons learned from the support provided by USAID:
Keep Focus. We find that the original design ofCJSP was comprehensive, incorporated needed and
appropriate implementation mechanisms and defined appropriate areas of activity. We found that in
the area of court services some ofthe contemplated mechanisms were not used or to the extent that
would have proved useful such as independent monitoring and evaluation and also external technical
assistance.
Similarly we see a widening of the CJSP focus as the program developed. While the areas of new
focus are cenainly valid and worthwhile in their breadth they tend to lessen the integration of
activities and focus that the original four areas of focus provided. The fact that there was not
progress on the ICFMS and the roll out of the Re Aga Boswa model suggests to us that there
should have been renewed efforts in these areas not less but perhaps by taking different
approaches and avenues to achieve the stated goal.
Integrate Activities. There are possibilities to create synergies and linkages between programs that
should be done. We do not see, with some exceptions, that the training programs that were
implemented attempted to build on the two key programs ofthe ICFMS and Re Aga Boswa. The
proposed study tour to the US for judges and justice sector officials if done properly is a good
linkage mechanism. The tour should give emphasis to the issues that in the court administration
component CJSP is focusing on such as integrated case flow management and document
management systems and how courts are structured and function administratively elsewhere.
Target and Institutionalize Training Support. The key lesson to be learned in training programs is to
avoid having an ad-hoc approach and ensure that training programs are less demand driven, reactive,
and more related to specific CJSP activities and strategic objectives. Training can and should be a
means to support the technical activities of the support. It is inherent to the program planners to
ensure that these synergies are realized. Another lesson is to ensure that trainings programs are
offered within the institutional structure of the counterparts so that the CJSP does not have
independent training offerings since such an approach while often easier to implement has more
limited sustainabilily and longer-term impact.
Measure Progress. While the CJSP should be commended for tbe rich detail of quantifiable data,
especially in its early years, there is a need to consistently monitor and evaluate progress in
order to inform future activities. USAID may need to go back, capture, and analyze existing data
to bener measure actual impacts in a way that is currently not possible with existing in-house data
and resources. That process would result in better measurement of impacts, either according to
original indicators or a focused subset ofthe original indicators. The consistent application and use of
methodologically sound monitoring and evaluation indicators would bave provided the CISP with
hard data that could that be used to both assist counterparts to measure performance and make
adjustment to programming activities.
6.2 Recommendations for a Strong Finish
35
DPK
cc>nsull-Ing
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
In the following. the evaluation team has consolidated me various key recommendations that we have
outlined in me body ofthe evaluation into a menu ofspecific activities that we suggest USAlD
consider in ilS final programm.ing ofCJSP to ensure a strong finish aftbe program. With limited time
remaining in the CJSP. we believe that the focus sbould be on a number of"bigh impact" activities to
contribute directly to the project original objectives.
6.2.1 Implementation Strategies
I. There is a need for specific technical knowledge to help guide the technical activities that should
be undertaken in the remaining life ofOSP. Such assistance will help to successfully design and
implement activities addressing areas such as improved management, organization, and policy
making in the judicial branch, improved case now management and court efficiency, use of
technology to improve access to information, and means to increase judicial productivity and
reduce delay. An effective rule oflaw implementer with knowledge ofinternational best and
appropriate practices could be very effective in quickly helping to give direction to the CJSP
program in these and other relevant areas as it concludes. In response to the technical needs
identified by me DOJ, strong consideration should be given to contracting either a Rule of Law
IQC holder as was contemplated in the original design or a local South African firm to provide
strategic advice, particularly on me court strengthening program.
2. While not tied directly to a strong finish, we suggest that USAID consider me use of a small
value contract to obtain more quantitative evaluation of the overall impacts ofthe CJSP relative
to the adopted performance indicators man was possible in this rapid assessment/evaluation.
3. A specific and critical issue to address in achieving a strong finish is to address
institutionalization and sustainabiUty issues in anticipation of program handover, specifically
the transfer of project management and know how from the SAC to the Program Management
Units within DOJCD and the NPA. A transitional plan outlining needed steps in the
institutionalization process is needed along with commitment to carry out the steps in the plan
and along with timetables and quantifiable indicators of progress.
4. There is a critical need to improve and address existing coordination and inter-agency
relation issues through the POC and PIC mechanisms. For example, the SOCA Unit no longer
participates in the POC and PIC mechanisms, and since the change in the CJSP's trajectory there
has been a steady deterioration in the relationship between the DOJCD, the CJSP-PMSO, and
SAC. There is a need (0 eimer rethink or re energize the oversight and coordination bodies to be
more effective in overseeing CJSP activities. We suggest that USAlD/SA take a leadership role
in the process and contemplate activities such as daylong retreats and planning sessions to
achieve this purpose.
6.2.2 Areas of Focus
I. Since me MOJ has now decided to roll out the RAB model nationally, CJSP can and should
provide assistance in supporting this process. Resistance to this model may still exist at the
regional level, as it prescribes shifts in responsibilities from the regional manager structure in the
DOJ to court managers under the direction ofjudges and magistrates. C1SP should provide
assistance in planning, process re·mapping, training change management, and other effons to
rekindle interests, buy·in, and readjustment of the model. We have identified the needed steps in
the roll out as follows:
• Planning for priorities and sequencing in the roll out
• Workshops to introduce the model and motivate the judges, magistrates, and others
36
IFK
consu I t:1 ng
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program in South Africa
• Develop organizational framework ofthe model adjusted for new elements to the original
design
• Re·mapping of processes that will govern the operation of the model adjusting for changes
that have been introduced
• Provision of hardware, software, and infrastructure needed 10 support the rolled out model
• Training for the coun, prosecutoriai and related personnellhat will work in the system
• TechnicaJ assistance in the actual roll out ofthe model
The CJSP can and should support this process through a combination ofuse afme rule oflaw
implementer, local technical and training assistance, and some needed material and logistical
support.
2. There is general consensus that adjustment is needed in the proposed USAID suppon. related to
the ICFMS and OMS programs during the strong finish. Some adjustment will be needed
purely because of the procurement requirements and timetables of both me South African
government and USAIO itselfsuggest needed ahemations in the current plan for suppon. Other
adjustments should be driven by the need to ensure that any procurement incorporates an
integrated approach to ICFMS. A comprehensive plan for the future of tbe ICF:\1S should be
put in place during the strong finish with suppon from CJPS if needed.
As a pan of implementation ofthe ICFMS and OMS, there should be business re engineering of
the current manual and quasi automated systems in place to ensure that any funher
automation is built on an efficient foundation. The CJSP can effectively support such business
process reengineering through support for local and/or international consulting work as well as
sponsoring working committees of court personnel ro participate in the process
With specific regard to CJPS suppon of the OMS element of the system which is currently a
part of the CJSP strong finish plan, before committing any CJSP funding to procurement a
careful professional review should be undenaken ofbom the DOJeD summary of objectives and
also me DOJCD·generated TORs, to ensure mat the program is not a stand alone/pilot that does
not fit into the integrated approach. Specifically, CJSP support should target the procurement
process to clearly define phases ofthe ICFMS process, what will be required for each phase, and
what can and will be achieved with CJSP support. The key is to ensure that any CJSP support
does not become an isolated ""e.'(per1menC' with no built-in follow on.
3. The strong finish in the area oftraining should focus on issues of institutionalization of training
through detennining the appropriate structures to house training including the USAlD
supported training programs. The South African governmental goal is ro create the Judicial
Education Institute. The most appropriate assistance to support this process of creating the
Institute for CJSP support is three fold:
• Generate interest and support for the new institute by holding workshops of key
judiciary figures to discuss organization, curricula, tcaching philosophy, e.g., instructor.;
versus peer-to--peeT instruction models and other organizing elements.
• Use the workshops or training needs assessment as the basis to create an outline for a
curriculum and set of detailed offerings, e.g., courses for new judges, courses on
international law issues such as on international human rights, intellectual property rights and
37
DPK
co suiting
Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Stnlngthening
Prognllm in South Africa
others.
• Analyze how new technologies such e-learning techniques can be built into curriculums to
expand the reach of training.
4. Training programs supported by CJSP. and in general in the judicial branch, have had an ad-hoc
quality and need to be less demand driven, reactive. and more based on a life long learning
professional development curricula that is established for judges, magistrates, and non-judicial
personnel. During the strong finish, CJSP should assist making acwal training more effective
within this framework.. Specific CJSP assistance interventions could include:
• Undenake a judicial skills audit to be used in defining training needs and the development
of professional development curricula for judges, magistrates and non-judicial personnel
• Support, as a reasonable proxy for a skills assessment, convening of regional court
presidents, chief magistrates, and provincial deputy public prosecutors to discuss their
perceptions of training needs which would also reenergize the program.
• Define specific training needs to tie out to the RAB model and ICFi\'IS systems mat will
be implemented and provide support for lhese programs.
• Detennine and provide any assistance that can be provided to fast track the Justice College
accreditation process.
• Provide specific assistance through an international or other expert [0 help with the
development of the organization, curriculum, staffing, finances, and administration of
the Judicial Education Institute.
5. The justice system is in the process of rethinking the use of dedicated courts. CJSP has
supported the creation of dedicated courts in the sexual offense, community and commercial
couns areas. During the strong finish, CJSP should provide technical assistance, support for
legal framework reviews, workshops and other means to rethink the approaches currently
employed. This work can include:
• The issue in sexual offenses cases is whether to consider rotation oftrained magistrates into
these couns versus permanent assignment to avoid issues of bum out. What is needed is a
strategic intervention for an "in flight correction." CJSP support can and should be
to defme the way forward for dealing with sexual offense matttn by providing
assistance to review memes on performance, convening mulri-member groups to consider the
way forward, etc.
• Community courts are in need ofre-engineering. The model needs to be revisited to
emphasize more informal mechanisms for resolution, such as ADR and diversion. Most cost
effective mechods, such as the use of quasi-judicial officers, volunteer mediators, and
involvement of traditional leaders and structures need to be built into the model. The
community coun program also needs to refocus to ensure it delivers programs to rural areas.
CJSP can suppon this process by developing white papers, bringing to bear international
models, reviewing legislation, and other means.
• The commercial court model has demonstraled high conviction rates but the overall case
volume ofthe commercial courts remains consistently low. There are questions as to the
38
DPK Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Strengthening Program in South Africa
costs and benefilS of having separate commercial couns in tenus of maximizing I.he use of
scarce judicial resources. CJSP can provide important information to the review process by
sponsoring an assessment aCme COSlS and benefits ofthe current ··pilot" approach, and
whether it should be rolled out further or commercial cases should be rolled back into the
normal rolls ofthe courts.
6.2.3 Support to HGOs
1. For the NGO section to provide more consistent and expanded services, particularly in the courts
and Tees, there is a need for the DOlCD and NPA to fonnalize their relationships with NGO
service providers (as it has been done to some extent in the Western Cape), and [0 idemify and
implement mechanisms for long-term financial support to NGOs in order to ensure the
sustainability of current services and facilitate the expansion of good programs to courts and
TCCs in under-served areas. CJSP can assist in this process by convening workshops between
tbe NCO and governmental sectors to define how the two groups can work together in the
future.
2. Support to the GBV se<:tOr during the strong finish should emphasize sustainability. Either
lhrougb CJSP or \VJEI, there should be more training and technical support to government
personnel to help government o[ficials identify and/or develop mechanisms for out-sou.r-cing
in the criminal justice/victim empowerment sector. CiSP or WJEI should also playa more
active facilitative role between DOJeD, PA, and N'GOs around the issue of child wimess
preparation so that USAlD's substantial investment in this area has a chance to bear fruit. CJSP
specifically could support the commission of an in-depth analysis of government
funding/procurement options for NGO service providers, with particular emphasis on the justice
sector (GBV. diversion, etc.), while continuing to provide short-teno grants or "bridge" funding
to NGOs during the remaining period of the CJSP program.
3. There is a need for some specific assistance on new legislation in the strong finish, specifically
assistance for the implementation of the recently enacted Sexual Offenses Act. CJSP can
provide assistance for the implementation ofthe act through training and orientation programs for
judicial officers and prosecutors and rotationally some public education campaigns directed to
impact groups on rights under the act. Because many ofthe provisions and envisioned changes
by the new Act are quite complex, the evaluation team recommends that such training not be
limited to a once-olT conference or workshop but rather a series of in-depth trainings.
7. CONCLUSION
The evaluation team has reviewed the key activities and impacts and achievements ofthe CJSP over
its life. As we have outlined throughout this work. we find that the CJSP was built on a strong design
and implementing mechanism which has born fruit in its execution and impacts on improving the
justice sector in South Africa. The team has identified a series ofstrategic focus adjustments dun we
believe is consistent with the original design ofthe CJSP that should be emphasized in the strong
finish activities to ensure appropriate institutionalization ofthe foundations of the CJSP program.
39
DPK
•·
... 's"I'I,'R
APPENDICES
APPENDICES
1 INTERVIEWS, SITE VISITS, AND KEY DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
2 PROGRAM DESIGN: CRIMINAL JUSTICE CJSP (NOVEMBER 2000)
3 CJSP PROJECTS: 2002-2008 AND IMPACTS OF CJ5P TRAINING AND
DEVELOPMENT
4 CJSP'S USAID SUPPORTED MILESTONE MEETINGS/EVENTS
5 CJSP4SUPPORTED CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES
6 RE AGA BOSWA TRAININGS
7 EVALUATION OF THE CJSP DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT
ASSESSMENT CONDUCTED BY MATLOLElMOKGABO JV
8 ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT ARCHIVE SYSTEM GENERAL
SPECIFICATIONS
9 SUMMARY OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND COMMUNITY LEADERS
REACHED
10 GRANTEE ACTIVITIES
11 ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF ANTI·GENDER·BASED VIOLENCE
NGOS
DPK
<·
...,,.;.,1'1,,1-(
APPENDIX 1
APPENDICES
INTERVIEWS, SITE VISITS, AND KEY DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
DPK
C·c''-'''''.!.l.!l..ng
INTERVIEWS, SITE VISITS, AND KEY
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
INTERVIEWS, SITE VISITS, AND KEY DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
INTERVIEWS
The various personnel interviewed in conducting this CISP assessment included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Justice Pius Langa, ChiefJustice of South Africa
Adv. Simon Jiyane, Depmy Director General, DOlCD
Mike Ndlokovane, Director DOl's Nerve Center
Adv. Trish Matzke, Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions, National Prosecuting Authority
Adv. PVH Moaka, Acting Director. Area Coun Manager, Johannesburg
Dr. Carleene Dei, Director, USAID/South Africa
Gary Juste. Depmy Director, USAID/Soum Africa
James Warson, Regional Program and Project Development Director, USAlD/South Africa
Development Director, US Embassy, RSA
Katherine Liesegang, Cognizant Technical Officer, USAID
Harold M. Motshwane, Program Development Specialist Rule of Law and Human Rights,
USAID
Mr. Siphiwe Nzimande, Chief Executive Officer, SAC
Gomolemo Moshoeu, Project Director, CJSP
Dr. Biki V. Minyuku, Ex-Director, CJSP-PMSO
A.C. Bekker, President, ARMSA
Madole ConsultingfMakgabo Technologies
Andrew Mokone, Director, College Support Services, Juslice College
Julian Marsh, Head ofJudicial and Legal Training, Justice College
Gomolemo Moshoeu, Project Director, CJSP
Judge Mogoeng, Regional Court Presidenl, Nonh West Division and Chief Magislrate. Mafikeng
Mr. MOlsoenyane, Acting Cluster Head, Maflkeng
Grace Modiba, TCC site co-coordinator, Mafikeng
Hishaam Mohamed, Regional Head, Western Cape
Joy Smith, Legal Section, Western Cape
Happy Mdaka, Labor Relations, Western Cape
Dan Roux, Director, HRM
Superintendent Swarte, SA Police, Capetown
Members ofCape Town TCC Team
Lizelle Bonita, Senior Public Prosecutor and TCC Operations Manager, Cape Town
Sister Banlette, Forensic Nurse, Cape Town
Nazma, Rape Center Coordinator, Cape Town
Mr. Letsoalo, Acting Head of Court, Mankweng
Margaret Balakistan, Acting Court Head, Pretoria Magistrate Court
Belinda Mulamu, Chief Magistrate, Polokwane
Professor Titus, Justice College, Pretoria
Karl Kruger, Justice College, Pretoria
Memme Sejosengoe, Chief Director for Court Performance, Durban
I-I
•
•
•
•
•
•
IFK <·.,......ltlnH
Tinas Hudson, HRM Director; Durban
Delene Oleman, Area Coun Manager, Durban
Mark Naiker, Area Court Manager, Durban
Lynneue Venter, Facilities Manager, Durban
Ester Maritz, Ladysmith Cluster Area Court Manager, Durban
Hlatshwayo, Coun Manager, Pietermar1tzburg and Durban
INTERVIEWS, sITe VISITS, AND KEY
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
•
•
•
•
•
Cheryl Frank, Director, RAPCAN
Joan Van Niekerk, National Director, CHILDLlNE
Angelica Pino, Gender Unit Director, CSVR
Fiona Nicholson, Director, Thohoyandou Victim Empowennent Project
Linda Naidoo. Director, Childline. KZN Regional Office
Karen Hollely, Institute for Child Research and Training
Chantal Cooper, Executive Director, Rape Crisis
SITE VISITS
Site visits made to justice sector institutions and NOOs included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Johannesburg Magistrates Court
Community Couns in Makweng and Hatfield
Tbuthuzela Care Centre
Mannenburg TCC.looste Hospilal. Cape Town
Sexual Offenses Coun Wynberg
Wynberg Magistrate Coun
Pretoria Magistrate Court
Thohoyandou Victim Empowerment Program Crisis Centre. Court Support Office, Limpopo
Justice College, Pretoria
Mafikeng Thurhuzela Care Center, Mmabatho Mafikeng
Western Cape, Regional Office, Cape Town
Kwa 2ula National Regional Office, Durban
RAB's Court Support Services Center, Durban
Constitutional Court, Johannesburg
REPORTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
The reports and other documents reviewed in the performance ofthis assessment included:
Result.s Packnge 674-0322./. Criminal Justice Strengthening Program. November 2000.
Cooperative Agreement with Business Against Crime. 2002; and Amendment.s. 2004, 2006.
CJSP First Annual Work Plan. 2002.
CJSP First Report. February 9,2002.
CJSP lSI Performance Activities Report to USA/D. October 28, 2002.
CJSP r Performance Activities Report to USAlD. October 2002-March 2003.
CJSP r Performance Activities Report to USAJD. April-September 2003.
CJSP Peiformance Activities Report to USA/D. October 2003-March 2004.
CJSP j" Peifomlance Report. October 2oo3-September 2004.
CJSP (f* Peiformance Report. October 2004-March 2005.
CJSP 11t Peiformance Report. April2005-September 2005.
CJSP glt Peiformance Report. October 2005-March 2006.
CJSP Interim Performance Evaluation Report. Decipher Consortium. 2004.
1-2
DPK
............. I.I·'H
INTERVIEWS, SITe V1Srrs, AND KEY
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
Tshehla, Bayana. EWlluation Report a/CJSP s Base·lines, Targets, Impacts, and Overall
Effectiveness ofRAE and Case Managers Ex/ended Pilot Projects. Institute of Security Studies.
Internal ClSP Rel'iew Report a/the Impacts. Effectiveness, Immediate and Potential Benefits a/the
RAE Pilot Project.
Joint CJSP-PICIPOCISub-program Sponsors and Project Managers Reports [Bound].
Laundering Seminar Evaluation Report (Bound).
Training Needs Analysis/orthe Curriculum Design and Development on Case Flow and Court.
Management Projects Report [Bound].
Judicial Leadership Workshop Participants Workbook [Bound].
Judicial Leadership Resource Guide [Bound).
Justice College Impact Assessment Project: Fina/lmpact Assessment Report [Bound]
Justice College's Work Program: I April 1008 - 3 I March 1009.
Jllstice Vtsion 1000. Draft Strategic Plan/or the Transformation and Rationali=otion o/the
Administration ofJustice, Ministry ofJwtice.
Memorandum: Highlights ofthe Rel'iew ofthe South African Criminal Jltstice System.
Schomeich, Martin. Making Couns Works, A Review ofthe IJS Court Centre in POrl Eli=abeth. 2002.
Na/ional Prosecuting Office, Stakeholder Conference. 2007.
Practical Guide: Court ami Case Flow Managementfor South African Lower Courts. DOJeD.
Guidelines/or the Establishmem and Functioning ofHatfield-Type Community Courts. SAC. 2006.
Training Manuals (Volumes 1-6) and "Tool Kit." Child Witness Project.
Integrated Domestic Violence Training Manllal. 2004.
Child Jltstice in Africa: A Guide to Good Practice. Communi£)' Law CeoU'e. 2004.
South African Young Sex Offenders Program: Prevention Programfor Young Sex Offending.
SAYSTOP. 2004.
Venon, Lisa & Khan, Zohra. We're Doing Their Work For Them: An Investigation Into Government
Support To Non-Profit Organizations Providing Services To Women Experiencing Gender-Based
Violence. CenU'e for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation. 2002.
USAlD 2004 Annual Report Back-up In/omation. Including excerpts from reports by NGO grantees
such as Childline Kwazulu Natal, Preparation and Support ofthe Child Witness.
Closing Report/or USAJD. Seplember 2oo3-August 2004.
Report to Crea. GRIP. July-September 2004.
Mosaic Court Support Desk Project Final Report to USAlD. October 2004.
1-3
DFI(
.-n......I'I··H
INTERVIEWS, sITe VISITS, AND KEY
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
USAlD Progress Reports. Thohoyahdou Victim Empowerment Trust. ApriI2003-September 2004.
"Public-Private Pannership AgreemenlS" between the Department ofJustice, Constitutional
Development, and various NGOs including MOSAIC, RAPCAN, and NICRO.
Survey on USAID GBVActivities. Rule of Law Unit.
Mankweng Communiry Court (Court E) Statistics. 2007, 2008.
Giving Youth a Second Chance in South Africa. USAID Success Story.
Reducing Violence and Increasing Justice. USAID Success Slory. 2003.
Liberating Children/rom Crime. USAID Progress Profile.
1-4
DPK
•·
..."",,I'I··H
APPENDIX 2
APPENDICES
PROGRAM DESIGN: C.lSP FOR RESULTS PACKAGE (NOVEMBER 2000)
CJSP PROGRAM DESIGN
PROGRAM DESIGN: c.JSP FOR RESULTS PACKAGE (NOVEMBER 2000)
The original design for the JSRP was to achieve "a more effective and accessible criminal justice
system." The two original indicators that were established were:
• lncrease in the percent of a nationally representative sample of South Africans expressing trust in
the criminal justice system
• Reduction in the average time it lakes for a criminal case to be processed in selected courts
FOUR PROGRAM AREAS
• Improving management ofjustice sector institutions
• Improving case processing and court efficiency
• Improving crime and violence prevention strategies
• Having better prosecutor led criminal investigations
PROGRAM STRATEGY
The program should focus on geographic clusters including large, urban-based courts and smaller
rural courts that serve a historically disadvanlaged population.
PROGRAM PHASES
A two-pronged priority planning period oftwo to three years. and resources reserved for a second
phase.
Program Elements and Activities
1. Improving Management of Justice Sector Institutions
a. DOJCD Management Skills Improved
b. NDPP Management Systems Improved
c. Sexual Offense Courts Strengthened
d. Internship Program Implementation in Selected Justice Cluster
e. Court Office Managers Functioning in Selected Justice Cluster
f. Public Defender Officer Created in Selected Justice Cluster
g. Justice College Strengthening
h. On-going Administration ofJustice Program Activities Related to Improved Management of
Justice Sector Institutions
i. Phase Two Activities
2. Improving Case Processing and Court Efficiency
a. Court/Case Flow Management Training for Prosecutors and Magistrates
b. ProsecutorfMagistrate Tutor Program in Selected Justice Cluster
c. Magistrate and Prosecutor Occupational Skills Training
d. Ongoing Administration ofJustice Program Activities Related to Improved Case Processing
e. Phase Two Activities
3. Improving Crime and Violence Prevention Strategies
a. Crime and violence Prevention Activities
b. Research and Analysis ofCrime Issues
c. Short-Term Technical Assistance Addressing Priority Program Concerns
2·1
CJSP PROGRAM DESIGN
4. Having Better Prosecutor-led Criminal Investigations
a. Investigation Policies, Procedures, and Manuals Developed
b. Enhanced Investigator Skill Base
c. Investigator Supervisors Trained
d. Improved Prosecutorflnvestigator Communications
5. Other Ongoing Administration of Justice Program Activities
Implementation Mechanisms
The program was set up to continue using the implementation mechanism established under the
previous AOJP project. That approach consisted of implementing activities through:
1. Coordination Management (CM) in the DOJCD. The program design did envision that some
activities would be implemented differently, "Most significantly, it is anticipated that certain CJSP￾related activities will be implemented directly, i.e., not through Host Country Contracting
arrangements."
2. Program Implementation Cumminee (PIC). The Program Implementation Committee (PIC) is a
key element, with representatives from MPJIDOJ, USAID, the CMU, NPA, the Justice College, the
grants management contractor, and any program implementation agent contracted by USAID. The
PIC is chaired by the MOJ/DOJ and USAlD.
3. Program Implementation Agent (PIA). Envisioned using the existing PIA, which was Creative
Associations International, Inc., with reconsideration at the end of Phase I for the continuing need of
a PIA, whether from South Africa or the US.
4. Participll1ing Agency Service Agreeme/lt (PASA). Inclusion of a resident legal advisor from the
USDO).
5. IQC Buy-in. Buy-in to a Global Bureau Rule of Law IQC for short-tenn technical advisors.
6. Personal Services Contractors. Direct contracting of FSN and USPSC personnel to monitor the
implementation oftbe program.
7. Small Value Contracts. Direct procurement of services for program monitoring and evaluation.
Functional CJSP Governance and Management Structure
The Program Implementation Committee (PIC) is lbe operational head of the CJSP, and is made up
ofrepresentatives ofCJSP's strategic partners within the DOJCD, JCD, the NPA, USAID's
Democracy and Governance Section as well as the Rule of Law Unit, BAC-SA, and the CJSP team
responsible for seuing the CJSP's strategic direction, budgetary requirements, and governance of the
program. The PIC meets quarterly, and is appropriately chaired by the DOJCD's director general.
The Program Operational Committee (POC) provides direct operational oversight ofCJSP, and is
composed ofthe CJSP's sub-program sponsors, the USAID Rule of Law Unit director, and the CJSP
director. The POC is responsible for programmatic planning such as budgets and annual work plans,
project implementation guidance, and all-round project performance based upon project management
principles, agreed upon performance indicators, budget, and timeframes. The POC meets on a
monthly basis to track, monitor, and evaluate the performance and progress of approved projects. The
2-2
DPK
,-no ..... 1110 'R
CJSP PROGRAM DESIGN
POe is chaired by the DOleD's coun services sub-program sponsor. At its peak, the CJSP had nine
sub-program sponsor.;.
Both the PIC and POC benefit from the CJSP Program Management Support Office (CJSP-PMSO).
This office is led by the CJSP-PMSO director. The CJSP-PMSO is responsible for strategic
leadership, day-to-day CJSP activities, and program operations, as well as providing technical
assistance and advice as needed across the CJSP spectrum. The CJSP-PMSO operates through a
small complement oftechnical services providers and administrative support staff, as well as the
assigned CJSP projecl managers who are named by the counterparts. The latter ensure that activities
carried out by counterpart institutions are conducted according to adopted plans of action.
2-3
DPK
•·
......".,1.1,,1{
APPENDIX 3
APPENDICES
CJSP PROJECTS 2002-2008 AND IMPACTS OF CJSP TRAINING AND
DEVELOPMENT
CJSP PROJECTS 2002·2008
CJSP PROJECTS
Project Name
A. Court Services
A1. Decentralized Court Suooort Services Extended Pilot Proiect {MCSP
A2. Re A a Boswa RAB
A3. lnte rated Case Flow Mana ement S stem ICFMS
A4. Mosaic Court Su rt Pro'ect
B. SOCA Sexual Offenses and Communit Affairs
81. Public Awareness Campai ns (9) (PACs
B2. Case ManaQers(4) Pilot pro'ect (CMEPP
B3. Victim Assistance Program Coordinators (4) Pilot Pro'ect VAOEPP
B4. Child Law Manual
B5. Domestic Violence Multi-disciplinarv Trainina Guide/Manual DVMMI
86. Manaaement Development PrO'eet
87. Uniform Protocols for Victim Manaaement UPVM)
C. Justice Colleae Caoacitv Buildina
C1. Maaistrates Mentorino Proaram Tutor Trainino Proiect (MMP
C2. Imoact Assessment
C3. Visionino and Strateaic Plannino I VSP
C4. Maaistrates Mentorshio Pro'ect
D.Outsourcin the Mana ement of Monies in Trust
01. Mana ement of Monies in Trust
E. Transformin the Judicia
E1. Judicial Officers Association of SA International Association of Judges
Conference
E2. South African Judaes Svmoosium
E3. Leadershi and Mana ement Develo ment Pro ram for Women in the Judiciarv
E4. Unified South African Judicia Committee
E5. Sin Ie Rule Makin Authori
E6. Interim Advise Council/Board
E7. Restruclurin and Transformation Committee
Ea. Judicial Education and trainina committee
E9. Development and Implementation of the Plea barQaininQ Trainina Pro ram
E10. Aspirant JudQes TraininQ and development Proqrams
E11. Trainina the Trainers
E12. Newlv Appointed Judaes Orientation Proaram
E13. Continuina Education for Judaes Trainina Proaram
F. Caoacitv Buildina within the OOJCO
F1.DOJCD's Proaram Manaaement Suaoort Unit (PMSU
F2. Forensic Audit Unit (FAU1
G. External Anti-Corruotion Initiative
G1. Commercial Court Centers CCCC
J. Social Crime Prevention Initiatives
J1. Tiisa Thulo--GDA n
J2. Local Crime Prevention Tool Kit (LCPT)
J3. Anti-Cash-in Transit Heist (ACTH
J4. Anti-Computer and Cell phone Theft AC & cn
K. Capacity Buildina with the NPA
K1. Trainina for Prosecutors Dealina with Gender Based Violence (TPDGBV
K2. Trainina for 050 Prosecutors and Investiaators TDSOPI
K3. Trainina for Prosecutors Dealina with Corruotion (TPDC)
K4. Trainina the Proseculorial Trainers
3-\
DPK
........."I"H
CJSP PROJECTS
Project Name
K5. Administration
L. CJSP VAT Reclamations
l1. Su communi courts
M.NGOs
M1.NGOs
3-2
DIK
':.uJ ,s.1I I 1-, ,g
CJSP PROJECTS
IMPACTS OF C.lSP TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT
In the following, the learn has analyzed some oflhe impacts, costs, and benefits of training programs
offered through CJSP. The following tables present an overall summary of major training effoIlS, tbe
population impacted, total funds expended for each program, and estimates of cost per beneficiary.
Table 6 CJSP Trammg Programs and Costs
ProjeetslTraining Programs No. of Beneficiaries Aggregate Amounts
Alternative Sentencing Seminar 228 R14,OOO
Anti-Corruption Training Workshop 72 R107,576 for DSO Prosecutors
Money Laundering Training 110 R143,885 Workshops for DSO Prosecutors
Cultural Diversity Training 313 R1,792,511 Workshops
Judgment Writing Workshops for 70 R189,035 Maaistrates
Excel Training Workshops for 69 R56.336 Prosecutors
Trial Management Training 47 R92,960 Workshop for Prosecutors
Orientations to Re Aga Bows 189 R421 ,057
Training Workshops for 60 R3,421 ,229 Prosecutors Dealing with GBV
The Children's Bill Implementation 218 R632,520 Workshoos
Workshop for the Prevention of 28 R62,839 Illeoal Evictions
Leadership Training Workshops 779 R5,557,482
3-3
DPK
<·o...",I'I"H
CJSP PROJECTS
Table 7 Indicative CJSP Tramlng. Beneficiaries and Costs per BenefIcIary
Sub--programlProject's Training No. of Beneficiaries Aggregate Cost Per
Efforts Amounts Person
A: Court Services:
A1: Re Aga Boswa 189 R421,057 R2,228
[RAB]
A2: Integrated Case Flow 359 R795,550 R2,216
Mat 'Svstem ICFMSl
B: Sexual Offenses and
Community Affairs
[SaCA] Unit:
B1: Public Awareness
Campaigns (PACs]:
Community 5,286 R85,440 R16.16
Schools 325,446 R300,OOO RO.92
82; Case Manager
Extended Pilot Project 1,009 R413,193 R410
[CMEPP]
83: Victim Assistance
Officer Extended Pilot 1.236 R174,500 R141
Project [VAOEPPj
86: Management
Development 22 R52,452 R2,384
PmQra';' [MOP]
,,: Capacity Building at the
Justice College:
C1: Tutor Training 625 R5,390,682 R8,625
Program [TIP]
C4: Magistrates
Program 34 R149,812 R4,406
MMP
E: Transforming the Judiciary:
E9: Prosecutor-led Plea 141 R77,355 R549
Bargaining Program
E10: Aspirant Judges
Training & 48 R2,140,752 R44,599
Development
Program {AJTDPj
E12: Newly Appointed
JUdges Orientation 18 R144,590 R8,033
Prooram rNAJOPl
H: Social Crime Prevention:
H1: Tisa Tutu 56,268 R907,936 R16.14
K: Capacity Building within the
National Prosecuting
Authority:
K1: Training Prosecutors 60 R3,421 ,057 R57,018
Dealing with GBV
K2: Training DSO
Prosecutors Dealing 136 R338,173 R2,487
with Money Laundering
K3: DSO Prosecutors on
Anti·Corruption Training 236 R360,809 R1,529
3-4
IJPK
c< •• • s.ll1!-1 ng
CJSP PROJECTS
A straight cost per beneficiary analysis must be used with caution. For example, training prosecutors
dealing with GBY, the aspirant judges training and development program, the tutor training program,
and the magistrates mentoring programs are relatively expensive but are directed at the core of
improving the capacity ofthe justice sectOr and thereby justify the investment and continued suppan.
Programs like the public awareness campaigns and Tiisa ThUlo which have wide reaches in terms of
target audiences have lower costs per target, but the impacts of me investment are harder to measure.
In the following table there is a summary afthe beneficiaries ofCJSP sponsored training in the
justice sector, indicating that the programs covered a wide range of personnel in the system.
Table 8 Selected Training and Related Interventions for Justice Sector
Personnel
Training Interventions No. of Beneficiaries
Leadership and Cultural Diversity Training:
Upper Courts:
Constitutional Court Judges 11
Supreme Court JUdges 23
High Court Judges 159
Judges from 6 Divisions 87
Lower Courts:
Chief Magistrates 21
Senior Magistrates 153
Magistrates 1,359
Regional Court Presidenls 7
Regional Court Magistrates 307
National Prosecuting Services Personnel:
Prosecutors and Directors 63
DOJCD Personnel:
Members of EXCO 27
Chief Directors 15
Directors 293
Deputy Directors 1,967
Assistant Directors 559
Magistrates Mentorship Program: 34
Prosecutor-led Plea Bargaining Training: 141
Aspirant Judges Training and Development: 48
Anti-Corruption Training for Prosecutors: 224
Prevention and Combating Corruption for DSO Training: 254
Money Laundering and Racketeering for DSO Training: 163
Training for Prosecutors Dealing with GBV: 100
Training [Prosecutorial] Trainers: 54
Appointments for DOJCD's Internal Forensic Unit:
Data Capturers 19
Supervisors 2
The teams observation and finding is that though somewhat focused, the trainings and seminars and
workshops content-wise do not fall within an overall set of clearly defined training goals and are
non-modularized in terms of being part of a clearly defined professional development program. The
team could not draw any conclusions on the credentials ofthe institutions and presenters ofsuch
seminars and or workshops. Furthennore, as is often the case in training, there was no substantive
evidence as to the impaclS oftraining on capacities in units such as the NPA's SOCA Unit and/or the
)·5
DPK
c ••,,,•••ltl"H
CJSP PROJECTS
Inter Departmental Management and Mulri·sectoral Team mal is directly dealing with sexual
violence and abuse and gender-based violence.
3-6
DPK
<"
.....s •• III·'R
APPENDIX 4
APPENDICES
CJSP'S USAID·SUPPORTED MILESTONE MEETINGS/EVENTS
CJSP'S USAID SUPPORTED
MILESTONE MEETINGS' EVENTS
CJSP'S USAID SUPPORTED MILESTONE MEETINGS/EVENTS
Dates and
Location
09 September
2000: Pretoria,
RSA
05 February
2002:
Pretoria, RSA
08 Febl1Jary
2002:
Pretoria, RSA
27 July 2002:
Pretoria, RSA
05 August 2002:
Pretoria, RSA
20-25 October
2002:
Pretoria, RSA
31 January 2003:
Pretoria, RSA
04-06 March
2003:
Pretoria, RSA
13-16 June
2003:
Birchwood
Benoni, RSA
16-16 July 2003:
Birchwood
Executive Hotel,
Benoni, RSA
01·12 Au ust
StrategiclMilestone
Meetin Events & Pu 5e
Signing of the United States of
AmericaJRepublic of South
Africa Governments' Bilateral
A reemenl
Criminal Justice Strengthening
Program [CJSP] Official
launch Joint (OOJCO, USAID
& BAC-SA Press Release
Signing of the USAJO/BAC.SA
Award Letter &
Cooperative Agreement
No 674-A-OQ-02·00012-00
CJSP Work-Plan
Implementation & Kick-start
Workshop for the CJSP￾Program Management
Su ort Office Staff
Public Signing of the OOJCO,
USAID & BAC.SA CJSP
Strategic Partnership
Declaration & Memorandum of
Understandin MOU
Launch of the Jntegrated Case
Flow Management System
[ICFMS] Workshop with
assistance from USA-based
Judges James Ware &
Geor e Gish
Launch of the Re Aga Boswa
[RAB] Pilot Project
Training CJSP-PMSO Siaff &
Project Managers on Mind
Map Manager & Microsoft
Projects
Judicial Officers' Association
of South Africa [JOASA's]
Regional International
Association of Judges'
Conference
1st South African Judicial
Officers' Symposium in 70
years
Institute of Securi Studies
4-1
No. of
Partici nts
2 Strategic Partners
3 Strategic Partners
2 Strategic Partners
5 CJSP-PMSO Slaff
& 11 Project
Managers
3 Strategic Partners
100 Operatives
Trained
58 Courts in Kwa
Zulu Natal &
Court Support
Services Center in
Durban
4 CJSP-PMSO Staff
4 CJSP Project
Managers
3 DOJCD's RAB
Pro"ect Del ates
70 Participants
attended
174 Judicial Officers
including 34 lower
Court Judicial
Officers:
6 Regional Court
Presidents 13
Clustered Court
Heads
Mr. Bo ane
Achievement!
Results
Signed Copy of the
Bilateral Agreement
in place
Press Release
distributed
Copy of the Signed
Award Letter &
Cooperative
A reement in lace
Work Plan & Assigned
Non-FuJl·Time
Equivalent Project
Managers
Copies of the signed
Declaration & MOU in
place
ICFMS Launched:
6 CFM Plans &
Notebook Manual in
place
RAB launched; pilot
tested & refined
11 Operatives Trained
Declaration in place
Resolutions in place
Assessment Re rt
IFK
•·•
..
•
..'illt··H
CJ5P'S USAID SUPPORTED
MILESTONE MEETINGSI EVENTS
0.-000
Location
2003,
Johannesburg;
Durban & Cape
Town, RSA
17-18 September
03,
Durban, R$A
January 2004:
Johannesburg,
RSA
March 2004:
Johannesburg,
RSA
19 April-14 May
04: Pretoria,
RSA
17 May-9 June
2004,
Pretoria, RSA
August·10 Sept.
04:
Pretoria, RSA
06-09 August
2004, RSA
September 2004:
RSA
11,14-16 & 22-
24 February
2005,
PretorialJoburg,
RSA
03-19 March
2008
Strateglc:IMilestone
Meeti vents & Pu sa
(ISS] established base-line
statistics and analyzed CJSP
targets. impact; and overaJl
effectiveness & potentials of
Re Aga Boswa [RAB) & the
Case Manager Extended Pilot
Pro"ect CMEPP
Intemal CJSP review of the
impacts; effectiveness;
immediate benefits &
Potentials of the
Re Aga Boswa (RAB]
Pilot Pro-act
Pro-bono Strategic Review of
the CJSP by Decipher
Consulti
Inauguration of the Judicial
Education Institute Interim
Adviso Board/Council
Inauguration & evaluation of
the 11t Cycle of the Aspirant
Judges Training Program
Implementing & Evaluating of
the 2"'" Cycle of the Aspirant
Jud es Trainin Pr ram
Implementing & Evaluating of
the 310 Cycle of the Aspirant
Jud es Trainin Pr ram
Inauguration of the
Intemational Association of
Women Judges [IAWJ]
Seminar
Interim CJSP-PMSO
Performance Evaluation &
Impacts/Effectiveness
Assessment by the Decipher
Consortium
Training CJSP-PMSO on
Microsoft Projects & Visio
Mid-Term Evaluation of the
Impacts & Effectiveness of the
CJSP & the BAC-SA
Mechanism by DPK
Consultin & Associates
4-2
No. of
Pattici nts
Tshehlat
Input sought from
Selected Key
Players
Input sought from
Selected Key
Players
DDJCD, USAlD &
BAC-SA
1 Strategic Partner
49 candidate
Judges
9 Participants
10 Participants
75 new women
Judge Members
inclUding the
following 6 elected
Executive Members
The CJSP-PMSO
9 CJSp·PMSO Staff
NA
AchievementJ
Results
submitted
Internal Review
Report submitted
Review Report
submitted
Interim Advisory
Board/Council in
lace
Overall, 49 Aspirant
Judges including 20
Women Fast Tracked
Candidates were
Trained
9 Aspirant Judges
Trained
10 Aspirant Judges
Trained
The SA Chapter of the
IAWJ launched
Evaluation!
Assessment Report
submitted
CJSP-PMSO Staff
trained
Mid-Term Evaluation
Conducted
DPK
••
... ,,,... 1,11,1-4.
APPENDIX 5
CJSp·SUPPORTED CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES
APPENDICES
CJSP..sUPPORTED CAPACITY
BUILDING ACTJVmES
C.JSP·SUPPORTED CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES
(CONFERENCESISYMPOSIUMS TRAINING PROGRAMS, SEMINARS AND
WORKSHOPS WITHIN THE .JUSTICE SECTOR INSTITUTIONS)
1. Conferences and S m siums
• Judicial Officers Association • 13-16 June 2003: Birchwood 90 70 Judicial
of South Africa Regional Executive Hotel, Benoni, R$A Officers
International Association of
Judges Conference
• 1tt South African Judicial ·16-18 July 2003: Birchwood 250 174 Officers Symposium In 70 Executive Hotel, Benoni, RSA Judicial
ears Officers
2. Stud Tours and Reci rocal VISits
• Thuthuzela Care Centers • 2003: Chile 5 4
[TCCs) • FeblMarch 2007: By Lesotho 3 3
• June 2003 & 15-18 Sept 2003: 6 6 4 • The National Center for Washington DC & Williamsburg
State Courts ra: Case Flow, Virginia
Court Management & Grant • March/Alii 2008: Washington, Administration 15 10 5 DC & Williamsburg, Virginia
• Integrated Justice & TCCs
• NovlDec 2007: By Ethiopia
• 200512006: By the RSA Portfolio
Committee on Justice & 17 4 13
• Re Aga Boswa (RAB] Constitutional Development
NA NA NA
3. Seminars
• South African Chapter of the • 6·9 August 2004: Birchwood 75 New 72 3
International Association of Executive Hotel, Benoni, RSA Members
Women Judges (SAIAWJ]
• Alternative Sentencin ·27·28 Jul 2007: North West 228 228
4. Worksho s
• Project Planning, Mgt & ·27 July 2002: Justice College, 11 5 6
Implementation Principles & Pretoria 22 13 9
Strategies ·2-4 Sept. 2002: Acadia Center,
• Mgt Development Training Pretoria 37 22 15
Workshop for SQCA ·20-25 Oct. 2002: St. George's Operatives
Managers Hotel, Centurion
• Integrated Case Flow
Management System • Conducted at the following
• Decentralized Integrated Courts: Cape High, Regional & 11 Project Case Flow Management Family Courts; Pretoria High & Mana ers
10 As no ret:ord was made available to the evaluators., information in the above regards was provided to the best ofour
recollection.
II Referenced figures drawn from USAlD's TraiNet Web Repons generaled on 03/17/08. The training and development dynamics
of Re Aga Boswa, the Public Awareness Campaigns, Tiisa ThulO and the Composite Indicative Cost Benefit Analyses are
hereunder unpacked and presented separately.
5-\
IFK
co,.s"ltlng
CJSP-SUPPORTED CAPACITY
BUILDING ACTIVITIES
Planned Males
Training Workshops Magistrate Courts;
• Training CJSP-PMSO
& Johannesburg Family Court;
Project Managers on Mind Wynberg, George, Durban
& 300
Map Manager
& Microsoft Soshanguve Magistrate Courts 9 CJSP￾Projects • 4-6 March 2003: Pretoria, RSA PMSO
• South African Magistrates personnel
Workshop 72 21 51
• Training CJSp·PMSO Staff • Burgers Park Hotel, Pretoria 11,
on Microsoft 14-16
& 24-26 Feb
• Projects
& Visio 2005:Pretoria, RSA
• Decentralized DSO • Between 110 34 76
• Anti·Corruplion Training Oct
& Nov 2005:
-Workshops Pretoria
& 313 67 226
• Decentralized DSO Money Durban, RSA 70 28 42
laundering Training • Between March
& April 2006
Workshops Pretoria
& East london, RSA 69 50 19
• Decentralized Cultural • Between Nov.OS
& Sept. 2007: 47 22 25
Diversity Training All Provinces, RSA 189 75 114
Workshops • Between June 07
& January
• Decentralized Judgment 2008: North West
& the Western 60 33 27
Writing for Magistrates Cape Provinces. RSA
Training Workshops • Between Oct. 07
& January
• Decentralized Excel 2008: In Gauteng
& the 218 159 59
Training Workshops for Limpopo Provinces, RSA 28 11 17
Prosecutors • Between July
& October 2007:
• Trial Management for Pretoria, RSA
Prosecutors Training • Between July
& September 779 291 488
Workshops 2006: Gauteng, Northern Cape,
• Orientations to Re Aga Limpopo
& Western Cape
Boswa • Between March
& September
• Training Workshops for 06: Pretoria, RSA
Prosecutors Dealing with • Between June
& September
Gender-based Violence 2006: In Durban, Cape Town,
• Decentralized Training Limpopo, Mid-rand
& Kimberley,
Workshops for the RSA
Implementation of the ·12-13 October 06
Children's Bill
• Prevention of Illegal
Evictions • Between March 2006 and Training
Workshop October 2007: Through-out
• Decentralized Leadership South Africa's Provinces
Trainin Worksho s
5. Trainin Pro rams
• Tutor Training Project 261 184 77
• Magistrates 112 32 80
• Prosecutors 34 14 20
• Magistrates Mentoring
2 Program 1 1
• Trainin Jud e Trainers 24 7 17
5-2
........
DPK",".I'I·'H
APPENDIX 6
RE AGA BOSWA TRAININGS
APPENDICES
"·.-.n,.,,.tl,./,! DIK
RE AGA BOSWA TRAININGS
RE AGA BOSWA TRAININGS
ries and T os of Offerin s
Induction/Orientation Pro ram
Workshops:
• Dismissals 35 48 83
• Logistics 4 4 8
• Mi ration of ActivitiesIProcesseslServices 13 10 23
On-the-Job Training Programs [OJTPs]:
• Clerks of the Criminal Court 46 30 76
• Clerks of the Civil Court 46 30 76
• Office Managers 27 30 57
• Family Court Matters 12 68 80 38 42 80
• Financial Services 16 8 24
• Procurement Services 42 46 88
• Auxilia Services [ndudin Re ist
Other Specific Skills Training Programs:
• Processes Mapping [HR, Procurement, Auxiliary, 4 10 14
Residual, etc.) Training
• Change Management Training 53 36 89
• Habits [Training the Trainer] Training 48 72 120
• The Habits [Board Game] Training Program 33' 420 751 8 20 28
• Computer Literacy/Software Languages Training:
• [Levell: Computer Training Course]
• [level II: Intermediate Computer Training Course]
Data Capturing 2 2
Visio 4 10 14
Mind Map 1 3 4
Microsoft Projects 5 13 18
• Valuing Diversity Training 7 19 26
• Customer orientation Training 12 17 29
• Voice of the Customer Training/Survey 5 13 18
• Service Excellence Training 4 17 21
• Records (including Electronic] and Information 1 2 3 1 1 Management 8 13 21
• Registry Management and Archiving 15 25 40
• StrategiclBusiness Planning 4 14 18
• Performance Management 36 85 121
• Training on Stress Management and Career Burn-out 1 1
• Successful Supervisory [Junior Management] Training 8 6 14
• Procurement on BEE
• Court Managers [including Delegations and HR
Processes] Training '2 28 40
• Leadershi Foundation Trainin
Totals 1,329 1.685 3,014
6-1
IFK
<.:<>n,. .. ltl ••J.,I.
RE AGA BOSWA TRAININGS
T.Jble Trammg Offenngs
1. Clerks of the Criminal 2. Clerks of the Civil 3. Office Managers 4. Family Court Court Court Matters
• Warrants of Arrests J1 • Rule 51 and Appeals · Flags ·Maintenance
• J8, J50, J56, SAPS' 69 • Taxations ·Sheriffs ·Estates
• Closure-Court Books • Summonses • Organization & Control ·Domestic Violence
• Charge Sheet • Sections 57 & 58 • Office & District • Archives
Management Judgments Administration • Keeping of
• Summonses • Default Judgments • Justice of the Peace Statistics
• Subpoenas • Civil Processes • Commissioners of Oath • Children"s Coun
• Process Control • Civil case • Archives • Small Claims'
Document Management • Appraisers Court
• Appeals and Reviews • Archives • Advertisements • Inquests
• Admissions of Guilt
7. Auxiliary SelVices & 5. Finance ·Keeping of Statistics Reaistrv 8. Court Managers
• Management and
• Exhibits
• Reformed Schools • Archives • leadership and Processes
• Correctional • Publications Court
• Debt Collection [Ex- Supervision • Postal Matters Management Employees] ·Mental Observation • Correspondence ·Human resources
• Accounts Payable ·Rehabilitation • Keeping of Statistics Management
• Salary Administration ·Periodic Imprisonment ·Fundamentals of
• Subsistence and Travel ·Suspended Sentence case Management
• Perform General ·Requisitioning • Court AccountinQ Prisoners Management
6. Procurement ·Compensation Fines • Facilities &
·Fines & Fines Securities
• Purchase E-Class Deferred Management
• Purchase A-Class ·Bail including • Court Finance
• Assets Control Forfeitures Management
• Stationery and Forms ·Measuring
• Office Accommodation Performance
• Archives Management
• Keeping of Statistics
6-2
DPK '-'-'!..!.!U' I. t nB
APPENDIX 7
APPENDICES
EVALUATION OF THE CJSP DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT
CONDUCTED BY MATLOLElMOKGABO JV
IFK
.·u,,,... ltl ••g
EVALUATION OF THE
MATlOlEIMOKGABO ASSESSMENT
EVALUATION OF THE C.lSP DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT
CONDUCTED BY MATLOLElMOKGABO .IV
The document management assessment carried out by MalloleIMokgabo JV reflects a work of
significant detailed analysis and thought, but uhimate suffers from the fact that me objectives afme
assessment are not clear, the evaluation was conducted by persons clearly without a knowledge of
court operations or international best practices in OMS, and the recommendations are DOl full
detailed in tenns of cost and the realities of whether it is feasible 10 implement them given cost and
other considerations.
Stated variously lhroughout the OM-A. documents, the objectives seem to be (in the opinion ofthis
evaluator):
• Move lite justice system toward e·govemment goals to the extent possible
• Develop highly sophisticated security provisions for the movement of both people and
documents
• Create a paperless work environment in bolh court and lawyer offices
• Ensure integrity of court documenlS
The work does not present alternatives to the highly sophisticated, state.-of-the·artsolution·set that is
presented (but not currently in full operation in any judicial system to the knowledge of
MatloleIMokgabo JV or this evaluator). Nor does the study consider in detail the costs of this
solution·set relative to other solutions that might be considered, especially given that the long-term
goal will be to move from a pilot state to a nationwide application in most, if not all, courts.
The solution·set is totally technology driven, i.e., it provides for technological solutions to almost
every action taken in the courts. For example, "Magistrates will now be required to update a charge
sheet electronically. The interface provided will be such that minimal amount of typing is required
and most of the actions will be through a touch screen process," (Consolidated Analysis, p. 14). This
solution·set does not take into account either the current skill-set of magistrates relative to the use of
automation, which is low, nor the willingness to embrace modern technologies such as those
proposed.
Allhough the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002 encourages the use of e￾government, court processes are closely governed by codes and regulations, especially regarding
documenlS such as appropriate certificates, need for originals, etc. The DMA does not analyze the
feasibility ofthe proposed solution-wbich one suspects will not relieve the courts in all instances of
maintaining bard copy, original documents in the case file-relative to the requirements ofthe codes.
The Executive Summary
The Document Management System (DMS) Project by the Department: Justice and Constitutional
Development ChiefDirector ofCourt Perfonnance states: ..that a detailed costing of a complete
turnkey solution was a part of the terms ofreference" (p.2). We have not seen such as detailed
costing in the materials delivered to USAID. There is no costing of the solution·setso that critical
variables of cost relative to benefilS can be derived, and are very hard to determine. The true cost
elements that need to be considered are the following:
Development and InstaUation
• Reengineering ofprocesses
• Hardware required
7-\
.·n. IFK,,,,. I II I I .""
• Software development
• Communications
• Infrastructure remodeling
• Personnel
Steady State
• Additional personnel to operate the system
• Maintenance of equipment
• Communication
• Upgrading of equipment
EVALUATION OF THE
MATLOLEJMOKGABO ASSESSMENT
Solution-Set
The proposed solution-set ofthe audit is based on the idea of creating a virtual counhouse and law
office environment:
The centerpiece ofthe virtual courthouse and the virtual law office is the eleclfoDic case file
(ECF). An ECF is the compilation in electronic fannal of all relevant materials for the
magistrate to decide a dispute or a lawyer to represent a client. In order for a magislrate and a
lawyer (0 achieve lime and space efficiencies, they bOlh must create an electronic case file.
Common sense would instruct mat the magistrate and tbe lawyer should jointly participate in
the development of the ECF because ofthe interdependent nature oftheir work. Many ofthe
elements of the lawyers ECF and the magistrates ECF are similar if not the same.
Marlole/Mokgabo JV, Document Management Assessment Defiverables: Final Solution
Analysis. p. 13.
The audit goes beyond a solution for jusl documents and defines a proposed method for controlling
the movement of people in lbe courthouse:
To effectively control the human element, it is important to establish a method. In this
particular case the use of a Radio Frequency fdentification (RFID) card is recommended.
With sufficient RFID readers placed in strategic locations, coun management will also be in
a position to plot the movement of people throughout the courthouse. Marlole/Mokgabo JV.
Document Management Assessment Defiverables: Final Solution Analysis. p. 300.
The analysis does point out several fundamental issues that would need to be addressed before a
successful document management solution should be undertaken. Quoting from lhe Johannesburg
Audit, these include:
I. "98 percent ofthose surveyed indicated that they had not received any training between 2004
and 2006" (p.19).
2. "Workflow is not documented at all" (p. 23).
3. " 0 training material to assist knowledge workers in understanding processes and (0 guide
them in performing the necessary activities" (p. 24).
4. "Many cases are postponed due to a lack ofsufficient information on the charge sheets"(p.
24).
S. "Very little thought has been given to the physical security aspects of access to files" (p. 24).
7-2
DPK.
..........."I'I·'M
EVALUATION OF THE
MATLOlEIMOKGABO ASSESSMENT
6. "Virtually DO security with regards to physical access to the archived files" (p. 24).
7. "There are 34 workstations in the criminal section" (p. 25). "The workstations are not being
used" (p. 26).
Workflow Control Station
Evidently, the current paper·based system needs to be replaced with a DMS or content management
system. 'Content management' has become an all-encompassing buzzword for document
management, infonnatioD management, and knowledge management-a wide variety of functions.
Without a workflow conuel station to manage and route business processes and (0 direct the
processes from one skilled worker to another to allow pre-described tasks to be perfonned, the DMS
will not fulfill needs within the coun environment. "Moreover, simply placing a PC workstation,
with a variety ofsoftware applications to be used as and when required, is also not an option" (p. 33).
Problem Matrix
The problem matrix described serves to identify problems but relies on a subjective ranking system
to rate the severity of problems, and some identified problems would not be addressed by the virtual
file system, e.g., lawyers and parties getting access to the file room.
The way forward should include defining elements ofthe integrated case flow management system,
such as:
1. Upgrade and develop the ICMS·based on e-scheduler and enhancements, i.e., South Africa
Integrated Case Management System
2. Conduct a re-engineering of current court processes, inefficiencies, and security ofdocuments
(case files)
3. Develop a DMS that is based on analysis, and define which documents should be digitized,
should be integrated into the e-scheduler and JAMIS data management system, and should be
included in annual and periodic statistical reports
4. Continue provincial and district case flow management forums and meetings to adopt strategies
to improve productivity and reduce delay (started under the Re Aga Boswa and the IFCMS
programs)
5. Conduct needed training to upgrade the skill levels ofstaffto absorb new technologies and
systems once introduced
6. Address institutional capacity to absorb new systems through training
1. Improve data analysis and reporting for better court management
Resources Required to Implement Court Assessment Findings In Each Court
The document presented by MatlolelMokgabo JV, on describing the status ofthe OMS, indicates that
solution implementation should include two phases: I) business process reengineering and
development; and 2) implementation of the 'final solution analysis,' which calls for creating a vinual
courthouse and law offices through an electronic case file, i.e., a paperless court and law office
environment 12 We cannot endorse this solution for the South African courts without a more
1l "The centrepiece ofthe vinual courthouse and the vinuallaw office is the electronic case file (ECF); An ECF is
the compilation in electronic format of all relevanl materials for the magistrate to decide a dispute or a lawyer to
represent a diml. In order for a magistrate and a lawyer to achieve rime and space efficiencies, they both musl
create an electronic file. Common sense would inslrUCi that the magistrate and the lawyer should jointly
7-)
EVALUATION OF THE
MAnOLElNOKGABO ASSESSMENT
significant analysis ofthe costs and benefits involved, and do not support using USAID-funding for
this purpose given both the limited timeframe that USAID funds will be available and the magnitude
ofthis endeavor. We do not believe that. even if desirable. this solution-set could be developed
within the remaining timeframe ofthe project, let alone conduct the necessary training of personnel,
conversion offiles, or back scanning. This is a high-risk solution mat requires significant investment
and could remain a one-off type ofsolution that is not transferable to other courts and prosecutors
offices.
participate in the development oflhe EeF because ofthe interdependent nature oftheir wont. Matlole/Mokgabo lV.
Document Management Assessment Deliverables-Final Solution Analysis. p.14.
7-4
DPK
<""",s•• 'tl"H
APPENDIX 8
APPENDICES
ELECTRDNIC DDCUMENT ARCHIVE SYSTEM GENERAL SPECIFICATIDNS
DPK ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT ARCHIVE SYSTEM GENERAL
SPECIFICATIONS
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT ARCHIVE SYSTEM GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS
The following specifications for an eiec(Tonic document archiving system, known in South Africa as
a OMS system, was issued by DPKlJordan as a part of our program with the Jordanian Ministry of
Justice to carry out a second phase of creating an Integrated Case Management System. The first
phase included both automating the courts and introducing a state ofthe art case management system
(eMS). The OMS will be built to integrate with and be compatible with eMS systems. These terms
ofreference outline basic system specifications that can be helpful in guiding the development of the
South African OMS.
Table Sample OMS Speclf,catlons
Item Specification •
General
1 The system must be provided with full user manuals in all languages required under
contract.
2 The system must include an API/development tool kit to allow for the integration of the
svstem with other line of business aoolications.
3 The Vendor must have access/own the source code of the s stem.
• The vendor must have at least 5 years in the EDA field and at leas! 3 customers from the
aovemment sector
5 The svstem must intearate with a workflow svstem.
6 The svstem must have seoarate interfaces for the administrators and the end users.
7 Licensina must be based on concurrent users
6 The server aoolication can be installed on multi ohvsical servers on anv locations.
Web Capabilities
9 Internet/Intranet readv. No modifications needed to be accessible from the Internet/Intranet.
10 Search & retrieval operation to be supported via the web browser as well as the standard
client.
11 Documents disolaved throuoh web browsers will be converted to PDF format durino retrieval.
12 The system must have the document handling features available in the user client
application available through the web browser. (Update document indexes; upload images
and MS office
13 System administrator must be able to generate pre-defined reports from the web browsers
(i.e., Users Information and privileges, Productivity Summary, Documents Distribution and
etct
,. The system must enable the administrator to create custom reports using technology relative
to the selected EBMS
Database
15 The svslem must sunnort Oracle, MY SOL and/or MS Sal Server as database enaines.
16 EDMS Database Design and Definition 10 be stored in the RDBMS can be administrated
from EDMS administration session.
17 EDMS to communicate nativelv or throuah DoSe connectivitv with the Database Server.
8-1
DPK
<""'","ulllnK
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT ARCHIVE
SYSTEM GENERAL
SPECIFICATIONS
T<lble Sample OMS SpecIfications
Item Specification #
18 Database must be controlled bv the EDMS Comnnnents
User Interface
19 The system viewer must be fully bilingual (Arabic/English) in the entire EDMS end-user
interfaces, Including trees, toolbars, menus, and system messages. Switching from Arabic to
English mode and vise versa should be done without the need for the user 10 fe-login to the
system.
20 The user interface must be compliant with the Windows XP and Vista environments and their
standards.
21 Simals users interface (Microsoft Standard) for all modules
22 Users must be able to navigate the document repositories in a simple graphical manner,
oreferable similar 10 windows explorer.
23 The Ofooosed viewer must suooort viewino multiole documents at the same time.
24 The system must have separate modules for administration and reporting and other for
document scannino and indexino and viewino.
C. turin
25 The svstem must be able to use either hioh volume or desktoo scanners.
26 The system must support Black and White, gray scale, and colored images having any
dimensions.
27 The functionalitv of the scannino ooeration must be intearated as oart of the EDA svstem.
28 The system must support TWAIN and ISIS scanninQ technolOClies.
29 The system must support Duplex, simplex and batch, single image scanning from the same
interface.
30 Using the EDA, the user must be able to scan, index, search and view from the same
interface without the need to scan from the scanner native interface.
31 The svstem must have scannino orofile to enable user to chanoe scanner settinos easilv.
32 The system must be able 10 link a scanner profile with certain document type of name, so
that when the user scans a specific document the system will automatically choose the
aoorooriate scanner orofile.
33 The system must be OLE compliant: all OLE objects such as WORD files, EXCEL sheets
shall be viewed from within the system without the need to start the corresponding
aoolication. The oolion to view the document in Iheir nalive viewer should be available.
34 The system must have the ability to include several data object types in a single document
and to be viewed simultaneouslv usina the same viewer.
Indexin
35 The system must support basic document properties, which are minimum document indexing
fields, such as the document name, creator name, creation date.
36 The sYstem must include Out-of-the-box support for IndexinQ capabilities.
37 The system must support user-defined index fields. These fields will be used in indexing
different documents tYpes
8-2
IFK
ro,.s•• I'lng
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT ARCHIVE
SYSTEM GENERAL
SPECIFICATIONS
Table Sample DMS Specifications
110m Specifieatton #
38 The system must have a user-defined indexing utility that will allow the system administrator
to maintain and create solutions.
39 The must support an easy GUI design feature thai will allow the system administrator
to modi and chance the stl'lJeture and shaDe of the indexina fields.
40 The system must support, Free Text, Numeric, Date, Code Files, and auto increment fields
as field NOes.
41 The svslem must 5UOOOrt mandatorv and aationsl fields.
42 The system must have the oolion to define some user·defined index fields as uniaue-index.
43 All user-defined indexino fields must be searchable.
44 The system must support the use of document categories for additional classification of
documents
45 The svstem must suooort the indexino usino kevwords.
46 The system must support the use of user pre-defined document sets (Document Templates)
to allow the user to easily add multiple documents.
47 The svstem must have the abiHtv to acceot Enalish and Arabic document identifiers.
Ima e Enablina
4B The system must provide an image-enabling feature. This feature will allow the system to
add document management features to any database application without the need for the
source code of the aoolications.
49 The system must be able to image enable Windows Applications and other legacy
applications runninq throuqh terminal emulators or thouqh a web browser.
50 The system must allow the user to search in the EOA database and images using the keys
of image enabling, without the need to access the original database application, from the
native EDA interface.
51 The svstem must have the abilitv to limit the user's access.
Search and Retrieval
52 All user-defined indexina fields must be searchable fields.
53 The system must allow the user to search the entire database for a certain document (Global
Search)
54 The svstem must have the abilitv of searchina usina the document cateaories.
55 The system must have the ability to store user·queries so that the user will be able to search
easilv for certain documents.
56 The system must allow the administrator to modify. update or delete the user query from
within the system.
57 The svstem must suooort (AND) and fQR\ ooeration is search.
58 The system must support locking (check in/check out) where a user can lock a document to
prevent other users from performinq any modifications to it, while alJowinq them to view it.
59 The svstem must allow simultaneous viewino of the same document bv manv users in the
8-3
DPK
C" .... " ...ltl,.g
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT ARCHIVE
SYSTEM GENERAL..
SPECIFICATIONS
Table Sample OMS SpecIficatIons
Item Specification #
5 stem.
60 The system must have a recycle bin. This recycle bin will contain all the deleted documents
by the users. The deleted document will remain in the recycle bin until the system
administrator purQes them or restores them.
Ima e ProcessinQ
61 The system must have imaging functions to include zoom in, zoom out, rotate, flip, image
oannina, and maanifier.
62 The system must have the image enhancement functions like scale-to gray, despeckJe,
deskew. croooina, etc.
63 The system must support scanners that have image enhancement functions that come with
the scanner hardware specifications.
64 The system must have annotation capabilities including rectangle, blackouts, lines, stamps
and free hand annotations and User Sionatures.
65 Users must be able to rearrange pages of the documents (drag and drop) and insert and
remove oaoes, accordina to their securitv orofiles.
66 User must be able to quickly preview document pages before opening the document for
actual work, usina thumbnails.
67 Users must be able to put pre-defined stamps as annotation overlays. Users should be able
to define new stamps as well.
68 The system must be able to orint the document from within the main system interface.
69 The user can orint the document with or without the associated annotations.
70 The images in the system must have one of the standard image formats utilizing standard
comoression that can be ooened bv international viewers.
71 The system must store the images using standard TIFF format. The system must use Group
4 compression for black and while documents and must use JPEG compression for colored
images. Switching between compression criteria must be automatic according to the image
tvoe.
72 The system must expose a set of API that can enable other application to use the imaging
functionalitv of the system usina standard oroarammina lanouaoes.
User Securi
73 The system must allow the administrator to define users and user groups and their security
profiles in a GUI interface.
74 The user security profile includes password, role and permissions on all the objects in the
svstem.
75 The system must have full Configurable user access to aU filing structure levels
(documenUfolder/drawer, etc.), document types, and Queues.
76 The must be able user on every object in the storage tree. Right will
include view, add, delete, u ate, CODY...etc
77 Users must be grouped on seculity basis, meaning that all the users in one group must have
the same securTtv oermissions.
8-4
DPK
cu. ,suIting
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT ARCHIVE
SYSTEM GENERAL
SPECIFICATIONS
Table Sample OMS Speclflcatlons
Item Specification #
78 The system must support unified login feature, utilizing he user names of the AD Windows
Domain, without the need to define users manuallv.
79 The system must support security levels. Security levels are applied to user and documents,
where the user will be able to view the documents in his securltV level or at lower levels.
80 The system must have the ability 10 activate and deactivate a user account Without the need
re-define his security profile.
System Administration and
81 The system must have the ability to record all modifications to system objects using a
transaction 100.
82 Administrator should be able 10 view the transaction log using classification filters to easily
locate actions.
83 The system must have the ability to show the system administrator the status of all the
documents in the system.
84 This transaction 100 can be enabled or disabled accordino to administrator decision.
85 The system must have a tool to generate system reports. The reports include users and their
orivileoes. data objects and other system vital statistics.
86 System Administration must be bundled in a single module, where the system administrator
can control the system from one interface.
87 The system must have different user interlaces for the administrator and the end user.
Faxin and Email
88 The system must allow the user to receive and send email messages utilizing Microsoft
Exchanae from within the document manaaement system interface.
89 The system must have the optional ability to send and receive documents as a FAX directly
and automaticallv archive it to the svstem.
OCR
90 The system must have built-in Enalish OCR enaine.
91 The s stem must be able 10 aenerate text content from the scanned documents.
92 The system must be able to generale OCR results in RTF. HTML, Word Perlect or plain text
formats
93 The system must have the ability to OCR certain zones in the image document rather than
the entire document.
94 Inteoration options must be available to intearate other OCR enoines with the system.
Document Route (Collaborative Workflow)
95 The system must have an internal routing engine that facilitate sending documents between
EDA users in a collaborative mode 13td oart inteeration is not acceotablel.
96 The user should be able Ie send documents to anv number of users in two wavs:
97 Send the document as a COpy to each recipients
98 Send the document in sequence (Document Route style) and enforce the first recipient to
send it to the next recipient
8-5
DPK
•U'.ll'• '..!.!..!nI-l;.
ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT ARCHIVE
SYSTEM GENERAl
SPECIFICATIONS
T.:lble S.unple OMS Specifications
Item Specification #
99 The sender should be able to assiQn a deadline date on the messaqe
100 The system administrator must be
3
to define route temPI::es to enable users to send
documents in ore-confiaured route unlimited route lemolales
101 The sender must be able 10 view the document route history for a certain document (send
date and time, the subject, recipient's action on the message like read, unread, deleted
unread, deleted after read, etc
102 The system must log all transactions for all documents thai have been routed using the
system.
103 The sYstem should notify users when a new document arrives.
104 Users should be able to search on [nbox and Outbox for a specific document.
105 Users should be able to track the status of each document from within the user interface
106 The system should allow users to forward any received document to other users and keep
trackina for the route historv.
Stora e
107 The system must have the ability to classify and electronically organize documents in folders
and cabinets and other storace units.
108 The system must have a tree like storage hierarchical structure to allow the user to classify
and oroanize his documents.
109 The system must have the ability to store document in several locations to create multiple
document renositories.
110 The proposed solution must support storing images on RAID storage, NAS and SAN
storage.
External Viewer CD Viewer)
111 The system must have an external stand alone CD Viewer module with ability to export
subset of the svstem documents in PDF format
112 The CD Viewer must be able 10 view the documents directlv from the CD (Not from the PC).
113 The CD Viewer must be able to encrvot the exoorted files.
114 The loain to CD Viewer must be orotected bv a user name and oassword.
115 The CD viewer must provide search capability (document properties, indexes, keywords,
catenaries. and etc. \.
8-6
DPK
,"n••sulll·'H
APPENDIX 9
APPENDICES
SUMMARY OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND COMMUNITY LEADERS REACHED
DPK
co.!-s••III••g
SUMMARY OF SCHOOL CHILDREN
AND COMMUNITY LEADERS
REACHED
SUMMARY OF SCHOOL CHILDREN AND COMMUNITY LEADERS REACHED
Table Summary of School ChIldren Reached
Actual Demographics of Reported No. Provinces Set Targets Beneficiaries Reach Bovs Girts Cas..
1 Free State 32,400 44,962 22,296 22,686 7
2 Mpumalanga 32.400 35,140 17,916 17.224 40
3 Gauteng 32.400 41,046 17,991 23,055 36
4 Limpopo 32,400 32,583 15.722 16,861 16
5 North West 32.400 26,688 12,615 14,073 20
6 Northern Cape 32,400 33,680 15.866 17,814 46
7 Eastern Cape 32,400 36.473 17,779 18,568 60
8 Western Cape 32,400 30,024 14.373 15,651 27
9 Kwa Zulu Natal 32,400 44,205 20,102 24,103 21
Total 291,600 325,446 154,660 170,035 252
Table Summary of Community Leaders Reached
Demographics of Beneficiaries
No. Are.. Set Targets Actual Reach Males Females
1 Upington 100 85 28 57
2 Bloemfontein 100 98 36 62
3 Parrow 100 80 23 57
4 Odi 100 135 36 99
5 George 100 59 17 42
6 Nelspruit 100 84 34 50
Totals 600 541 174 367
Table fllsa Thule In Brief
Beneficiaries
Provinces No. of Schools Learners Educators ParentsfSGBs
Gauteng 90 53,308 350 279
Free State 6 57,699 1,155 45
Kwa Zulu 6 25,395 818 Natal -
Totals 102 136,402 2,323 324
9-1
DPK
('OI.S..III"g
APPENDIX 10
GRANTEE ACTIVITIES
APPENDICES
GRANTEE ACTIVITIES
GRANTEE ACTlVrTlES
Table NGO Grantee ActivitIes
Dates/funding Result (based on Grantee Activity °bi8Ctive information amount- available)
Mosaic (Western Court·based Access to justice; 1/02-9/04 .. 64,407 DV victims
Cape) support program victim $209,144 assisted to obtain
to assist victims of empowerment; protection orders
domestic violence court efficiency; from 2002-04.
to apply for prevention of
protection orders crime and violence Expanded
services from
eight to ele....en
courts; services
extended to 5
days per week.
Childline (Kwa Comprehensive, Access to justice; 4/02-9/04 •• Child witness
Zulu Natal) holistic services to victim $96.695 support offices
child victims of empowerment; established in five
sexual violence more effective courts; witness
and abuse, criminal justice preparation
including system program
counseling, child developed and
witness piloted; 2,775
preparation and children prepared
court support to testify in 2003·
04.
Thohoyandou Comprehensi....e Access to justice; 5102-9/04 10102-3103235
Victim support services .... ictim $225.946 rape victims and
Empowerment to victims of rape empowerment 362 victims of
Program and domestic more effecti....e domestic violence
(Limpopo) violence, including criminal justice assisted;
counseling,court system
support, PEP and "Break the
home visits; Silence" outreach
lobbying, campaign reached
advocacy and 76,000 members
monitoring of gov't of rural
services on behalf communities
of victims of GBV;
community
outreach
10-1
GRANTEE ACTIVITIES
Table NGO Grantee ActIvItIes
DatesJfundlng Result (based on Grantee Activity Objective Infonnation amount- aVailable'-
Cape Town Child "Isolabantwana" Prevention of 4/02-4/03 10/02-3103 448
Welfare (Western Eye on the Child crime and violence abused or "at risk￾Cape) program; children assisted;
community-based outreachlawarene
child abuse ss provided to
prevention, 3,077 members of
intervention and community
mitigation project;
case intervention
and management;
community
outreach
Centre for Paralegal advice Access 10 justice; 4/02-4/04 9/02-3/03 legal
Criminal Justice and court support victim S15O,214 advice/assistance
(Kwa Zulu Natal) for women and empowerment provided in 3900
children at 12 cases (including
victim support 1780 cases of
centers based at GBVor child
rural magistrates abuse)
courts and police
stations;
legal rights
workshops and
community
outreach
10-2
DPK
....lll.,H.
GRANTEE ACTIVITIES
Table NGO Grantee ActivIties
Dates/funding Result (based on Grantee Activity Objective amQunt- available
Greater Nelspruit Comprehensive access to justice; 7/03-9/04 Est. 350 rape
Rape Intervention support services victim $160,888 victims assisted
Project (GRIP) to victims of rape empowerment; during project
(Mpumalanga) and sexual assault more effective period
including criminal Justice
counseling, court system Care rooms
support, PEP and established at 3
home visits; 24- additional
hour care rooms hospitals
at seven rural
hospitals; Witness support
lobbying, rooms established
advocacy and at 2 additional
monitoring of courts; witness
government preparation and
services on behalf court
of victims of GBV; monitoring/support
training and provided at 5
outreach courts
fntersectoral
training provided
to police, health
providers and
prosecutors
Centre for Social Program to reduce Prevention of 7/03-9/04 20 schools
Legal Studies and respond to crime and $155,747 assisted to
(Kwa Zulu Natali sexual abuse and violence: access develop anti·
Eastern Cape) harassment in to justice abuse
schools policies/codes of
conduct and 10
develop and
implement
violence
prevention
strategies;
approx.30,OOO
learners and
teachers educated
onGBV
10-3
....
IFK
QP·...I.ln,g
GRANTEE ACTMTIES
Table NGO Grantee ActIvIties
OatesJfunding Result (based on Grantee Activity Objective information amount" available\
Centre for the -Zivuse- Youth Prevention of 7103-9/04 Curriculum
Study of VIOlence Crime Prevention crime and violence developed and
and Reconciliation Program, pilot tested; 35
(CSVR) (Gauteng) implemented by youth leaders
peer leaders at trained to
schools; focused implement
on teaching life progcam
skills,
trauma/anger
management, and
conflict resolution
techniques.
•• Nare Ihar organizations marked with this symbol receil'ed additiona/fundingfrom USAID aftu 1004 through rhe
Ch'iI Society Strengzhen;ng Projttt administered by PACT/IDAS.-4. Derailron rhisfullding .....ere nOl avoilable/or lhe
CJSP assessment.
···Infomfation dral\nfrom Ruleo/Law PM?file. data quality back lip data for 2004 report.
Table Research and Develo ment Grantees
Resutt (based on
Grantee Activity Objective OateslFunding information
available
Institute for Criminal Justice More effective and Inot available) Data collected,
Security Studies Monitor accessible analyzed and
(Gauteng) criminal justice disseminated;
system website
established; in￾depth research
monographs
prepared and
workshops
conducted on
range of relevant
CJ issues
10-4
DPK
<·Clo.'l,..... III.·.R
GRANTEE ACTIVITIES
Table Research and Develo ment Grantees
Result (based on
Grantee Activity Objective DatesIFundlng information
available
Child Witness Development and More effective and 6/02-3104 Standardized
Project (Vista Piloting of accessible 5242,480 preparation
University) standardized child criminal justice program
witness system researched and
preparation developed;
program Training modules,
information
materials and "tool
kitsM for children,
leens, and
parents/care￾givers developed
and piloted at
schools and
Chitdline centers
for abused
children.
Say Stop Research on Violence and 7/03-9/04 Research
Consortium intelVenlions for crime prevention 5110,631 completed and
(Western Cape) repeat and serious disseminated;
youth sex Prevention manual
offenders; developed;
development and probation officers
piloting of sexual trained to
offenses implement
prevention prevention
program (adapted program in 9
from SAY STOP provinces
diversion program)
Community Law Research on best More effective and [not available] Resource Manual
Centre (Unit of practices in accessible developed and
Western Cape) juvenile justice criminal justice disseminated
and diversion in system; violence
Africa; and crime
development of prevention
Juvenile Justice
Resource Manual
for relevant role
players
10-5
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 11
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF ANTI-GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE NGOS
DPK
..o ••st.lling
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF
ANTI-GENDER·BASEO VIOLENCE
NGOS
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF ANTI·GENDER·BASED VIOLENCE NGOS
USAID South Africa plans to issue a number ofsub-grants lO NOOs combating gender-based
violence (OSY) under both the CISP and Women's Justice Empowerment Initiative (WJEI). Under
the WJEI, these will include "prevention" grants through the USAID office in Washington, as well as
sub-grants to support direct services to victims of GBV through the WlEI GMTA contract (currently
in the tendering process). Although not limited to organizations working directly with Thuthuzela
Care Centres, a major goal of the planned grant program under the WJEI is to support organizations
working in conjunction with either the Tees or sexual offenses courts or in areas where new Tees
are planned, in order to improve or provide complementary services to vlCtims ofOBV. Under the
CJSP, USAlD is also planning to issue an APS-independent of the WJEI contract-to suppOrt
additional NODs working to combat violence against women and children (and pOlentially in other
areas that would support the objectives and activities ofthe CJSP).
In connection with the CJSP Rapid Assessment, DPK was asked to assess the capacity of South
African NGOs working in the GBV or "victim empowerment" sector "to manage USAlD funds and
to implement activities." The terms ofreference included the following specific questions:
I) What is the effectiveness of USO·supported NGOs and other selected non-USG-supported NGOs
currently providing support to victims of GBV and abuse, particularly those currently funded
under the USAID Economic Support Fund (ESF) and that, based on USAID's experience in
working with them, have a good track record in activlties related to GBV and abuse?
2) Since activities will be implemented in coordination with the 001 and CD, what is the
relationship between these NGOs and DOJ and CD?
3) What can be done to strengthen these NGOs capacity to manage and implement activities?
4) What lessons can be learned from ami-GBV NOOs previously supported by USAlD?
Effectiveness of NGOs in the GBV Sector
As set forth in the background section ofthis report, from 2002-2007, USAID supported a number of
NOOs working in the area of GBV, originally under the CJSP program with Creative Associates
(CREA), and subsequently through its Civil Society Strengthening Program. Although the number of
grantees has varied over the years depending on funding, the main USAlD partners in the area of
direct services to victims (or ''victim empowerment") have been Thohoyandou Victim
Empowerment Program (Limpopo), Childline (Kwa Zulu Nata!), and Mosaic (Western Cape). Each
ofthese NOOs received grants from 2002-2004 under CJSP (with DA funds), and then received
additional gram support under the CSSP from about 2006-2007 (reportedly with ESF funds). None
are current USAID grant recipients. In addition to these three NODs, USAIO has also supported
GRIP (MpumaJanga), Cape Town Child Welfare (Western Cape), and the Center for Criminal Justice
(Kwa Zulu Natal)-all of which provide direct services to victims as well as outreach and training￾as well as the Center for Social Legal Studies (Kwa Zulu NataUEastem Cape), which focuses on
legal rights education in schools and communities. u
Although the assessment learn did not have access to all reports submitted by these organizations to
USAID over the years, based on the information available from documents and the personal
experiences of USAID activlty managers, as well as the reputation of the organizations within the
NGO community, the team concluded that USAID's main NCO partners in CBV programming
(Thohoyandou, Childline. and Mosaic) are very effective and weU·run NGOs. Although all three
11 USAID has also supported NGOs providing diversion programs and other services to juvenile offenders. As these
are not related to GBV, they are not discussed in detail in this section ofthe report.
11-1
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF
ANn.GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE
NGOS
continue to experience challenges, they have demonstrated capacity to implement high-quality
services to victims of violence; to expand and replicate their programs in additional areas; to navigate
the challenges ofinter-sectoral service delivery; and to raise, manage, and account for donor funds.
AU three organizations are currently mentoring and training smaller community-based organizations
to raise capacity in under-served areas, and are regularly called on by government to train public
employees (e.g., police, nurses, social workers, coun clerks) in aspects of GBY and related service
delivery. Alllhree organizations are run by highly competent directors complemented by motivated,
well-trained, and well-supervised staff; appear to provide services in a very cost-effective manner;
and are well respected in the field.
Thohoyandou: TYEP was established in 2000 and has grown steadily over the past 7 years. It
currently runs two hospital-based crisis centers and shelters for victims of rape and domestic
violence, where it provides a wide-range ofsupport services including HIY counseling, PEP
adherence support and follow-up, home visits, and psycho-social counseling. TYEP also runs an
"access to justice" program from its central office which provides infonnation and support to victims
in conjunction with the criminal justice process, and monitors the investigation and prosecution of
any court case. Other program activities include: monitoring the delivery of health services provided
to victims, training other stakeholders (including nurses, police), conducting outreach and awareness
campaigns in rural communities, manning GBV "help desks" in rural areas, lobbying and advocacy,
and providing support and mentoring to local CBOs working on a range ofsocial issues.
Thohoyandou currently operates only in the Thohoyandou area in the Limpopo province. It has care
centers at one regional and one district hospital, and also maintains an office and victim support room
at the magistrates/sexual offenses coun. There is no TCC in Thohoyandou at present, although plans
are in place to establish one with USAlD funding. The implications ofthis roll-out for the TYEP are
not yet clear.
Childline: Childline is one ofthe few victim empowerment NGDs that operates nationally. It is also
one of only a few organizations (along with RAPCAN, Teddy Bear Clinic, and various local child
welfare organizations) that specialize in providing support and therapeutic services 10 abused
children and their caregivers. Childline currently has offices in eight provinces and is in the process
of establishing an additional office in the Northern Cape. In Kwa Zulu Natal province, Childline
currently operates 12 satellite offices in several disadvantaged communities, located at hospitals and
courts in addition to its main office in Durban. Childline is best known for its counseling hotline and
for the counseling and other support services it provides through its local centers. From 2002-2004,
USAID funding supported a broad range ofCbildline services in KZN, including therapeutic
services, forensic assessment, and preparation for court. From 2006-2007, USAJD support to
Childline has focused primarily on the developmem, piloting, and implementation of a separate coun
support program for child witnesses in five local courts. This program prepares children to testify in
court and also supports them and their caregivers through the court process. The success ofthis
program has been due in large part to the quality of the preparation program (curriculum and
training), the close supervision and monitoring of court support volunteers by Childline
professionals, and Childline's capacity to provide this service in the context of a broader range of
specialized services (such as therapy and family interventions). The KZN office ofChildtine works
closely with the Thuthuzela Care Centre at Prince Mashiyeni Hospital in Umlazi, where it provides
onsite follow-up counseling and support groups for children and caregivers 4 days per week. In the
last year, it has also begun to provide similar services 1-2 days per week at the Mahatma Gandhi
TCC in Phoenix. According to the National Director, Childline could develop its capacity to provide
services to new areas in conjunction with the planned TCC roll-out, ifsufficient and reliable sources
offunding were made available. This would include opening local offices where needed and
recruiting and training professionals,lay counselors, and volunteers.
11-2
DPK '"Uf,,.,,I. ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF ANTI-GENDER·BASEO VIOLENCE NGOS
Mosaic: Mosaic is a Cape Town-based NGO established in 1999 that focuses on domestic violence
prevention and mitigation. Although Mosaic engages in a variety of awareness, prevention, outreach
and 24-hour support services in local communities, USAID support has focused on the delivery of
Mosaic's court support program. This program assists victims of domestic violence and abuse to
apply for interim protection orders pursuant to the Domestic Violence Act. Housed within the
magistrate's couns, Mosaic guides applicants through the often complicated and confusing system of
applying for a court order, helps applicants complete necessary forms and affidavits, and provides
emotional support and referrals (aJthough this function should be provided by the court clerks, most
courts do not have the capacity to provide this function effectively). With assistance from USAID,
from 2002-2007 Mosaic expanded its services from courts in Cape Town and the surrounding
areas. The court support program is implemented by stipended volunteers under the sUpeTV1sion of
full-time Mosaic project managers. Mosaic also supports the courts by training and debriefing clerks
ofthe court to enable them to provide more efficient and sensitive services to applicants, and has
established role player coordination committees at several courts to provide forums for problem
solving and betler communication. USAJD has identified this project as one with good potential for
replication in other courts in South Africa. However, replication has been limited to date because of
Mosaic's dependence on donor funds.
The capacity of other GBV NGOs who have received funding from USAlD appears more
mixed. According to former USAID activity managers, most of the organizations supported by
USAlD (and specifically, GRIP, CCJ, and CTCW) were able to effectively implement their programs
to support victims of violence and report positive results to USAlD (other programs funded by TNL
through USAlD were less effective), although one ofthe three CJSP grantees had difficulty in the
area Qf funds management. AccQrding to the rule oflaw team leader, USAlD decided to withdraw
grant funding frQm CCJ after it failed to meet USAJD standards fQr ftnancial systems. This
apparently occurred after CCJ became an independent NGO separate frQm the University Qf Natal
(where it had previQusly been located). Apparently, USAJD did not allQw cQnditional funding or
provide any intervention or technical support to this QrganizatiQn (despite its previous track record
with USAlD) before taking this step. It also appears that GRIP's capacity tQ implement programs has
been weakened at times due to inadequate funding. During the I-year period QfUSAlD grant
funding, GRIP reported that it had to "let go" of two staff members due tQ lack of funds and to
reduce salaries Qf other staff members by 50 percent. While it cQntinued to provide (and even
expand) certain services with USAID funding, olher areas Qf its prQgram suffered and had to be cut
back.
GRIP has a very good reputatiQn in the sector and fills a critical need in an under-served area. Like
ThQhQyandou, GRIP prQvides "Qne-stQP" SUPPQrt services tQ victims ofrape in poQr, rural areas,
including access to PEP and court mQnitQring and SUPPQrt. It also conducts intersectoral training,
witness preparation, and monitQring Qf court cases. CCJ Qperates legal advice centers throughQut
rural KZN, Qfwhich the majQrity Qf cases involve WQmen and children. Cape Town Child Welfare
provides a range Qfservices to vulnerable and abused children in the Cape TQwn area, including an
innovative cQmmunity-based interventiQn prQgram previQusly suppQrted by USAJD, entitled
IsolQbantwana Qr "Eye Qn the Children." All are considered "established" NGOs wilhin the sectQr.
In conjunctiQn with the assessment, the team was able tQ interview the directQrs Qf two additional
victim empowerment/GBV organizations that have not received USAID funding. These were
selected in part because Qf their location (which cQrresponded with that Qf other stakehQlders
interviewed for the assessment) and in part becaw>e oftbeir existing relatiQnship wilh the DOJ&CD
andlor the Thutbuzela Care Centres. Both are "establisbed" NGOs wilh good reputatiQns in the GaV
sector.
11-3
IFK
consulllnJ.(
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF
ANTI·GENDER·BASED VIOLENCE
NGOS
Rape Crisis: Rape Crisis is one of me oldest GBV organizations in South Africa. It is considered a
leader both in tenns ofservice delivery (infonnatioo, containment, and trauma counseling) and
advocacy/training. It provides services primarily in the Cape Town area through a central office and
fWO grassrooTS offices in local communities. In 2000, Rape Crisis panicipated in the development of
lhe Tee pilot program at Jooste Hospital, focusing on the counseling component. Another NaG
provided counselors to cbe Tee for a while but ultimately was not able to deliver effective services
and withdrew from the program. In early 2007, Rape Crisis was approached by the NPA and asked to
provide counseling services at the Jooste Tee (for both adults and children). After nearly 6 months
of negotiating with the Department of Social Development for funds to support its services, Rape
Crisis was finally given a I-year gram (which expires al the end of March 2008). This grant enables
Rape Crisis to supply containment counselors onsite at the TCe 24 hours per day, seven days per
week, filling a critical gap in the TCC's services. Rape Crisis also takes referrals from the TCC for
more in-depth follow up counseling and support services off-site. The TCC is now asking Rape
Crisis to expand its service to include HIV pre· and post·test counseling. Under the current
arrangement, Rape Crisis provides 8 volunteer lay-counselors to the TCC (two per shift). These
counselors undergo intensive training by Rape Crisis and are fully supervised and regularly debriefed
by the Rape Crisis psychologist at the local office in Gugulethu. The volunteers receive a stipend for
each shift. According to the director, "lay counselors" can be vel)' effective in this role if they are
"properly trained, monitored, and supported," and receive "adequale compensation" for their hard
work. The director also stated that Rape Crisis has me instinuional capacity to expand its counseling
services to additional TCCs in the Western Cape, and can also train and mentor other NGOs and
CBOs to provide this service provided that sufficienl funding is made available to support the
activity.
RAPCA1"l': Like Childline, RAPCAN is a specialized NOO aimed al combating child abuse and
neglect and providing support to victims and their families. At present it only provides direct services
(counseling, family support, witness preparation) in the Western Cape, although it is involved
nationally in advocacy and policy efforts. Members of the assessment team visited tbe court support
program established and run by RAPCAN in the Wynberg Sexual Offenses Court, and also spoke
with the director of RAPCAN at their main office. According 10 the director, RAPCAJ.'l has been
providing support to child witnesses (up to age 16) at the Wynberg Court since 2000. It operates
child·friendly waiting rooms, staffed by paid "parHime staff members" where children can wait for
their cases to be heard and also receive witness preparation. According to the director, RAPCAN
"works with the children every time they come to court for consultations, hearings, etc. We liaise
with the prosecutor and case manager to ensure that the child understands the process and that the
child's best interests are protected throughout the criminal process." RAPCAN also trains and
provides "intennediaries" to assist children to testify in the Sexual Offenses Court. All coun
supporters and intermediaries receive training, supervision, and debriefing support from full·cime
RAPCAN staff members. Over the years, RAPCAN has developed and rermed its own preparation
modules, based on research conducted by the Child Witness Project, which it feels is very effective
and "developmentally appropriate" for children. RAPCAN also works in partnership with less
established NOOs and CBOs to deliver services in the GBV sector and provides "a lot of capacity
building [for smaller organizations] on the basics of program delivery." Support ranges from
technical content such as "working with traumatized victims" and "preparing child witnesses" to
building organizational capacity for "program planning and financial accountability." According to
the director, the capacity of NGOs in the sector to deliver services to victims is very ·'uneven."
11-4
IFK
£T...sulllnH
ORGANIZATIONAl CAPACITY OF
ANTI-GENDER·BASEO VIOLENCE
NGOS
General Capacity of Antl·GBV NGOs Nationally
It was not possible in this limited assessmeDl to establish how many NOOs are currently providing
direct services to victims afGBY in South Africa, or to independently assess the capacity of
individual NOOs to provide andlor expand those services in specific areas. This task will fall to the
contractor selected to implement the WJEI (Tee support component), which includes a national
"mapping exercise" as one of the initial project activities. This activity should ideally be conducted
in cooperation wilh NODs such as Childline who have a national presence, are familiar with role
players in specific areas, and are in a position to comment on the capacity ofindividual organizations
(0 deliver various types ofservices.
The following information was provided by the Center for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation
(CSVR) Gender Unit regarding the "national picture" ofNGOs in tbe GBV sectOr. 14 In 2002, there
were 196 non-profit organizations listed in the CSVR national directory ofservices on violence
against women. These included organizations providing some form ofsocial or health-related
services to victims of violence, as well as organizations engaging primarily in advocacy or policy￾related work. The directory is currently off-line and in the process of being updated. According to the
head of the CSVR Gender Unit, many ofthe organizations included in the directory are not
"specialized" NGOs dedicated specifically to combating or addressing GBV. Rather, many provide
services to victims ofGBV as one component of a broader range ofservices, such as legal advice
cemers or places ofsafety for ··children in need of care." Others act primarily as '·outreach" or
··referral" organizations-that is, they inform victims of their rights and refer them to other
organizations or to government departments, but do not provide direct services (such as shelter or
counseling) themselves. The director was not able to say how many organizations currently listed in
the directory are direct services providers or specialist GaV NGOs. bur she estimated that only a
·'small percentage" ofNGOs in the country have the capacity to consistently provide "high quality"
support services and to effectively compete for donor funds.
One challenge identified by CSVR (and echoed by other interviewees) is that the distribution of
support services is very uneven across the country. At present, the majority ofservice
organizations are concentrated in three of the nine provinces (Gauteng, Western Cape and Kwa Zulu
Natal). In 2002. for example, 60 percent of tbe NGOs listed in the directory were located in those
three provinces. Of all shelters, 61 percent were located in either Gauteng or Western Cape. Some
provinces had no shelters at all. We were also informed that even now, the majority ofNGO service
providers within the provinces are located in urban and peri-urban centers, leaving significant gaps in
services to rural areas. The lack of GBV NGOs in certain provinces and particularly rural areas is
likely to pose a significant challenge for the roll-out of the TCes. As nOted in the Thuthuzela "gap
analysis," most of the current TCCs outside Johannesburg, Durban, or Cape Town have not been able
to identify NGOs to assist them in providing on- or even off-site referral services for victims, nor do
the TCes have tbe capacity to recruit and train volunteers on their own.
In rural and semi-urban areas in South Africa, most services relating to GBV are provided (if at all)
by local community-based or faith-based organizations. Some of these have a specific focus on
women; otbers provide a broader range ofservices to their communities. According to CSVR, most
women in poor areas tum to these organizations first when they have been raped or need. protection
from a violent partner. Although these organizations know and understand the local context, many
are "struggling to survive because they lack access to funding and other resources, they often have
14 CSVR is a Johannesburg-based NGO and former USAID grantee engaged in research, advocacy and program
development in various sectors, including women's rights, crime and violence prevention and GBV. Ii has compiled
a national directory ofservice providers providing services to victims of GBV and has also engaged in various
capacity-building programs in the sector
11·5
DPK
c·ul'>;.ul,rnH
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF
ANTI-GENDER·BASED VIOLENCE
NGOS
little organizational infrastructure, can't pay staff, experience a high turnover of volunteers, and can't
afford to properly train or supervise their staff." They also lack systems for financial accountability,
which further precludes them from accessing donor or government funds.
According to the NODs interviewed, many eaos have capacicy to raise awareness in their
communities around GBV and in some cases to mobilize communities to cake action to prevent or
reduce GBV. For this reaSOD. there are opportunities to partner with caDs in areas such as
community outreach and awareness raising (including raising awareness of the Tees). With minimal
training and financial support, CBOs can also provide general support to victims of violence, such as
manning comfort rooms at police stations or providing referrals to other service providers (an
example here being the help desks operated by TVEP in rural villages). Most CBOs, mough, do not
currently have capacity to provide more specialized services such as trauma counseling, legal advice,
or court preparation. Although lay members of the community can be trained to provide certain types
ofservices (such as crisis/containment counseling, coun preparation, and support), most CBOs do
not themselves have the capacity or experience to effectively train, mentor, monitor, supervise or
debrief tbose providing the service-aspects essenrialto quality assurance.
Another key challenge in tbe sector is that many ofthe smaller, local NODs and CBOs lack
organizational capacity to plan and implement programs, prepare funding applications, write reports
and manage project funds. Both RAPCAN and CSVR (as well as Thohoyandou) have initiated
activities to memor and support CBOs in these areas. According to CSVR, many of the NODs
working on GBV lack capacity in project management. though their programs in this area show that
organizations can be trained and supported to develop action plans and effectively implement
programs. The most persistent challenges include:
•
•
•
Writing proposals and narrative reports, especially in English.
Fundraising (directly related to the point above-many CBOs are OUI ofthe donors' circuit
because they can't submit proposals in the format and language required by more traditional
donors. Many also fmd it difficult to access government funding).
Stafr retention-Volunteers are difficult to retain in the absence ofstipends or other incentives.
This can result in high stafftumover and a lack of continuity, knowledge, and skills within an
organization.
Challenges Noted By USAID-Supported NGOs
It is clear from the assessment interviews that the GBV grantees supported by USAID in the past are
not necessarily "representative" ofthe sector as a whole. This is not surprising, given the high
standards required by USAlD for organizational support in terms of technical capacity, past
performance, and organizational and financial management capacity. Although USAID typically
receives a high volume of proposals for grant funding in the OBY sector, it has tended (with a few
exceptions) [0 select those NODs that are already established in the sector, have good track records,
and have the capacity to write a strong proposal.
According to NODs interviewed for this assessment, the challenges faced by USAlD-grantees are
primarily as follows:
•
•
Working with government/government stakeholders
Accessing consistent and reliable sources offunding
11-6
IFK
.-n!..!.1!!.!ltl'·H
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF
ANTI-GENDER·BASED VlOlENCE
NGOS
Only one NGO, Thoboyandou, reported iliat it also struggles wilh capacity around language and
writing. The director states she is me only one in her organization who has lite capacity to write
strong funding proposals and the necessary reports to donors in English. She noted mat she has hired
a ruler to help her deputy director develop these skills, but this remains a concern in terms ofthe
organization's institutional sustainability. Though no longer an issue, it was also noted that
Thohoyandou required technical assistance from Creative Associates when it firs[ began receiving
USAro funds, in order to bring its financial reponing systems up to USAID standards.
Relationship Between NGOs and DOJCD
None of the NGOs interviewed for this assessment have a strong relationship with the DOleD or
NPA at the nalionallevel. To the extent that Ihey have a relationship with lbe DOJ (or NPA), it is
more likely to be at the regionaVprovincial or !ocallevel. The strongest relationships tend to be with
local justice institutions, such as cowts, where the NGOs have been providing services for a long
time and have developed credibility and strong personal relationships with management and slaff. In
many cases the NGOs also have strong relationships with individual prosecutors or magistrates who
"appreciate the work we do and know they couldn't cope without us."
one ofthe I GOs providing services to the courts or TCCs receive funding from the OOJ or NPA.
In some cases, OOS (such as RAPCAN, Teddy Bear Clinic and Rape Crisis) have been able to
access partial funding from the provincial DepartmentS of Social Development (DSDs) to support
witness preparation or counseling, although this has been problematic as delailed more fully below.
Of the organizations reviewed, only (Wo, RAPCAN and Mosaic-both in the Western Cape--bave
recently formalized their existing relationships with the DOJ-CD (regional office) through
Memorandums of Understanding. These MOUs set out the roles and responsibilities for the "public￾private partnership" between the OOJ and the NOOs with respect to the services provided. These
services include both victim services and training for coun personnel. otably, they do not include
any financial resources or payment for the NOOs to provide services, apart from the in-kind
contribution of free use of DOJ/coun facilities.
The relationship between NOOs and TCCs bas also not been formalized. Although Rape Crisis has a
good working relationship and "understanding" with the TCC regarding the services it provides, the
only NOO "contrac[" is with the DSD (who provides funding), nOi the hospital or NPA. This leads to
tension when the NPA asks an NOO to provide additional services (such as HIV counseling or
administrative support). Rape Crisis also noted that it would "love to continue working with
Thuthuzela, but we can only do so as long as we have funding 10 support the program." Based on the
TCC "gap analysis," it appears mat other NOOs working with TCCs (whether onsite or on a referral
basis) also do not have fonnal relationships with the NPA. To the extent they have more formal
contractual relationships (and most do not), they are more likely to be with the Department of Health
or DSD.
Several NGOs expressed dissatisfaction wilh their relationship with DOJIXPA at nationalleveJ.
According to one director interviewed, '·they want NGOs to do the work but they don't want real
partnerships. There is no transparency when you are dealing with government; they are very guarded
with information:' One even described the OOJ as "hostile to NGOs," reporting that "there is no
receptiveness" at the national level to working in partnership with NGOs on OBV. Another NOO
director described the relationship with the NPA (at the national level) as "very tentative." From her
perspective, NOOs "bend over backwards to be non-controversial, non-adversarial, to be responsive
and to establish and maintain a collaborative working relationship" with the NPAISOCA. but "don't
really feel respected or appreciated." Others expressed frustration with what they see as the
government taking credit for the work that NOOs do, without providing any acknowledgment or
funding to support those services. As one explained, "the [NPAIOOJ] is always happy to report￾11-7
DPK
.-:nnsul.!.l.!Jg
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF
ANTI·GENDER·BASED VIOLENCE
NGOS
look at what great services we [the government] are providing to victims of violence in our courts
and care centers. What they don't say is thai NODs are providing these services free of charge and
that we have to go out and raise our own money to provide these services. These services would not
exist if we weren't there to provide them..." Several NODs said that while their services were "seen
as vitally necessary al the local level," their presence was often "taken for granted" and even
"exploited." One NOO explained, "It is as ifit were our duty and Dot the government's to provide
rnem."
In addition to the funding issue, two recent developments have caused "enormous frustration and
concern" among GBV NODs interviewed, and have caused tensions in the relationship between
NOOs and the DOllNPA, panicularly at the national level. The first involves the NPA's policy with
respect to witness preparation, which is now being provided by NPA contracted employees ("coun
preparation officers") in many couns and appears to be rolling out nationally. Several NGOs
expressed "serious concerns" about the quality of the programs being provided (court
preparation officers), and the lack of training and supervision of preparation officers by the
NPA. Concerns were elevated when it came to preparation of young children, which many 'OOs see
as an area requiring specialized expertise and "tried and tested. developmentally appropriate" training
materials. A Childline representative confirmed that in the process ofrolling out the new NPA
program, Childline has been "chased out" of some courts by the NPA and told !.heir child witness
services are no longer needed. At the same time she noted that prosecutors are asking them to come
back because the NPA program has not been as effecti ve. NOOs providing services to TCCs and
couns in Gauteng have also been told by the DSD thal they will no longer get financial support for
witness preparation/court support, as this function is being taken over by the NPA. The roll-out of
the TCCs in certain areas have also resulted in some tensions among GBV NGOs. Some
organizations, including Thohoyandou, fear that the NPAlSOCA is planning to "take over" their
programs, facilities, and staff and put TCCs "in their place." While they are willing to work "in
partnership" with the SOCA unit to achieve better services for victims of violence, they obviously
feel threatened by current developments. Lack of information and transparency on the part of
government in these two areas were noted by NOOs as pan ofthe problem. Moreover, NGOs noted
that they were afraid to be too critical for fear of further straining the relationship.
Because of scheduling constraints, it was not possible to discuss these issues with the DOlor NPA at
the national level to caprure their perspective and views on tbe DOllNaO relationship. At the
regional level, the DOl (Western Cape) was very proud oftheir collaborations with NOOs, including
those funded by USAlD-Mosaic and NJCRO-and spoke highly of both organizatioos. We also
ooted that the SOCA unit is currently engaging with NOOs on the issue of child witness preparation
and is working with NOOs to develop minimum standards for these programs. Although the issue is
far from resolved, it is notable that government is seeking NOO inputs in this area. USAID has also
staled thai it plans to fund an inter-sectoral "Indaba" in April 2008 in connection with the WJEJ
program, and planned roll-out ofthe TCCs. Although USAID has not shared the details of Indaba, it
appears to be aimed at addressing some of the NOO concerns and identifying potential areas for
effective collaboration.
Recommendations for Strengthening NGO Capacity
As discussed above, the NOOs !.hat USAJD has funded through ClSP to address OBV are very
effective, with both technical and organizalional capacity. With respect to these NOOs, the main
challenges revolve around funding as well as relationships with government stakeholders (at both the
nalional and local level).
11-8
ORGANIZATIONAl.. CAPACITY OF
ANTI-GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE
NGOS
Funding for Victim Services
In the course ofinterviewing NGOs for this assessment, the issue of funding was raised numerous
times by virrually all infonnants. The universal complaint among NGOs is that they do not currently
have a good way---or in some cases, any way-to access funding from government departments for
whom they are providing training and direct victim services. All of the NGOs providing services to
the courts and/or Thuthuzela Care Centres have been told repeatedly that me DOJINPA does not
have a mechanism to outsource or omerwise support NGO services, even when me government has
approached the NGOs and asked them to come in. In some cases, NGOs have been able 10 access
some grant funding from the Department of Social Development (DSD), but this differed from
province to province, and rarely covered the fulJ cost of providing the service. Apparently even the
large, established NGGs had difficulty navigating the "mysterious" and complicated procedures for
DSD grant funding (which also differed from province to province, and even district to district). In
Limpopo the amount provided to TVEP by the DSD was so small (R25 per victim assisted) that it did
Dot even cover the cost of the "comfort kit" given to rape victims, let alone the personnel costs
associated with counseling and long-tenn support. In the Eastern Cape, NGGs have never received
funds from the DSD for GBY.
A recurring challenge documented in various CSVR reportsl5 is that NGOs and eBGs do not know
how to access government funds or are told that funds are simply not available for GBY. In
interviews, NGGs noted that while the Department of Health had an "umbrella mechanism" for
coordinating and funding NGOs to provide HIY-related services, no such mechanism existed in the
criminal justice or victim empowerment sector. They also questioned why the DOJ and NPA were
not utilizing normal procurement mechanisms or procedures to tender services by NOOs. NGOs said
they had "repeatedly tried to get answers to these questions," but that government was not
forthcoming. Some thought that there might be some kind of legal obstacle in the procurement
regulations, while others thought it was because "government doesn't know the answer itself." In any
case, more clarity is desperately needed on this issue.
Based on the fmdings of this assessment, we recommend that USAID use some portion of CJSP
or other available funding sources to commission a critical and in-depth analysis of available
mechanisms for government to provide support to NGOs, whether through grants, tenders or
other mechanisms. This analysis can be focused specifically on NOOs working with the DOJ and
NPA, or more broadly, as it no doubt has implications for NOOs in other sectors. The purpose of the
study would be to work with government to identify and assess the feasibility of available
mechanisms, identify operational and legal obstacles, and recommend methods for addressing this
problem. If warranted, funding could also be provided to support the development of a more effective
and efficient mechanism for accessing government support, particularly in connection with victim
services and with services provided across multiple districts and/or provinces. All of the NGOs
interviewed strongly supported this recommendation and said it would contribute greatly to the
provision ofservices to victims of violence and the sustainability ofNOOs in this sector.
Although it is true that the funding "problem" NGOs face can be addressed at least to some
extent in the short term through USAID grant support, it is not a sustainable solution. All of
the NOOs interviewed questioned whether they could afford to staff up, train people and expand their
services if tbe money would disappear after a year or two. They also felt it was government's
responsibility to assume long-tenn financial responsibility for the delivery ofservices in public
facilities-particularly those required by law and public policy. As one NGO explained, "[our
organization] would be happy to support the expansion of the Thuthuzelas, but we cannot do it unless
IS See, L. Venon & Z. Khan, "We're doing their work for them:" An Investigation into Government Support to Non￾Profit Organizations Providing Services to Women Experiencing Gender Violence (CSVR Gender Unit, 2002;
"Where is the money to address gender-based violence?" (CSVR 2007).
11-9
DPK
.-....,.,.. 1.1,,).(.
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF
ANTJ.GENDER-BASED VIOLENCE
NGOS
the funding is there. Ideally this needs to be government funding, and it needs to be available long￾tenn."
Structure grants to encourage the partnering of more established, experienced NCOs with local
NCO! and caos. One sltategy to address gaps in NOO capacity is to provide tet:hnical assistance to
GOs in areas such as organizational development, grant writing, strategic planning, etc. For a time,
USAID reports thaI it tried this approach through me Civil Society Strengthening Program and that it
did Dot have any measurable impact As this program was outside the scope ofthis assessment, we
were not able [0 independently assess the program or USAID's conclusions regarding its
effectiveness. In any case, it is clear that any support for NOO capacity building under the
CJSPIWJEI program should be offered to NOOs in conjunction with services delivery. Thai is, there
should nOl be a "stand-alone" capacity building program, but rather a mechanism to support NOOs
while they are implementing USAlD·supported activities.
The interviews suggest that many established NOOs are willing-and in many cases already
providing-mentoring aDd other support to newer, local NODs and CBOs to improve their capacity
to deliver services. For purposes ofthe CJSP/WJEI grant funding, we therefore recommend that the
grants be structured to encourage and allow more established NODs to panner with local NGOs and
CBOs to provide victim support services and/or outreach activities in areas not currently served by
the established NGO. Where experienced NGOs are available to provide services themselves, such
pannering may not be necessary. To be effective, this will require the "Iead" NGO (and USAID to
support) to build into its budget for training, supervision, monitoring, and support as required to
provide a high-quality service and to build the capacity ofthe local NOO/CaO to provide service in
me longer-tenn. Extra resources may also be required for the emerging organization to support
expanded programming and the needs of donors, such as equipment and personnel. It may also mean
that me service may not be available immediately, and that grants should be timed to allow sufficient
start-up, training, and capacity building before the TCe or SO coun is established and the direct
services required.
In our discussions NOOs emphasized the fact that building sustainable capacity is not a once-off
intervention. It is ramer a process that requires time and demands qualified and dedicated human
resources. From this point of view, it is important that established NOOs do not become mere
'clearing houses' for USAID funding. Although the NOOs may, by virtue oftheir better
organizational and financial structures, play the "lead" role in the "consortium," they should be
encouraged and financially supported to establish real partnerships with oilier organizations and to
build the capacity ofthose organizations over the life ofthe grant.
Structure of USAID Grant Support Going Forward
Any future grant funding under CJSP/WJEI should focus on expanding/replicating successful
programs in the area of victim empowerment and diversion. These should include grams to support
the training and mentoring of local organizations (to provide specific programs/services) by more
experienced NOOs. WJEI grants under the proposed contract mechanism should focus primarily on
expanding services to specific Thuthuzela Care Centres and affiliated sexual offenses coons, while
other grant mechanisms can be designed more broadly to include diversion programs for both youth
and adult offenders as well as court suppon services for victims of domestic violence (such as those
currently offered by Mosaic). Access to justice grants under CJSPI\VJEI could also be expanded to
help poor women obtain child support orders under the Maintenance Act.
To the ex.tent thal USAID wishes to support NGOs providing services in conjunction with existing,
new, or planned TCCs, USAID should be very specific about the type or service required, where it is
11-10
IFK
...... ,,,"'IIII.g
ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF
VIOLENCE
NGOS
required, and the minimum standards for service delivery. USAID should not rely on a broad APS
mechanism to fill this gap.
In the area of grant funding, we offer the following recommendations.
• Grant funding should be provided for a minimum period of 3 years, particularly where
NGOs are initialing new programs or expanding/replicating services into new areas. This
commitmenl is necessary (0 enable GOs to slaff up and lrain new personnel and lay the
groundwork with stakeholders for sustainability.
• Victim services activities should DOl depend on ""volunteers" in tbe sense of unpaid staff.
Though all personnel do not necessarily have to be "employees" afme organization.mey should
receive some form of compensation (wages, gratuities, or a stipend and expenses) for their
services. 16 Paying me workers contributes (0 professionalism and accountability and reduced
turnover for me organization, as weO as income generation for me workers (who typically come
from the poor communities mey serve).
• Appropriate training, supervision, monitoring, and debriefing are critical to ensure
consistent quality services and help to protect NGO workers from "burnout."
Managers/supervisors "need to be aware ofthe toll [providing services (0 victims of violence]
taken on counsellors and orner support workers. They need to be monitored and supported on at
least a weekly basis." Orner NOOs noted the importance of providing certain kinds of workers in
shifts, ramer man full·time, every day.
• Where sen'ices are provided inter-seclorall)' or in a public facility im'olving other
stakeholders, il is critical to establish some form of coordination mechanism or
implementation!ovenight committee to provide a forum for communication and problem
solving. Examples bere include me TCCs 'monmly stakeholder management meetings' and
Mosaic's 'court management committees' involving representatives from me magistrates, court
clerks, Mosaic, police, and other relevant role players.
• Relationships between government and NCO sen-'ice providers should be formalized
whenever possible through service-level agreements or memorandums of undentanding.
These MOU agreements should spell out the roles and responsibilities ofthe panners and include
mechanisms for resolving problems that arise.
USAID should inform its government partnen of the NCOs it supports and playa more
active role in facilitating cooperation and support from government to those NCOs
wherever possible. Where a good program exists (such as Mosaic or the Child Witness
Preparation Program) that can be replicated elsewhere, USAID should do more to encourage the
DOJCD/rI.rpA to support, and if possible, institutionalize the program. This would go a long way
to ensure that successful GO projects do not remain 'piJots' but become sustainable programs
with long-tenn impact and greater geographic reach.
USAJD should seek ways to integrate its support to NCOs more effectively with its support
to government in the criminal justice sector. Too often these CJSP components have been
dealt with compartmentally in an uncoordinated fashion. This has resulted in some conflicts in
approaches as well as actions by either government or NOOs that have undennined USAID￾supponed programs.
I' As an example. RAPCA.l\' pays its COW1 support workers RlOO per day.
11-11