FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT JUNE 2009 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by DPK Consulting – A Division of ARD, Inc. FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT Program Title: USAID/Evaluation of the Family Justice Project (FJP) Sponsoring USAID Office: USAID/Egypt Contract Task Order Number: #263-I-03-06-00019-00, in accordance with REDI-Justice IQC Contractor: DPK Consulting – A Division of ARD, Inc. Date of Publication: June 7, 2009 Authors: Evaluation Team: Julia Roig, Deborah Chase, Shareef Ghoneim The authors’ views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................... 7 ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................................... IX EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ XI I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 1 II. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 1 III. TASK ONE: TO STRENGTHEN FAMILY MEDIATION .......................................................... 2 A. OVERVIEW OF FJP ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................ 2 B. FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................. 5 C. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 13 D. RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................... 16 IV. TASK TWO: TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO AND INFORMATION ABOUT FAMILY COURT SERVICES .................................................................................................................................. 20 A. OVERVIEW OF FJP ACTIVITIES ...................................................................................... 20 B. FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................... 22 C. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................. 26 D. RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................... 30 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................ 33 APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 34 ANNEX 1: FJP’S ORGANIZATIONAL CHART...................................................................... 35 ANNEX 2: USAID/EVALUATION OF THE FJP STATEMENT OF WORK ............................ 37 ANNEX 3: BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................... 41 ANNEX 4: INTERVIEWS/FIELD ACTIVITIES BY EVALUATION TEAM IN EGYPT ............. 42 ANNEX 5: LIST OF TRAINING WORKSHOPS PROVIDED TO STAFF OF MEDIATION OFFICES, BY DATE, SITE, AND PARTICIPANTS’ CHARACTERISTICS, THROUGH MARCH 2009 .......................................................................................................................... 53 ANNEX 6: LIST OF TRAINING WORKSHOPS PROVIDED TO FAMILY COURT JUDGES, BY DATE, SITE, AND PARTICIPANTS’ CHARACTERISTICS ............................................. 56 ANNEX 7: EXCERPT FROM THE FJP’S FY 2008 M&E ANNUAL REPORT ON TRAINING SATISFACTION LEVELS ....................................................................................................... 58 ANNEX 8: LIST OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS PROVIDED BY FJP TO FAMILY COURTS, THROUGH MARCH 2009 ...................................................................................... 61 ANNEX 9: MOJ DATA ON MEDIATION OFFICES ................................................................ 67 ANNEX 10: RFP ISSUED BY FJP TO LOCAL GRANTEES ................................................. 70 ANNEX 11: GRANTS DISTRIBUTED TO NGOS AND STATUS OF THE GRANTS, THROUGH MARCH 2009 ....................................................................................................... 75 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT ANNEX 12: A COMPLETE LIST OF ALL TRAININGS PROVIDED BY THE FJP TO NGOS, THROUGH MARCH 2009 ....................................................................................................... 76 ANNEX 13: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SCORECARD RESULTS AT BASELINE AND FIRST ANNUAL APPLICATION, IN NOVEMBER 2007 AND SEPTEMBER 2008, RESPECTIVELY ..................................................................................................................... 81 ANNEX 14: EVALUATION PHOTO ALBUM ......................................................................... 87 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Evaluation Team would like to thank the staff of the USAID Family Justice Project in Egypt for their professional and comprehensive coordination of the field visits and document review. A very warm thanks goes to Yasmine Zaki and the team of translators for providing excellent translation services and for their good sense of humor throughout our long days and adventures on the road. Special thanks to Margaret O’Shea and the home office staff at DPK Consulting, a division of ARD, Inc. for their support to the team during our work in the field and in their careful preparation for the final report. And, finally, our thanks to all the exceptional Egyptian mediators and staff members who dedicate their efforts to helping to resolve family conflicts, and to the Egyptian men and women who opened up to the Evaluation Team to tell us your stories. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT ABBREVIATIONS DPK DPK Consulting - A Division of ARD, Inc. FCL Family Court Law FJP Family Justice Project M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MOJ Ministry of Justice NCCM National Council for Childhood and Motherhood NGO Non-Governmental Organization TOT Training-of-Trainers EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the last ten years the Government of Egypt has introduced a series of new laws pertaining to family justice and the rights of women and children. In particular, Law 10 of 2004, known as the Family Court Law (FCL) established new family courts and created family mediation centers to help promote a non-adversarial legal process that serves the best interests of the family and promotes access to justice for women, who comprise the majority of claimants in family law cases. In support of Egypt’s goals to fully implement the FCL, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) established the Family Justice Project (FJP), a five-year project which began in January 2006. The FJP’s overall objective is to strengthen access to justice, enhance family stability, and protect the rights of children. The FJP works closely with both the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and the National Council for Childhood and Motherhood (NCCM) (now within the newly established Ministry of Family and Population) to execute two main tasks: (1) strengthen family mediation, and (2) improve access to and information about family court services. To accomplish these goals the FJP instituted a broad technical assistance and training program for the family mediation centers, including extensive infrastructure projects in three pilot jurisdictions in Egypt (Giza, Port Said, and Minya), and also implemented a large grants program for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in those same pilot areas to raise awareness of the family courts and encourage the use of family mediation services. USAID contracted DPK Consulting, a division of ARD, Inc. (DPK) to conduct a mid-project evaluation of the FJP in April 2009 to assess the impact of the activities within the two tasks in achieving the stated goals of the FJP and to make recommendations for future priorities. A team of three evaluators from DPK (Evaluation Team) conducted a document review and field research, meeting with national and local stakeholders in each of the pilot areas. This evaluation report was prepared to analyze each of the two project tasks separately, including findings, conclusions, and recommendations for each task. One of the biggest accomplishments of the FJP within Task One is the national coverage of the training program for all court-annexed Mediation Office staff throughout the country. The FJP has developed a very high-quality curriculum and also conducted an extensive Training of Trainers program to ensure that the capacity for on-going training programs exists within the MOJ Technical Assistance Bureau for the Mediation Offices. Trainings were conducted for Mediation Office administrative staff as well as for mediators in areas of law, mediation, sociology, and psychology and a separate component on team building. The FJP also conducted a series of very well-received practical trainings for Family Court judges on the Mediation Offices and other family law matters. In addition, the FJP provided helpful communications and outreach assistance to the MOJ, conducting trainings and developing a national “brand” for a mediation office logo as well as brochures, posters, and an informational video. While the training program has been quite successful in increasing the skills of the Mediation Office staff, the mediation program suffers some challenges. In large part there is a lack of professional￾level practice experience amongst the legal, social worker, and psychological specialists which has hindered the quality of their interventions and therefore their ability to generate confidence in some family court judges and family lawyers. In addition, many of the court mediators appear confused EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT about their role within the court as distinct from the role of the judge and court-appointed experts. This sometimes causes job dissatisfaction, tension with other court staff, and misunderstanding of the function of the mediation service. The Evaluation Team recommends specific changes to future trainings including: focusing on more legal, ethical, and substantive know-how in workshops for different subject-matter specialists who act as the mediators, how to effectively manage relationships with lawyers, how to ensure practical application of confidentiality in the Mediation Offices, and integrating feedback from client/user surveys on an ongoing basis into future trainings. Additionally, the FJP should continue to build the capacity of the MOJ Technical Assistance Bureau for the Mediation Offices in offering on-going assistance to the Mediation Offices and consider a local mentoring system of judges or legal experts for the Mediation Offices staff to turn to when they have concerns or questions. Each year, the case load of the Mediation Offices has risen and more cases are settled in mediation. The Evaluation Team recommends that the MOJ improve MOJ data collection to include additional statistics from the Mediation Offices that better demonstrates program impact. These settled cases are of great benefit to the overburdened family court system; however, a high percentage of parties do not show up for the mediation sessions. In large part this seems to come from the lack of support of family lawyers who often counsel their clients not to participate because of concerns about the professional competence of the mediators and/or because of concerns regarding enforcement remedies for support agreements. When both parties do show up, the mediators have a high rate of settlement, so it is recommended that the FJP and the MOJ devote resources to increase participation. Future outreach efforts should be focused on lawyers and on communicating to poorer communities that family mediation that does not require legal representation is available to them. In addition, the MOJ should consider building upon the appropriate role of NGOs and other community groups in spreading the word about the Mediation Offices within their target populations and encouraging more referrals to the Mediation Offices. Within Task Two, the FJP has awarded 34 grants to date, totaling approximately $2,000,000, to 27 NGOs (including 7 extensions) in Minya, Giza, and Port Said. The FJP grants program focuses on four pillars: (1) counseling services for families (social services, psychological interventions, and legal advice); (2) dispute resolution services, including mediation, for family disputes; (3) community awareness and public education efforts on the FCL and related rights of children, wives, and husbands; and (4) economic empowerment for targeted family members. In addition, the FJP developed a complementary strategy to provide an overall public media campaign for the family courts. An impressive number of Egyptian families have benefited from the services of the FJP grantees. During the life of the Project to date, almost 29,000 parties have visited the NGO counseling services; over 16,000 settlements have been reached through their dispute resolution services; over 70,500 community members have participated in outreach events; approximately 8,500 families have received economic empowerment support; and more than 1,600 Egyptian children have received social or psychological services. Family justice is a new service area for many Egyptian NGOs and the FJP has succeeded in building the capacity of many of these civil society organizations to offer a much needed service to the poor communities in the pilot areas. Because there are cultural taboos of discussing private family matters with outsiders, the NGO grantees have had to be very creative in reaching out to their target community and building the trust and confidence of the potential users of the NGO services. NGO EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT outreach staff go to the markets to meet women shopping, to schools to speak with mothers while they wait outside for their children to emerge, or invites them to NGO-sponsored events, such as Mother’s Day parties or holiday lunches. The Evaluation Team recommends continued focus on this type of very personal, targeted outreach in the community. Many of the NGOs work closely with religious leaders to reach out to the communities; they have developed very strong referral networks with other institutions and have embedded outreach within other services they provide. Much of the outreach has been focused on letting the community know about these NGO services and does not seem to include very much on the availability of the court mediation service. Of the four pillars required within the FJP grants program design, all of the NGOs came to the program with different strengths and substantive expertise, but implemented activities in each of the areas. Awareness-Raising is the central objective of Task Two to promote increased knowledge of women’s and children’s rights and promote the court-annexed Mediation Offices. Knowledge about rights was imparted mostly through seminars and dialogues with community members, although at times it was unclear what the message the NGOs have been imparting about family justice to the community has been. Dispute Resolution Services provided by the NGOs were reported as successful in keeping the family together if they could get both parties to show up. As in the court￾annexed Mediation Offices, there is a problem with the husbands attending the sessions, although the NGOs are able to use other creative tactics in reaching out to the husbands. Counseling Services help to address problems of communications and violence through preventative strategies to promote healthy families. Some NGOs conduct support groups with women to encourage them to talk about their problems, or work with young people on how to pick a marriage partner or on general communication skills for couples. The majority of the FJP’s NGO grantees provide services for children such as kids clubs or day care and organize family-centered community events or celebrations. Most of the NGOs interviewed by the Evaluation Team are convinced that the root of conflicts in families is economic and therefore stress the need to focus on the Economic Empowerment of the family and building job skills and economic opportunities. Many reported that they “can’t separate out the economic problem from the family problem.” The Evaluation Team is concerned by the overemphasis on economic issues during the site visits; there is too much emphasis on financial support instead of delving into deeper family issues. Economic support is a strong outreach tool as many community members first come to the NGO for financial help and then are introduced to the family justice services. FJP grantees, however, have struggled to change the mindset of the communities (and perhaps their own) from thinking of themselves as only offering handouts, as opposed to other types of counseling and services. One of the main observations of the Evaluation Team is that the central goal of Task Two, to provide information to the community about the court-annexed mediation services, is not being served by the majority of FJP grantees. It is clear that some NGOs view the Family Courts and Mediation Offices as “competition” and explicitly stated that it is not in the best interests of the beneficiaries to go to the Family Courts or use the services of the Mediation Offices. In part this is because they feel that when a case is taken to court or a court-annexed program, it escalates the conflict beyond reconciliation. The NGOs claim that the Mediation Offices are not offering a high-quality service; part of this, however, stems from a lack of understanding of the appropriate function of a court mediation program as opposed to the NGOs’ comprehensive social interventions. The sustainability of these NGO programs is of overarching concern to both the NCCM and the FJP. Many of the NGOs are carrying out excellent work in their field of expertise, whether it is in working with prisoners and their families, helping families with disabilities, developing micro-credit and economic empowerment, or providing general social services for women. Some of the NGOs are EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT well-positioned to continue with the new services they have incorporated, especially when there is a clear fit within the organization’s mission. The Evaluation Team was concerned, however, that the requirement of all four pillars for every grantee was imposing a program area(s) on some NGOs which had little organizational commitment to sustaining that activity past the life of the FJP grant. The Evaluation Team therefore recommends that new grants eliminate the requirement to work on all pillars, and instead focus on the NGO’s particular strength, and that the FJP require more formal networking amongst NGOs in a geographic area to refer cases of economic support, or child’s counseling, or mediation services to those NGOs who specialize in that area. This will also allow each NGO to concentrate efforts on offering deeper training for their specialized staff and improving the quality of their legal specialists and social workers which appears to be necessary in the majority of the NGOs. It is notable that many of the FJP grantees participated in the recent amendment to the Child Law. For many this was the first time they felt their voice was heard and incorporated into a new policy decision by the Government of Egypt. The success of the effort seems to stem from the role played by the NCCM as an intermediary between the NGOs and various roundtables that were conducted, to then relay the collected information to the MOJ for the drafting of the final version of the Law. Many of the NGOs realize that the effect of the new law will be realized only through passage of the necessary bylaws and regulations, but they are positive about the future legal framework and committed to continuing their advocacy work on the implementation of the Child Law and now their participation in the new FCL. In conclusion, the FJP has done an excellent job overall of advancing the agenda of improved access to justice for families in Egypt. Most importantly, the very competent FJP staff has maintained strong working relationships with all of USAID/Egypt’s local counterparts, negotiating different perspectives and positions on sensitive cultural and political issues. This has allowed the FJP to move forward at a slow but steady pace, winning the trust and confidence of the Government and court officials necessary to implement the FJP’s activities. The court-annexed Mediation Offices are an extremely helpful service to families in reaching a timely resolution of their disputes and have helped many families to reconcile. While this new service is still maturing, the FJP has made great strides towards improving the technical skills and infrastructure necessary for a competent service. The biggest challenge facing the FJP is the integration of the two tasks. While the NGO grants program has also been very successful in building new capacities within Egyptian NGOs to provide family justice services, there is still much work to be done to ensure that civil society is an effective and appropriate complement to other government and judicial services to increase access to justice for Egyptian families. The challenge of finding the right balance between the functions of the NGO sector and the formal justice system is not only faced in Egypt, however, and the FJP has provided a good basis from which to build better understanding and cohesion. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 1 I. INTRODUCTION In the last ten years the Government of Egypt has introduced a series of new laws pertaining to family justice and the rights of women and children. In particular, Law 10 of 2004, known as the Family Court Law (FCL), established new family courts and created family mediation offices to help promote a non-adversarial legal process that serves the best interests of the family and promotes access to justice for women, who comprise the majority of claimants in family law cases. In support of Egypt’s goals to fully implement the FCL, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) established the Family Justice Project (FJP), a five-year project which began in January 2006. The FJP’s overall objective is to strengthen access to justice, enhance family stability, and protect the rights of children. The FJP works closely with both the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and the National Council for Childhood and Motherhood (NCCM) (now within the newly established Ministry of Family and Population) to execute two main tasks: (1) to strengthen family mediation, and (2) to improve access to and information about family court services. To accomplish these goals the FJP instituted a broad technical assistance and training program for the family mediation centers, including extensive infrastructure projects in three pilot jurisdictions, and also implemented a large grants program for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in those same pilot areas to raise awareness of the family courts and encourage the use of family mediation services. (Please see Annex 1: FJP’s Organizational Chart.) USAID contracted DPK Consulting, a division of ARD, Inc. (DPK) to conduct a mid-project evaluation of the FJP in April 2009 to assess the impact of the activities within the two tasks in achieving the stated goals of the FJP and to make recommendations for future priorities during the remaining 18 months of the FJP’s execution. (Please see Annex 2: Statement of Work.) A team of three evaluators from DPK (the Evaluation Team) conducted field research from April 20 to May 16, 2009 in Cairo and each of the three pilot regions where the FJP is focusing its efforts: Giza, Port Said, and Minya. The following report is divided into two sections that discuss each of the two FJP Tasks separately. Each section includes a brief overview of FJP activities within that Task, followed by a discussion of the findings of the evaluation team, and then conclusions and recommendations. II. EVALUATION METHODOLOGY DPK’s Evaluation Team included team leader Julia Roig, Executive Director of Partners for Democratic Change in Washington D.C., U.S.A.; Deborah Chase, Senior Attorney for the Center for Families, Children and the Courts, of the Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts in San Francisco, U.S.A.; and Dr. Shareef Ghoneim, Chief Executive Officer of the Egyptian NGO Support Center in Cairo, Egypt. The Evaluation Team began its work with an extensive documentation review of all project background documents including FJP work plans, quarterly and annual reports, training curricula, and media/outreach materials. (Please see Annex 3 for Bibliography). Field research was conducted through in-person interviews with key participants in the FJP, including FJP staff, USAID/Egypt officials, and national-level counterparts within the MOJ and the NCCM and FJP participants in the three pilot regions of Giza, Port Said, and Minya including judges, court administrators, lawyers, family mediators, administrative staff of the mediation offices, and court users. In addition, the Evaluation Team met the FJP NGO grantees (their staff and boards of directors), community leaders, and beneficiaries. The Evaluation Team EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT conducted interviews with additional NGO leaders, academics, and judges who are not affiliated with the FJP to incorporate their perspectives on family justice in Egypt.1 III. TASK ONE: TO STRENGTHEN FAMILY MEDIATION A. OVERVIEW OF FJP ACTIVITIES The primary goal of FJP Task One is to support Law 10/2004 in strengthening family mediation. The issuance of this law, entitled the Family Court Law (FCL), introduced the new Family Courts and the Mediation Offices in Egypt. Article 1 of the FCL established separate Family Courts in Egypt as part of each trial court. Each family court is comprised of three judges, all of whom deliberate on each ruling, as well as two experts, a social worker and a psychologist, at least one of whom must be a woman. Both experts must attend court sessions in certain types of lawsuits such as divorce, physical separation, annulment or voiding a marriage, child custody, custody residence, visitation, relocation, and lineage. The court may assign the two experts to attend family court sessions and seek their help in personal status issues, if necessary. For example, the experts may make home visits to verify information given to the court by the litigants. Upon completion of their assigned work, the two experts shall prepare a report and present it to the judge to be included in the case file. The FCL requires mediation before resorting to litigation. FCL Article 5 mandates one or more Mediation Offices would be established within the jurisdiction of each family court, governed by the MOJ. The Mediation Offices do not charge any fees and attempt to resolve family disputes through mediation. Settlement must be completed within 15 days from the date of submission of the request. This period may not be exceeded except with the mutual agreement of the disputants. The panel performing mediation between the parties is comprised of three specialists – legal specialist, social worker, and psychological specialist -- and the head of the panel is the legal specialist. The role of the mediators is to meet with parties, hear their statements, and explain the different aspects of conflict and the effects and consequences of the case. The three specialists work together as a team. The legal specialist explains to the parties the legal problems that can result from the conflict, their legal rights, and the consequences of pursuing the case in the family courts. If the conflict ends amicably through mediation, the legal specialist prepares the reconciliation report in the required legal format. The social worker specialist examines all the social problems leading to the conflict between the two parties and attempts resolution in light of social theories. The psychological specialist seeks to gain familiarity on whether or not there are psychological reasons for the conflict and to identify solutions from a psychological perspective. If a settlement of all issues is not accomplished, and the parties proceed to file a case with the Family Court, the mediation specialists write a report that is included in the court file about the issues covered in the mediation. The social work and psychological specialists do not provide any sort of investigative role for the judges, as do the social worker and psychologist experts within the Family Court. They do not conduct home visits nor seek to verify the statements of litigants for the court. Pursuant to Article 8 of the FCL, the 1 Please see Annex 4 for the full list of interviews conducted and the interview questionnaires used by the evaluation team. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 3 specialists’ reports must be based strictly on documentary evidence and should not contain any statements hurtful to the parties or any diagnostic statements. While the Mediation Offices are located at the Family Courts, they are not technically part of the court. They are managed and supervised directly by the MOJ rather than the local courts with which they are co-located. In interviews, the MOJ stressed the importance of recognizing that the Mediation Offices were separate from the courts because mediation was a pre-filing process designed to help people settle disputes without having to initiate any court action. There is no indication in the legislation that significant collaboration between the mediation specialists and the judges and court experts was anticipated other than the mediators filing reports for inclusion in the court case files. Generally, interaction between the mediation specialists and the court experts seems limited, although there is some variation among court locations. Specifically, in Task One, the FJP is working to raise public awareness about family law and the Mediation Offices located at the Family Courts and to provide curriculum and training for the mediation specialists and administrative support staff in the Mediation Offices. The goals and objectives of Task One are accomplished via technical assistance in the following five areas: 1. CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT The FJP’s training curriculum for family mediation was originally designed as two training components - a 4-day component focused on the role of the Mediation Offices, and specialized subjects on law, mediation, sociology, and psychology for mediators; and a 2-day component focused on applying teamwork techniques. Two-day “booster” trainings to enhance mediators’ skills were also provided by FJP at three pilot sites in Egypt. Surveys and tests were conducted, pre- and post-participation, to assess methodology effectiveness. At the MOJ’s request, sessions were reduced in duration. The Training-of-Trainers (TOT) was a critical strategy to the FJP’s nationwide rollout of the mediation training. Initially, two senior trainers conducted a 3-day TOT program for nine psychologists, psychiatrists, and sociologists as trainers. These junior trainers then worked in tandem with the senior trainers to conduct two trainings for 37 MOJ-selected judges to serve as trainers to sustain the mediation-training program beyond the life of the FJP. A third training took place in May 2009. Judges were also trained to serve as coordinating judges, appointed to monitor mediators’ performance and provide ongoing technical support to Mediation Offices nationwide. Training Materials The FJP created several training manuals. The Nationwide Training Manual, finalized in July 2007, incorporates legal information, mediation skills, and team building techniques. It also includes useful information on family dynamics, conflict resolution, communication skills, and report writing. The Psycho-Social Manual provides content in communication and listening skills, family dynamics, and dispute resolution and contains information and practical exercises. Finally, with FJP assistance, a Legal Manual was prepared by the MOJ Technical Bureau for the Mediation Offices. 2. MEDIATION OFFICE STAFF TRAINING The FJP began a pilot training program in November 2006 in the three governorates selected as pilot sites - Giza, Port Said, and Minya. Since its inception the FJP has trained 1,582 individuals from 220 Family Courts, including social workers and psychological experts not originally envisioned. Men EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT and women were equally represented at the trainings. The breakdown by specialization was as follows: Specialization Number Percent Legal Specialists 592 38% Psychologists 244 15% Social Workers 480 30% Administrators 223 14% Social Work Court Experts 23 2% Psychologist Court Experts 20 1% TOTAL 1,582 100% The FJP completed skills enhancement training for 144 trainees in the pilot regions to provide further technical assistance. Several methodologies were used in the workshops including lectures and planned exercises, brainstorming, case studies, and plenary discussions. Trainings were videotaped for future use by new staff or related training programs. Based on lessons learned, the mediation training was refined and expanded to the remaining governorates at the MOJ’s request. Modifications to the training program included: modification of the curriculum to a question and answer style; participatory methods, including role-playing, were introduced to increase participation; and participant feedback was better incorporated. (Please see Annex 5 for the list of training workshops provided through March 2009 to staff of mediation offices, by date, site, and participants’ characteristics.) 3. JUDICIAL TRAINING Between December 2008 and March 2009, the FJP conducted a national training program for 563 family court judges. MOJ counselors, specialized in family law, served as trainers and facilitators for the legal portions, while psychologists led the additional training sessions. Knowledge and experience sharing played a key role. The training included ten sessions, two per week with an average of 55 trainees in each session. The first day focused on the role and work of the mediation offices, practical family law issues, and time and stress management. The second day dealt with lien issues, enforcement of family court rulings, and common judicial flaws in family court cases. In cooperation with the MOJ Technical Bureau for the Mediation Offices, the agenda was modified to include short lectures, case studies, and panel discussions to improve audience participation and enhance the effectiveness of the training. Evaluations conducted at each session showed an overall satisfaction rate of 75 percent. Regular comments included the need for longer sessions, and the need for participation by recognized family law scholars. (Please see Annex 6 for the list of training workshops provided to Family Court judges, by date, site, and participants’ characteristics; and Annex 7 for FJP’s M&E Annual Reports regarding trainees’ ratings of satisfaction regarding trainings.) 4. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS TO MEDIATION OFFICES The FJP, in collaboration with the MOJ and USAID’s Administration of Justice Project II (AOJSII), undertook upgrades to mediation facilities at several courts in the pilot regions. Improvements included dedicated rooms for mediation sessions; upgrades to mediator offices; information technology enhancements including computer systems, server rooms, and new wiring; and refurbished bathroom facilities. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 5 These repairs were not initially anticipated by the FJP. Soon into the Project life, however, reports surfaced that mediations were often conducted in locations with limited or no privacy, including hallways and waiting areas. As the need for facility enhancements became more apparent, the FJP undertook infrastructure improvements to ensure appropriate mediation office space. At the request of the MOJ and with USAID approval, upgrades were also made to the office of the Technical Assistance Bureau for the Mediation Offices at MOJ headquarters. The repairs included painting, new furniture, and installation of new air conditioners. AOJSII upgraded the electrical system and provided computers for the Technical Bureau. Computer training for the Technical Bureau staff was provided in November 2008. (Please see Annex 8 for list of equipment and materials provided by the FJP to family courts through March 2009.) 5. MEDIA OUTREACH In 2007, the FJP developed a media strategy in collaboration with the MOJ focusing on the development of a “brand” and logo for the Mediation Offices, creation of informational materials about the Mediation Offices for the public, and technical support to the MOJ with media relations efforts. The FJP completed a two-day media training for 24 staff of the MOJ’s Media and Public Relations office focused on interaction with the media, writing press releases, responding to events, media monitoring, and archiving. FJP activities with the MOJ have included a press conference for the opening of the family court judge training; developing an upcoming television campaign; conducting television interviews; creating informational materials for the public including brochures (such as a Frequently Asked Questions brochure on Egyptian family law); and informational posters that detail the steps for various family law matters which are displayed in family courts throughout the country. In addition, the FJP produced a documentary video about the mediation offices that includes information about the infrastructure upgrades for use in judicial trainings and eventual television broadcast. B. FINDINGS 1. TRAINING PROGRAMS AND QUALITY OF STAFF A. Background The FCL was issued in March 2004 and implementation was scheduled to begin in October 2004. The MOJ faced daunting challenges in implementing the FCL on this timeline. Several features of the new system posed particular challenges. These included: 1. Preparing implementation regulations 2. Selecting personnel for the Family Courts, i.e. judges and prosecutors 3. Seconding social workers and psychologists for the Mediation Office panels from the Ministry of Social Solidarity 4. Training family court personnel 5. Preparing physical facilities to meet FCL requirements 6. Establishing administrative procedures 7. Setting up special enforcement procedures 8. Providing the public with accurate information on the FCL and its implementation, and EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 9. Addressing gender issues. According to the above, the MOJ had no pool of expertise, whether legal, social, or psychological, to work with at the time of issuance of the new FCL. Furthermore, establishment of Mediation Offices was to be implemented over a scale of 224 locations nationwide by October 2004, which led the MOJ to second specialists from the Ministry of Social Solidarity and to hire legal specialists with the available experience and start building a pool of mediators through training. USAID provided the Evaluation Team with some background information about the qualifications and selection of staff for the Mediation Offices. By decree of the MOJ, legal specialists must have a minimum background of four years in the study of law, including personal status law, and the MOJ provides training in mediation techniques. The social workers and psychological specialists seconded from the Ministry of Social Solidarity to the Mediation Offices were trained as trainers in the FJP’s TOT program to then orient newly hired social workers and psychological specialists. B. Legal Specialists The FJP’s mediation training program has been effective in increasing the knowledge base of the legal specialists in the Mediation Offices. This is true for both the pilot and nationwide trainings. The mediators are undoubtedly more competent as a result, especially in mediation and communication techniques. However, the competency level of the legal specialists in substantive law requires further improvement. The majority of legal specialists interviewed had no prior experience working as attorneys, and those with a background working within the courts did not have family law experience. Two legal specialists interviewed had begun work for the Government directly after finishing law school studies; two others had been working as English teachers. According to interviews with legal specialists, many began working in the Mediation Offices with very little knowledge about family law and with no experience as family law practitioners. This created a fairly low baseline knowledge level in the field of family law for participants in the FJP mediation training program. The evaluation of the nationwide training for mediators reported a 14 percent average increase in knowledge which is commendable, but still very low. Very few legal specialists were able to describe to the Evaluation Team much about the particulars of family law, or how the law works. They talked almost exclusively about communication skills, teamwork, and mediation, and did not demonstrate much in-depth knowledge in the law-related topics. This lack of substantive legal knowledge was confirmed by stakeholder interviews. Several judges interviewed acknowledged that the trainings were effective with respect to mediation skills; however, most of the judicial interviewees expressed varying degrees of concern about the lack of legal knowledge of the mediation legal specialists, particularly their knowledge of substantive family law with respect to alimony, and their ability to write competent agreements for various types of support. One judge commented that family law was a broad and complex area of law, and that a comprehensive understanding of the issues involved was required to do the work competently. Interviews with community members in the three pilot governorates suggested a lack of trust and confidence in the ability of mediation office employees to be helpful. One family law attorney expressed the view that the mediation specialists did not always know how to mediate reasonable agreements that were fair to both parties in light of the law, and that this sometimes made them appear biased. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 7 C. Social Workers and Psychologists The FJP’s Mediation Training Program for social workers and psychological specialists has also been effective in increasing their knowledge base, and has had a positive impact on their ability to perform their work competently. The level of professional experience, however, among social workers and psychologists is also very limited. During interviews with NGO staff, DPK’s evaluation team encountered concern about the experience of the psycho-social specialists in the mediation offices, and their level of skill. It is possible that a misunderstanding of the role these specialists play within the mediation process and how it is different from traditional social work and psychological interventions may account for some of this concern, but not all. During interviews, several legal specialists in the mediation offices expressed concern about the recent graduates hired for psycho-social work, noting that new graduates were unable to do the in-depth analysis necessary and did not seem to have any theoretical basis for their interventions with clients. Initially the pool of social workers and psychologists were drawn from government workers who had work experience, but recent hires appear to be younger workers direct from graduation or from the private sector, but not necessarily with experience practicing in their field. For example, one psychological specialist had been working as an accountant immediately prior to starting in the mediation office. D. The Mediation Training Program The Mediation Training Program was in general well-received by mediation specialists who reported high satisfaction levels with respect to their training experiences. Legal specialists reported learning a lot from the trainings about team building. One interviewee reported learning things she can even use in her personal life, and her legal specialist colleagues agreed. Interviewees reported learning how to better communicate with colleagues and other offices, and how to resolve conflicts. In one location, the legal specialists particularly valued the teamwork instruction. Teamwork is important as the most common model for mediation is to have all three specialists participate in all the mediations together. Participants believe they have learned to work well as team members with the social and psychological court experts. In another location, the legal specialists asked for more training on family problems and case studies. They would like smaller￾sized trainings with mentoring. They also want more frequent refresher courses that are based on real-life cases and challenges. Psychologists and social worker specialists reported in our interviews that they gain a lot from the trainings, particularly on legal instruction and neutrality. Practical trainings were preferred to those that are more theoretical in nature and thus formatted as lectures. Interviewees voiced a preference for instruction conducted in groups and the use of role-playing. (One social worker reported “feeling like I was actually in a courtroom” because the simulation was so real.) Meeting with colleagues from other courts appeared most popular as participants were able to discuss and learn about real cases and what works in different contexts. E. Evaluations of Mediator Training Without exception, interviews with the mediation specialists revealed positive experiences with the trainings they had received. Evaluation reports provided by the FJP support the satisfaction expressed in the interviews. Review of the evaluation of the skills enhancement trainings offered in the three pilot programs indicate participant satisfaction ranging from 82 percent to 97 percent with EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT an average of 88 percent. Review of the evaluation reports for the nationwide mediation trainings indicate participant satisfaction ranging between 89 percent and 97 percent with an average of 93 percent. Participant satisfaction is based on evaluation of trainer, trainer’s material, and recommendations by participants about topics that should be included in future trainings. Assessment of legal capacity of trained specialists was handled by more detailed questionnaires prepared by the MOJ. Questionnaires were used as part of the evaluations conducted at the skills enhancement trainings. Answers collected were reviewed by the FJP’s legal advisor and handed over to the MOJ for reference and filing. All specialists (psychologists and social workers included) were requested by the MOJ to complete these questionnaires at the end of each training, in order to measure how much legal knowledge was acquired by the trainees. The questionnaires consist of 15 true-false items and are administered as a pre-test/post-test to evaluate increase in learning. Review of the evaluation reports prepared by the FJP for the skills enhancement trainings in the three pilot programs indicate a range of increased learning in the three pilot programs of between 14 percent and 30 percent with an average of 22 percent. In addition to the pre- and post-test, a whole session in the skills enhancement training was devoted to evaluation of previous training, whereby trainees were divided into groups representing the different mediation offices and were asked to illustrate to the audience their handling of a real-life case and how acquired skills were applied by the team. The three-day nationwide mediation trainings also used the 15 item true-false pre-test/post-test questionnaires to evaluate increased learning. The MOJ developed five different tests to prevent trainees from sharing these questionnaires with subsequent groups of trainees. Review of the evaluation reports for the nationwide mediation trainings indicate a range of increased learning of between 4 percent and 19 percent with an average of 14 percent. F. Judicial Trainings Judicial trainings were well received. The FJP staff reported feeling that being asked to conduct judicial training was a big vote of confidence by the MOJ. The judges rated the organization and content of the program highly (86 percent) in their evaluations of the trainings. Sessions on practical issues in family rulings enforcement were rated highest among the substantive topics covered, followed by issues in family law such as self-guardianship and common procedural mistakes in family law cases. They seemed less interested in discussing the role of the mediation offices and their relationship to them. It is worth noting that many judges requested more information on time management and topics pertaining to the psychological health of family law judges. G. Role of the Mediation Offices The mediation process is a new practice in the Egyptian judicial system, only started due to the issuance of the new FCL in 2004. Its regulations, personnel, infrastructure, education of specialists, and public awareness had to be initiated and developed to provide this service to the community. USAID reports that the specialists in the Mediation Offices are still learning and acquiring training to reach the required standard of capacities, and are not completely clear about their roles. Two court experts interviewed reported tension between court experts and Mediation Office specialists, saying that mediation are less professional, are paid less in relation to court experts, and their reports are not taken seriously. Psychologists and social workers in the Mediation Offices expressed concern that people do not understand the importance of their work such as when court users insist they would rather meet with a legal specialist. Most of the mediation specialists interviewed did not seem completely clear about their roles in relation to the family courts – particularly in relation to the court experts who assist the judges or the EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 9 judge him or herself. Of particular concern is the perception by some mediators that their role is to “investigate” the case and then report to a judge. For example, when interviewing a group of mediators at one court, a legal specialist reported taking information from a witness and including it in his report. He was later frustrated when the judge called a witness to testify rather than relying on the information contained in his mediation report. He felt the court was not respecting the report, and was wasting time. The other mediators in the room agreed. It was not clear to what extent these mediators were actually conducting investigations from the mediation offices. Mediation specialists often added that the court experts add no value to the courts other than an “extra set of eyes for the judge.” Some mediators interviewed were confused about the appropriate functions of the Mediation Offices. For example, some mediators used the Mediation Office as a clearinghouse for the payment and distribution of alimony and showed little understanding of why they were instructed to discontinue this practice. The only legal specialists who expressed job dissatisfaction to the Evaluation Team in terms of salary, status, or respect were those who also demonstrated confusion about their role as mediators. This was in notable contrast to other specialists who claimed to love their jobs. Most mediators interviewed did not seem to understand how their role as a Mediation Office specialist would affect their community relations; why they would have to be circumspect in their communications with the public; or why they would have to be careful in their associations with community organizations. For example, while they understand that they cannot work for the mediation office and an NGO at the same time, their understanding of why that was the case was far less clear. The importance of the role of the mediation offices and staff as neutral and independent within the community did not appear to be clear to staff members who were interviewed by the evaluators. 2. PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF THE MEDIATION OFFICES A. Attorneys According to the Mediation Office staff and judges interviewed, most people coming to the Family Courts and Mediation Offices are represented by counsel, although the FCL allows for parties to participate in the mediation service without legal representation. The Evaluation Team found that family law attorneys are not always supportive of the mediation process. One attorney reported that his colleagues feel the mediation is a waste of time because the husbands will only agree to such small amounts of alimony through mediation. The attorney reported that he thought that 80 percent of his colleagues would support mediation if the agreements reached were reasonable. He also supports the mediation reports.2 Legal specialists reported that attorneys are increasingly starting to support the Mediation Offices. B. General Public One of the challenges reported by mediators was their perception that the public did not believe that the mediations were confidential. Interviews with community members by the Evaluation Team tended to support this as several interviewees expressed the idea that the family court mediations 2 The mediators take minutes of the mediations. If a case is filed with the court, a report is given to the court that contains those minutes along with factual reports from the legal, social work, and psychological specialists who participated in the mediation. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT were open. Often there are several mediators working with one client while other mediation staff are allowed to walk in and out of the meeting room freely during the mediation. Mediation Office staff appear to interpret confidential as anyone on the court staff, just as they think their mediations are confidential and will be kept private even though they file reports to the judge. However, one community member complained that the Mediation Office was “all about scandal,” implying that parties were required to air their “dirty laundry” in public, and another reported there were too many people in the room while a mediation session was taking place. One Evaluation Team member observed a mediation session with one client while four staff people remained in the room, and another staff member came in and left without explanation during the mediation. Another strong indicator of public perception regarding the utility of the pre-court filing mediation service is the level of participation. Mediation is a mandatory first step before filing a case in family court; however, the parties to the dispute often fail to appear for their mediation appointments and the court has no jurisdiction to mandate appearance or issue penalties for failure to appear. Claimants often fail to attend, relying instead on attorney participation only. The most critical problem is the men who fail to appear, with estimates for men failing to appear ranging between 60-80 percent. Possible reasons for failure to attend include:  Attorneys tell parties not to come because the attorneys do not support it;  The respondent does not receive the notices to appear at mediation; or  Men, even though they do not have attorneys, may perceive that there is no real legal benefit to them in participating and no serious consequence for failing to appear. When parties do attend the mediation, the mediators are fairly successful in facilitating agreements between them. Mediators interviewed reported that the clients who come to the Mediation Offices often express gratitude for having people there who take the time to listen to their stories and try to help them solve their problems. The legal specialists in particular pointed out that when agreements for support can be reached in mediation, the time it takes to secure these agreements is significantly shorter than what would be required by a court hearing process. Almost all family law court and mediation interviewees expressed the view that one of the reasons that the attorneys are less supportive of the Mediation Offices is that the mediation process tends to reduce the level of attorneys fees needed to complete a case. One attorney interviewed was actually very supportive of the Mediation Office where he practiced because of the fact that the time to get an agreement for support was so much shorter than the court process would require. One of the family law court judges pointed out how beneficial it was for children not to have to come to court when agreements for custody and visitation could be resolved in the Mediation Office. 3. MEDIATION OFFICE CASE LOAD Public awareness on family mediation services is lacking. Mediation specialists reported that most clients hear about the Mediation Office from their attorneys or from family or friends. It is clear that the number of filings in the Mediation Offices has been increasing, but we were unable to collect the data on the number of family law filings of comparable case types for comparison.3 3 The Evaluation Team received no data from the MOJ on the number of alimony cases, for example, that were filed in 2003 or 2004 in the family law court that we could compare to the number of similar alimony cases filed with the court in the years when the mediation offices started work (2005 and going forward). The evaluators were told that no such reliable data exists. Court case filing data would give a baseline to compare case filings in both the court EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 11 The MOJ has collected data for mediation office caseload as of October 1, 2005, but the data does not include all governorates for all months, and numbers are reported in aggregate as follows: Mediation Cases Filed 2005 33,248 2006 32,842 2007 39,658 2008 70,796 The data available in the pilot mediation sites is instructive as it is more complete. (Please see Annex 9 for MOJ data on mediation offices.) In Port Said, filings have increased steadily, except for a drop in 2007, from 4,167 in 2005 to a projected figure of 6,778 in 2009. This projected figure is based on the mid-year filing data provided by the MOJ setting filings at 3,389. This demonstrates a 63 percent increase in filing in the Port Said mediation office since its opening in 2005. In Minya, filings have also increased steadily, except for a similar drop in 2007, from 9,708 in 2005 to a projected figure of 18,586 in 2009. This projected figure is based on the mid-year filing data provided by the MOJ setting filings at 8,549. This represents a 90 percent increase in filings in Minya mediation offices since they opened in 2005. In Giza, filings have increased steadily without any decline until 2009. Giza has increased its filings steadily from 19,373 in 2005 to 24,838 in 2008. The number of 24,838 is an underestimation based on incomplete data for the year. A projected figure for 2008 based on monthly averaging would result in a filing number closer to 27,096. This would represent a 40 percent increase in 2008 over filings since the Giza offices opened in 2005. The decline in filings in the first two quarters of 2009 suggests a problem with the data, or simply incomplete reporting data from all the courts. These three pilot mediation programs are still producing most of the data available for the mediation services. A. Mediation Office Outcome Data Outcomes in relation to filings are a standard way in which workload impacts are assessed by trial court management personnel. The MOJ has provided data on filings and on three types of outcomes from the cases filed at Mediation Offices. 1. Decided cases – The number of cases that the office closes as finalized with their services. 2. Postponed cases - The number of cases that are continued open at the end of the accounting period. 3. Settled cases - The number of cases that have resulted in a settlement between the parties. In 2005, the Port Said Mediation Office reported filings of 4,167. The office succeeded in closing (deciding) 4,036 (96 percent) of those filings. Of the decided cases, 1,289 (32 percent) resulted in and in the mediation offices and quantify the impact the mediation offices are having on caseload reduction - which the MOJ Technical Assistance Bureau judges reported was a priority for them. This would require data specific to case type because the mediation offices do not have "jurisdiction" over all family law case types. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT settlement between the parties. The settled cases account for 31 percent of the total cases filed. In 2006, Port Said reported filings of 4,614. The office succeeded in deciding 4,396 (95 percent) of those filings. Of the decided cases, 1,865 (42 percent) resulted in settlement between the parties. The settled cases account for 40 percent of the total cases filed. In both 2005 and 2006, only 3 percent of the cases filed in the mediation office were postponed. In 2005, the Minya Mediation Office reported filings of 9,708. The office succeeded in deciding 4,743 (49 percent) of those filings. Of the decided cases, 2,963 (63 percent) resulted in settlement between the parties. The settled cases account for 31 percent of the total cases filed. In 2006, Minya reported filings of 9,818. The office succeeded in deciding 4,885 (50 percent) of those filings. Of the decided cases, 2,651 (54 percent) resulted in settlement between the parties. The settled cases account for 27 percent of the total cases filed. In both 2005 and 2006, only 3 percent of the cases filed in the mediation office were postponed. In 2005, the Giza Mediation Office reported filings of 19,374. The office succeeded in deciding 12,514 (65 percent) of those filings. Of the decided cases, 1,562 (13 percent) resulted in settlement between the parties. The settled cases account for 8 percent of the total cases filed. In 2005, 6,860 cases (35 percent) of the cases filed in the mediation office were postponed. In 2006, Giza reported filings of 18,410. The office succeeded in deciding 12,663 (69 percent) of those filings. Of the decided cases, 1,622 (12 percent) resulted in settlement between the parties. The settled cases account for 9 percent of the total cases filed. In 2006, 5,747 cases (31 percent) of the cases filed in the mediation office were postponed. The wide variation in Giza compared to the other regions cannot be explained without further study. Data in outcomes indicates variance among locations. The range across locations for cases decided was between 49 percent and 96 percent of total filings over the two fiscal-year period of 2004 through 2006; for cases postponed, the range was between 3 percent and 35 percent; and for cases settled, it was between 8 percent and 40 percent. B. Mediation Office Impact Data The MOJ has provided data on the nature of the disputes that have been presented to the Mediation Offices; however, the largest category is “Other Appeals.” Of the defined categories, the largest is Expenditures, followed by Imprisonment and Divorces. The MOJ has not provided comparable data on the number of case filings in the Family Courts with the number of cases handled by the Mediation Offices during either the years immediately prior to the establishment of the mediation offices, or since the mediation offices have been in operation. Available data suggests that there has been some quantifiable reduction in family court case filings evidenced by the numbers of settled cases. It is not possible from the available date to determine whether the decided cases that were not settled resulted in family law court case filings, cases being dropped, or some other type of disposition. Interviews with counselors at the MOJ Technical Assistance Bureau and with family law judges at the local courts provided the evaluators with anecdotal observations that the mediation offices had reduced family law caseloads. Estimates about the extent of that reduction varied, however. One local judge reported that although the Mediation Office had helped reduce the caseload for his court, he did not think the reduction was significant. Another judge estimated the caseload reduction in his court was 40 percent. A counselor at the MOJ Technical Assistance Bureau for the Mediation EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 13 Offices estimated that the mediation offices had reduced the overall family law caseload by 25 percent. 4. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS Infrastructure improvements were observed in the six mediation offices visited by the evaluators. The offices appeared to be very comfortable and adequate for the needs of the mediation process. The Evaluation Team observed the reconfiguration of rooms in mediation offices that allowed for private meetings with clients. The team also detected improvements such as the addition of comfortable furniture, waiting areas, bathroom upgrades, and air conditioning. The Mediation Office staff was particularly grateful for computers, printers, and servers that contributed to making data collection and other administrative work more efficient. C. CONCLUSIONS 1. The new Family Courts and the Mediation Offices represent a significant step in the development of justice in Egypt for families. Although mediation is present in other legal areas such as economic courts, in family law it is mandatory and extensive. It is likely that the family mediation offices will be the flagship for court-based mediation in Egypt, so the respect with which their work is viewed is critical. Family law judges are in an optimal position to provide judicial leadership in the area of court-based mediation, but only if they fully support the work of the family mediation offices. 2. Men are not required to seek a divorce through the Family Courts and as a result do not seek services of the Mediation Offices in any significant numbers. This provides a serious challenge to the program. It reduces the number of settlements that the Mediation Offices can accomplish and therefore the degree to which they can reduce the overall caseload on the Family Law Court. 3. The lack of professional practice experience of the legal specialists creates challenges for the mediation program. It is important in building trust and confidence in mediation with judges, attorneys, and the community that this situation improve significantly. The ability of the legal specialists to provide the public with the complete and correct information they need in order to make informed agreements is critical to the mediators’ work. Furthermore, if the program is to be successful the legal specialists need the respect of the judges and lawyers who observe their work daily in various ways. This requires that these specialists be able to operate at a fairly high level of professional competence. 4. The professional competency of the social workers and psychologists is also somewhat problematic. The lack of any observable theoretical basis for the interventions that were made was notable. A certain level of education about current research in relevant areas, such as the social phenomena of divorce, demographic patterns of divorce, roles played by domestic violence, child abuse, and substance abuse, and mental health issues in the courts would be helpful to the work. 5. The FJP’s mediation training programs, both the pilot program and the nationwide program, have been highly effective in increasing the knowledge level of the mediation staff, particularly with respect to mediation skills. These programs have greatly facilitated the ability of the staff in the Mediation Offices to perform their work. For many, the baseline knowledge level in their field approximated zero, so a 14 percent reported average increase in knowledge nationwide, although quite low, is commendable. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 6. Training in legal issues appears to have been quite helpful particularly for the social worker and psychological specialists. The training in psycho-social issues is also helpful particularly for the legal specialists. The training format in mediation skills, communication, and team building seems excellent for all specialists. Trainings are effective as cross-disciplinary trainings. 7. Cross-disciplinary training is useful but can also be potentially confusing when the trainees lack education and experience within their own fields of specialty. Usually, cross￾disciplinary collaboration involves professionals bringing their own experience and expertise to share with others similarly qualified in their own fields. The Mediation Offices have brought together three areas of professional specialty (law, social work, and psychology) with largely inexperienced staff. Training the three disciplines together so early in the training has led to some confusion about professional roles. For example, clarity is needed about how operating in the role of a family mediator makes the specialists similar in certain respects, but also how they remain different in their own fields. Clarity is needed about how lawyers think about mediation, as opposed to how social workers approach family disputes. The difference in a variety of situations between a social worker’s role and that of a psychologist needs to be identified. Mediators of all professional backgrounds need a strong sense of their own professional identities and how they collaborate with each other professionally as mediators. Without this sense of professionalism, teamwork will be based simply on the personalities of the staff and how well they get along with each other. 8. The FJP’s usage of an iterative evaluation process with the pilot mediation offices to develop the training for the nationwide curriculum is a good practice. Reliance on the current questionnaires as a reliable measure of increased learning must be somewhat guarded. The questionnaires have a limited number of items (15) and the true/false answer format makes the assessment vulnerable to simply correct guessing answers. As a result, the actual increased level of knowledge may be less, or greater, than indicated in the percentages provided. 9. Lack of clarity about the mediation specialist’s role leads to several problems. In Mediation Offices where there was confusion about the limits of the mediation specialist’s authority, teamwork tended to break down more easily. Team building, while basically strong among mediation specialists, had not necessarily carried over to working collegially with family law court experts and judges, or other court staff. Competition appeared more prevalent among these individuals. Further, confusion about the limits of the mediation specialists’ role and responsibilities seemed to lead to lower job satisfaction among such specialists and lack of respect for the value of one’s own role as a mediator. 10. Over the long term, the mediation program will need the support of the family law bar to be successful. In part, attorneys’ resistance to the Mediation Offices is based on some legitimate concerns that should be addressed, including increasing professional competence in the Mediation Offices and promoting efforts to allow additional enforcement remedies for support agreements. 11. There seems to be no reason for all three Mediation Office specialists (legal, social worker, and psychological) to assess every case. Not only does the ratio of three staff to one client seem a bit overwhelming, particularly when there is only one party present, but it does not contribute to an optimal use of staff. 12. The importance of improvements made in infrastructure at Mediation Offices cannot be overemphasized. In particular, the separate space for the mediation appointments allows for EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 15 real confidentiality, and the computers allow for genuine data collection and timely preparation of reports. The comfort level of families, both physically due to space and air conditioning and emotionally due to privacy was greatly increased. These changes have greatly enhanced the efficiency of Mediation Offices. 13. The FJP has successfully provided the family law judges with continuing education on family law and the opportunity to discuss current issues in family law that they face in their day-to￾day work. The judicial training is vital in allowing judges to break the isolation of their particular courtrooms and broaden their perspectives on the law. This training can potentially provide an opportunity to introduce to the MOJ the concept of community-focused-planning and ways in which to interact with the community without compromising judicial independence or neutrality. The training can also provide an opportunity to roundtable with family law judges their ideas about training, particularly for the legal specialists in the Mediation Offices. This may be a way to engage them in discussions about mediation. Family law judges should be viewed and supported as a potential source of judicial leadership in the field of mediation in Egypt. 14. The FJP media assistance has been enormously successful in helping the MOJ develop a public relations strategy. This is a tremendous service to the judiciary. The judiciary has to be very careful about how it relates to the public because of its duty to be independent, to maintain its neutrality, and to safeguard the appearance of neutrality in anything public. The fact that the FJP has helped judges learn how to talk to the press, to participate in television and radio interviews, and to attend outreach meetings is a wonderful accomplishment. 15. Even though the Mediation Offices are not part of the Family Courts, they are located at the family law courthouses, and it is likely that they will be perceived as part of the court by the public. The mediation specialists do not seem to understand the ethical necessity of the Mediation Office to remain independent from community-based organizations or the practicalities of maintaining neutrality in communicating with NGOs. Their understanding of neutrality appears limited to not taking one side over the other in a specific case, or behaving in a non-judgmental way during mediation. 16. The MOJ media strategic objective of building public trust and confidence in the Mediation Offices is important. Using mass media is a good strategy, but not the only one. FJP Task Two involves community outreach through NGO grantees and should be very effective given that information about mediation services in Egypt is typically passed by word of mouth through social networks of friends and relatives in the community. The success of this strategy has been limited, however, due to the reluctance of the MOJ to become involved with the NGOs directly and the resistance on the part of some NGOs about supporting the new Family Courts and Mediation Offices. (See Task Two, below.) 17. One of the mass media campaign goals is to inform the public that the services of the Mediation Offices are available to those who do not have attorneys. It does not seem, however, that the mass media campaign has succeeded in reaching the sector of the public unable to afford representation; or possibly that section of the public simply does not want to use the services of the mediation offices. 18. The Mediation Offices are having a positive impact on the users of the mediation services. Sufficient time is available for mediators to hear the story of what is going on in the family. The mediation process promotes reconciliation and, when reconciliation is not possible, facilitates settlement of issues. This saves time and money for litigants. When there are EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT agreements about custody and visitation, mediation spares children from having to go to court. 19. The Mediation Offices are having a positive impact on the court system. The aggregate numbers of settled cases are cases that might otherwise have been filed with the Family Courts for litigation. Also, the reports provided to judges by the mediators provide helpful information that might otherwise take substantial time to gather. 20. The demand on the Mediation Offices has gradually increased since 2005 and will probably continue to grow as awareness about them increases. The impact of the Mediation Offices cannot be quantified, however, because filing data cannot be compared to reciprocal filing data from the family court currently. Coordination of data between the Family Courts and the Mediation Offices could greatly facilitate this in the future. Further, Mediation Offices are not allowed to follow up on specific cases, as this would not be an appropriate neutral role for a mediator. Instead, an independent study is required to collect and analyze data from families who have utilized meditation. For example, it would be interesting to review the cases that resulted in reconciliation; how many families stayed together one year later; how many had later filed for divorce; how many support agreements negotiated in mediation were being paid; and how many visitation orders were being followed. D. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. STRENGTHEN TRAINING PROGRAM. The FJP, or the MOJ when it assumes training responsibility for the Mediation Offices, should continue the training programs with the following modifications: 1. The FJP or the MOJ should initiate training specifically for the legal specialists that focuses on substantive family law with the goal of expanding their comprehensive understanding of legal issues. 2. The FJP or the MOJ should initiate a training specifically for the social workers and psychological specialists, respectively, that focuses on the academic and theoretical foundations of their professions. 3. The curriculum for social workers should include the most relevant theories in their field and the most current research available related to their work. 4. Learning objectives for psychologists’ curriculum should include the ability to critically read a research article, cognitive research related to behavioral change, basic understanding of child development, theoretical bases of family relations such as family systems and attachment theories, basic substance abuse, domestic violence, and research related to divorce. 5. Cross-disciplinary trainings should continue with increased focus on clarifying roles. All the specialists will continue to need overviews about the areas of expertise of the other specialists. It is probably most important for the social work and psychological specialists to understand family law issues since the work of the specialists is legal dispute resolution. 6. Future trainings should include a component on effectively managing relationships with lawyers before mediation has been convened, including developing confidence in the mediation process and respectful relationships with lawyers. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 17 7. Future trainings should expand discussions about applying confidentiality principles in practice, focusing especially on the need for court staff to respect the privacy of mediation sessions when they are taking place, including simple adjustments in the physical set-up at mediations such as installing “do not disturb” signs. 8. Additional training should be provided on the role the mediation program plays in the court system and the distinction of functions of mediation and the court. This training should also include basic concepts of neutrality of the Mediation Offices and the Family Law Court with respect to the community at large. 9. The MOJ should consider using a testing questionnaire with a larger number of questions. The questions should be subject-area specific. For example, there should be tests specifically for legal specialists on substantive issues; tests for social workers; and tests for psychologists. Also, the answer format should be multiple choices with at least four possible answers for each question. 10. Training should also integrate feedback from client/user surveys on an ongoing basis. For example, this evaluation revealed concern about the number Mediation Office staff in attendance at mediation sessions. The MOJ should work with NGOs to solicit such feedback and incorporate corrective measures in future training programs. 2. PROVIDE ONGOING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR MEDIATORS. 1. The existing support of the MOJ Technical Assistance Bureau for the Mediation Offices in supporting the mediation offices though literature, fax and phone access for questions and mentoring by family law judges is critically important and should be continued. 2. The MOJ Technical Assistance Bureau for the Mediation Offices should continue to promote their services as a “help desk” for the mediators, perhaps with a flyer with the numbers they can call to hand out during the trainings. 3. The MOJ should consider creating nationwide MOJ-mandated forms that contain checkbox legal language that meets statutory standards, and space to fill in case-specific particulars. When used by the Mediation Offices these forms would meet legal standards. If the offices were required to use these forms, they would be less vulnerable to criticism over the ability of individual legal specialists to draft documents. Standardization of family law documents also helps the public and any enforcement agency in understanding them. 4. The MOJ should consider developing a Code of Ethics for the Mediation Offices that would be available in the offices to serve as a clear guide on issues such as the roles of the mediators in relation to the family court personnel, role of the Mediation Office in relation to the community at large, independence of the Mediation Office, neutrality in mediations, neutrality in the community, and other areas of ethics for MOJ employees. 5. In addition to the current infrastructure improvements, the MOJ should consider providing the Mediation Offices with access to the internet so that they can connect to the Technical Bureau by email. Wireless cards may be a method by which this can be achieved. Access can be restricted to appropriate use by staff. Email questions and answer capability is an excellent method of technical support and highly adaptable to high volume work schedules. 6. The MOJ should consider designing an educational website for use by the Mediation Offices. Online courses in a variety of topics could be designed and posted for use by the specialists. This would allow for online education on specialty topics without the need of organizing trainings for all education. The MOJ might post a “Tip of the Day” each morning about a EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT legal, social, or psychological issue of interest that would attract users to the site from the mediation offices. 3. ENSURE PRIVACY IN THE MEDIATION FORMAT. 1. The evaluators recommend that the Mediation Offices employ an intake protocol done by one specialist, probably the legal specialist who would assess the needs of the case in terms of recommendations for intervention by the other specialists. As the other specialists were needed, they would be added into the mediation. This would allow for a private one-on-one session initially before more staff began to participate and would enhance the sense of confidentiality. 4. MAKE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS. 1. The FJP should consider expanding infrastructure improvements to as many Mediation Offices as possible if funds permit. 2. The MOJ should consider how these types of infrastructure improvements might be extended to the family law courtrooms and other areas of the family law courthouses, or family law court areas annexed to courthouses. 4. COLLABORATE WITH THE JUDICIARY. 1. The FJP should continue to work with the MOJ on its public relations strategy. The FJP should research the area of community-focused strategic planning for ideas on how judges can interact with their communities without jeopardizing their independence or neutrality. 2. The FJP or MOJ should continue the judicial trainings on a routine basis, as frequently as the press of business allows. Judges should be allowed to set the agenda for most of these trainings; however, the training should also take the opportunity to introduce new material as authorized by the MOJ. The judicial trainings are also a place to solicit input from the family law judges about the Mediation Offices. 3. The FJP should continue to work with the MOJ on ways in which the judiciary can promote trust and confidence in the new Family Courts and the Mediation Offices. Consideration should be given to ways in which to gain the support of the family law bar. 5. ESTABLISH SECONDED STAFF/STAFF QUALIFICATIONS. 1. The MOJ should attempt to stabilize the employment status of qualified and well-performing mediators by designating them as full-time MOJ staff. 2. In decisions regarding staffing qualifications for the Mediation Centers’ staff, it is strongly suggested that candidates for mediators (legal specialists) should have some experience practicing law as attorneys in their substantive areas. 6. GATHER AND MAINTAIN STATISTICS REGULARLY. 1. The MOJ should coordinate data from the Family Courts and data from the Mediation Offices. The MOJ must increase its usage of such data for system improvement purposes. It would be valuable for the MOJ to publish an annual report that includes data analysis among other information of family mediation programs. Some of the data required from both sources includes:  Number of cases filed, with the breakdown of the type of family dispute;  Whether or not the participants were represented by attorneys. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 19 2. The Mediation Offices need to record more detailed outcome data:  Number of mediations convened with only the claimant attending (with the breakdown of whether a lawyer accompanied the party);  Number of mediations convened with both parties attending (with the breakdown of whether lawyers were present or not);  Number of settled cases;  Number of decided cases that were actually filed with the court;  Number of postponed cases. 3. Data should be reported in aggregate numbers and comparisons made showing percentages with respect to total filings in the Mediation Offices and total filings in the Family Courts. 4. The MOJ should regularly collect and analyze client satisfaction data. 7. PROMOTE OUTREACH STRATEGY TO COUNTERACT NO-SHOW RATE. 1. The MOJ should develop a strategy for increasing participation in the Mediation Offices, so that it does not become a mere hurdle to litigation and that it actually provides the intended services to Egyptian families. Building confidence and awareness of the mediation process is key in helping to address the problem, in particular with the legal community who often advises their clients not to attend. Targeted outreach to the local and national bar associations and lawyers about the program should be a high priority within the strategy and will provide the most impact. In addition, outreach to poorer communities who do not have the resources to hire a lawyer and are afraid to access the court should be prioritized. This population does not appear to be availing itself of the Mediation Offices. To achieve this goal the MOJ should consider building upon the appropriate role of NGOs and other community groups in spreading the word about the Mediation Offices within their target populations and encouraging more referrals to the Mediation Offices. Targeted outreach to poorer communities through the personal services and referrals of NGOs has a much higher impact than broad-based mass media campaigns. 8. PROMOTE REFORMS TO THE LAW. 1. USAID should consider supporting a legal mandate that would require the parties to appear in person at mandatory mediations rather than have their attorneys appear for them. The FCL currently allows for a legal representative to attend the mediation sessions without the party to the dispute being present. All parties to mediation should always have the right to attend with a legal representative. However, parties should not be allowed to send a legal representative in their place without attending. This is inconsistent with the goals of the mediation process to provide the opportunity for parties to reach their own amicable solution. 2. USAID should consider supporting the liberalizing of the current restrictive statutory scheme for visitation. There appears to be some discussion about moving to a different standard for determining visitation in family law that would allow more visitation time with non-custodial parents. Should that become the case, there might be more to discuss in mediation with respect to visitation arrangements for children. This also might motivate men to participate more widely in the process. 3. USAID should consider supporting the expansion of the remedies available to enforce support agreements. The FCL clearly states that a mediated agreement has the full effect of a court ruling, but it appears that in practice this is not being implemented and is affecting the confidence and participation in mediation. Companion laws or orders that affect the EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT enforcement of mediation agreements should be revised to be consistent with the FCL, especially contempt orders to imprison men for non-compliance of certain support agreements, and the rules of the Nasser Social Bank to recognize mediated agreements for alimony payments. The Evaluation Team believes that prioritizing the issue of enforcement will help the MOJ combat the problem of non-appearance of parties in the mediation centers. 9. SUPPORT THE CREATION OF UNIVERSITY-BASED MEDIATION PROGRAMS 1. Over the long term, USAID should consider supporting the creation of university mediation courses and specializations in Egypt to prepare the future generations of staff for the MOJ’s program. Increasing the professionalism of mediators will provide a bigger pool of qualified candidates to the MOJ and will also establish respect for mediation as an important service. IV. TASK TWO: TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO AND INFORMATION ABOUT FAMILY COURT SERVICES A. OVERVIEW OF FJP ACTIVITIES To achieve the main goal of Task Two, to increase access to information on the Family Courts’ services, the FJP has been working with its main counterpart, the NCCM, to establish a grants program for Egyptian NGOs to support public awareness of the Family Courts and Mediation Offices and encourage the use of family mediation services. In addition, the grants supported counseling services for families, community education efforts, and other activities related to the health of families. The FJP developed a complementary strategy to provide an overall public media campaign for the Family Courts. 1. SUB-GRANTS TO NGOS IN THE THREE PILOT GOVERNORATES To date, the FJP awarded 34 grants, totaling approximately $2,000,000, to 27 NGOs (including 7 extensions) in Minya, Giza, and Port Said. The grants program focuses on four pillars: 1. counseling services for families (social services, psychological interventions, and legal advice); 2. dispute resolution services, including mediation, for family disputes; 3. community awareness and public education efforts on Law 10 of 2004 and related rights of children, wives, and husbands; and 4. economic empowerment support for targeted family members. At the time of this evaluation, eleven of the grantee NGOs had successfully completed their projects, and sixteen NGOs are continuing to implement their projects. A new round of grants is currently being considered. (Please see Annex 10 for the RFP issued by the FJP to the NGOs and Annex 11 for grants distributed to NGOs and the status of those grants through March 2009.) The FJP grants program has touched an impressive number of Egyptian families as a result of FJP grants to Egyptian NGOs. The following quantitative achievements of the program are listed below: EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 21 NGO-Offered Services 2007 2008 2009 (through March) Total to Date 1. Visits to Counseling Centers 3,000 18,184 7,628 28,812 2. Settled Cases 2,350 9,434 4,532 16,316 3. Awareness-Raising Events 90 1170 649 1,909 3(a) Attendees at Awareness￾Raising Events 15,600 45,455 9,671 (Q1 only) 70,726 4. Families receiving Economic Empowerment Support 236 4,900 3,575 8,711 5. Children receiving Social and Psychological Services 335 9,817 6,078 16,230 2. ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSIONS WITH NGOS The FJP and the NCCM facilitated roundtable discussions to encourage dialogue, exchange experiences, and foster collaboration among grantee NGOs around project implementation issues, and to build the capacities of grantee NGOs in areas such as sustainability. FJP staff, together with the NCCM, developed a rights-based advocacy manual that was also discussed during an NGO roundtable discussion with subject matter experts. FJP staff, through the roundtables, helped gather grantee NGOs’ inputs, ideas, and recommendations for the Child Law amendments and delivered them to the MOJ through the NCCM. 3. TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO NGOS (CAPACITY-BUILDING) The FJP delivered a series of NGO capacity-building training workshops with a focus on programmatic activities, monitoring and evaluation, family law, and financial management. The training program was an outgrowth of the NGO capacity assessment tool developed by the FJP to assess the specific needs of their grantees. The training programs were designed to build the capacity of NGOs to continue their work beyond the life of the FJP. (Please see Annex 12 for a complete list of all trainings provided by the FJP to NGOs through March 2009.) 4. SOCIAL MARKETING/MEDIA COMPONENT The FJP’s media component has been working on community awareness and media activities to educate the public about legal rights, family court services, and community support for family justice. The FJP has supported NGO activities in local communities such as literacy classes and family-oriented community celebrations designed to improve family communications, as well as media initiatives such as a series of radio spots aired daily at noon during Ramadan in 2008 that presented “real-life” dramas followed by solutions to both legal and psychological issues faced by families in dispute. Furthermore, the FJP sponsored the development of a youth-focused “Sesame Street”-type (Alam Simsim) television production with Al-Karma Company for 12 segments to be aired during Ramadan in 2009. The segments focus on the problems of children in families in dispute and attempt to promote healthy behavior to protect children. In addition, the FJP compiled two manuals, a Media Messages Manual and a Psychological Manual for Media Messages, together with a training plan to reach out to both print and television media. The FJP’s media team held several meetings with satellite and TV channels and TV talk show producers to assess the potential of producing a TV show that focuses on settling family disputes. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT The FJP held a roundtable workshop in February 2009 with the attendance of Minister of Family and Population Moushira Khattab, opinion leaders, and media producers to train on promoting messages for children and about children and the contents of the new Child Law amendments. Training for print journalists was also held to discuss the new Child Law amendments, controversial articles in the Law, how to raise awareness about child protection committees, and family crisis management, including suggested methods for dealing with children and families in crisis. Some NGO representatives also attended this workshop to build their capacity for media communications. At the NCCM’s request, the FJP drafted a specialized brochure on NGO activities in the field. This brochure highlights the work of NGOs working on family justice issues and the collaborative efforts with the NCCM, and serves as an informational tool for media and the public. Copies of the brochure have been printed and are currently being distributed to NGOs, media outlets, and the public. In January 2009, the NCCM received specialized buses from another donor that will travel throughout Egypt to provide information and build awareness in communities. The FJP is compiling Project- and NGO-developed outreach materials to disseminate on buses. 5. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO THE NCCM Since all Task Two activities are related to the role of NGOs in supporting family justice, the FJP strategically co-located its six staff members who work on NGO grants and capacity building at the NCCM premises, in an office space equipped and furnished by the FJP. The FJP helped the NCCM establish a database about NGOs in the three pilot governorates as well as develop a national hotline to respond to questions about family justice concerns. B. FINDINGS 1. GRANTS PROGRAM Family justice is clearly a new field for Egyptian NGOs. The FJP has succeeded in promoting a new area of services for the majority of the NGOs interviewed, and many of the NGOs have been experiencing for the first time the integration of family justice concepts and interventions related to counseling and dispute resolution into their work to help solve families’ social and economic problems. This has been a learning process, but the majority of NGOs seem to be able to move from their traditional role as charity organizations to service providers. Selection Process The FJP initially conducted specialized training in grants management to NGOs interested in submitting proposals. Of the initial 22 NGOs that received grants, the majority were urban NGOs located in the FJP’s pilot regions although some had formed coalitions with smaller rural NGOs to participate in their project. It appears that the central criterion for some of the sub-grantees was their geographic area of coverage and not necessarily their experience or expertise in one of the four pillars of the grants program. In some circumstances this made for tenuous alliances, and some networks of NGOs appear not to have outlasted the life of the FJP grant. Requirements for Participation in the Grants Program The FJP clearly determined a project design up front and decided that the best way for the NGO grantees to address family justice in the communities was through the four pillars that were required within each project submitted for funding. NGOs were identified and selected based on a variety of areas of expertise in one or more of the pillars, but were asked to incorporate all the services and pillars within each grant proposal. Many NGOs with experience working on family issues seemed to struggle with the economic empowerment pillar and some of the NGOs with a more robust expertise EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 23 in economic issues had a very difficult time incorporating the family counseling and dispute resolution pillar. 2. NGO CAPACITY BUILDING The NGO Assessment Tool The Scorecard that was developed and used by the FJP to determine the capacity building needs of their grantees was a valuable exercise and seemed to ensure that each NGO was capable of good financial management in order to responsibly handle USAID resources. The tool is heavily focused on project management and financial and administrative issues, and asks significant questions about financial sustainability. However, the exercise as related to sustainability seemed to be project-based and did not necessarily incorporate strategic planning as related to the holistic mission of the organization. (Please see Annex 13 for a comparative analysis of Scorecard results at baseline and first annual application in November 2007 and September 2008, respectively.) One NGO in particular mentioned that they never received feedback on the results of their organizational assessments which were conducted at the beginning of the grants program and again a year later. They were curious about what their particular NGO needed to work on and how the results of the assessment fed in to the NGO training program designed by the FJP. For example, right after turning in their assessment, the FJP conducted a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) training, but the grantee was unclear whether the assessment showed they needed to improve in that area. Training Programs The NGO participants in the FJP training programs all reported a high level of satisfaction. The Legal Specialist training in which the MOJ participated was particularly well received. In addition, the Counseling Office Guide provided by the NCCM was deemed very helpful. 3. FJP GRANTEE NGOS’ ACTIVITIES The FJP grants program has supported innovative programs and services provided to the communities which the NGOs serve. The NGO boards and staff interviewed seem quite committed to their work and to helping Egyptian families. The grantees have many accomplishments and lessons learned to report within each of the grants program pillars. Community Outreach Clearly it has not been a part of Egyptian culture for families to talk about intimate problems with outsiders and the NGOs have had to slowly build the confidence of the community in which they operate. Much of the outreach has been focused on letting the community know about the services of the NGO and does not seem to include very much on the availability of the court mediation service. Because of the sensitive nature of the issues to be addressed and the cultural impediments for women in particular to access these types of services, the NGOs have had to be very creative and innovative in conducting this outreach. NGO outreach staff goes to the market to meet women there, goes to the schools and talks with mothers while they are waiting outside for their kids to emerge, or invites them to NGO-sponsored events, such as Mother’s Day parties or holiday lunches. Most of the beneficiaries interviewed knew about the FJP activities in the NGOs through word of mouth from their neighbors, friends, relatives, and/or community facilitators hired by the NGOs to work within the community. To a lesser extent, some knew about services through signs at the NGO premises, posters in public places and schools, or by announcements via microphones on cars touring streets. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT Other observations about the Community Outreach pillar include:  A particularly effective outreach technique was to hold a seminar and then have the counselors available on the spot to offer counseling services to women attending the seminar.  All NGOs, to some degree or another, use community and religious leaders to get out the message to the population. NGOs involve religious leaders by inviting them to come speak at their events and many of the rural NGOs indicate that religious leaders are the most influential. Many NGO leaders reported that even legal education courses need to include religious leaders, because theirs are the only opinions the community respects.  Many NGOs reported having a sophisticated referral network, including social workers in schools, health workers, and reaching out to families through their children.  Sometimes the wife is willing to visit the NGO office, but asks that the NGO refrain from calling the husband. However, men also use the NGO services. For example, one husband interviewed noticed a change in his wife and wanted to come to the NGO to see what it was all about and then started attending the seminars. In another case, a father reported bringing his daughter to the NGO for help with her marital problems.  Some of the most effective outreach was embedded in the other traditional services of the NGOs. For example, an NGO dedicated to disabled children already has a strong relationship with the families who regularly used the rehabilitation services of the NGO, and so the transition to speaking with them about the availability of counseling and dispute resolution services was easier. Awareness-Raising This is the central objective of Task Two - to promote increased knowledge of women’s and children’s rights and promote the Mediation Offices. Knowledge about rights was imparted mostly through seminars and dialogues with community members, although at times it was unclear what the message the NGOs have been imparting about family justice to the community has been. Many NGOs interviewed could explain the rights-based approach to their awareness-raising campaigns, but others seemed to fall back on the central goal of family reconciliation as their highest goal and did not speak about the protection of women’s and children’s rights. Some of the most promising and sustainable achievements have been where the NGO has incorporated awareness-building into the NGO’s other main activities, such as taking advantage of a computer training to briefly discuss women’s rights with a group of girls, or working with a group of mothers who are present at a children’s party to talk about children’s rights. Dispute Resolution Services Dispute resolutions services provided by the NGOs were reported as successful in keeping the family together if they could get both parties to show up. As in the Mediation Offices, there is a problem with the husbands attending the sessions, although the NGOs are able to use other creative tactics in reaching out to the husbands through male friends or family members. In some of the more rural communities, NGOs formed “Community Councils” comprised of community leaders and the heads of big families. Community Councils help a great deal in reaching out to the husbands who would not otherwise attend. Many NGO board members and beneficiaries reported that this helped reconcile many disputes in the targeted families and also appeared to bring the community closer together. For example, the members of one Community Council in a village in Minya were both Muslims and Christians who reported that they became a more integrated community due to the NGO activities. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 25 Counseling Services A large problem in Egyptian families is the breakdown in communication and the use of violence rather than coping skills. Many of the FJP grantees are addressing this problem through counseling services and other preventative strategies to promote healthy families. Some NGOs conduct support groups with women to encourage them to talk about their problems. At the beginning women did not feel comfortable (they reported that they “don’t want to be laughing stocks”), but the NGO staff often wins their confidence once they come to see how the NGO operates and then feel comfortable to talk about their problems and get advice from their peers and the staff. Other observations about the counseling services include:  Many of the NGOs have installed excellent programs to work with young people on how to pick a marriage partner or on general communication skills for couples.  The majority of grantee NGOs organized trips for kids, kids clubs, or day care centers as ways to give children, especially the ones in troubled families, a chance to express themselves and get access to social and psychological care. Also, NGOs organize Family Days, consisting of recreational activities and/or trips for troubled families to be together. This appears to be a good strategy to help in resolving problems and creating a positive atmosphere among family members. Economic Empowerment Most of the NGOs interviewed are convinced that the root of conflicts in families is economic and therefore stress the need to focus on the economic empowerment of the family and building job skills and economic opportunities. Many reported that they “can’t separate out the economic problem from the family problem.” Other observations about the economic empowerment activities include:  The economic empowerment activities often serve as an effective outreach tool for the other services provided by the NGO. For example, one wife reported that she was able to bring her husband to the NGO because they received a loan, then they also began attending some of the seminars and now have a much happier marriage due to improved respect and communication.  Families and beneficiaries often expect to get money from the NGOs and the staff has had to work hard to explain that they are there in the community to help solve problems. Many of the NGOs reported a re-orientation of their work to focus on promoting a positive work ethic (i.e. working for a living) and offering job training instead of just giving handouts. However, some NGOs appear to fall back on their experience with charity and the evaluators heard many stories of NGOs giving short-term loans to families, paying the rent of a woman who needs it, or helping widows financially. 4. NGOS’ PARTICIPATION IN THE FORMULATION OF PUBLIC POLICY: CHILD LAW AMENDMENTS All of the NGOs interviewed expressed deep satisfaction with the process of providing input to the recent amendments to the Child Law. They universally felt that their input and concerns were incorporated and addressed in the final version of the law, and many reported that this was the first experience of a truly participatory process of developing public policy in Egypt. In particular, the success of the effort seems to stem from the role played by the NCCM as an intermediary between the NGOs, at various roundtables that were conducted, and the MOJ as it drafted the final version of EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT the Law. Many NGOs acknowledged that the effect of the new Law will be realized only through passage of the necessary bylaws and regulations, but they appeared optimistic about the future legal framework and committed to continuing their advocacy work on the implementation of the Child Law and now their participation in the new FCL. 5. MINISTRY OF JUSTICE RELATIONSHIP WITH NGOS One of the main challenges for the FJP has been its ability to coordinate Task One and Task Two which were originally designed to be complementary to achieve the same goals. During the FJP’s early stages, however, political roadblocks were encountered which divided the two components and they are now essentially managed as separate initiatives. It is noteworthy that the design assessment conducted for USAID to prepare the statement of work for the FJP in 2004 reported a willingness of top MOJ officials to work with NGOs in providing public outreach and legal assistance to implement the new FCL; it appears, however, that a general mistrust of the NGO sector by the MOJ has made coordination in practice very difficult. The FJP has made strides towards building that trust again and has involved the MOJ in some meetings and trainings with NGOs, but the problem also appears to stem from a misunderstanding on the part of the NGOs of the role of the Court Mediation Centers. NGO grantees, during the evaluation team’s interviews, demonstrated a sense of competition with the Mediation Offices at best, and a disregard for the Mediation Offices’ utility at worst. Many of the NGO staff and board members voiced a sense of pride that they provided a more complete service for community members and had a higher chance of keeping families together, and they asserted that the Mediation Offices offered an inferior service because they did not offer more traditional social work services for families. On the other hand, many NGOs requested more formal protocols of cooperation with the Mediation Offices and were looking for a mechanism to make referrals between NGOs and the Mediation Offices. In some jurisdictions, this is reportedly taking place on an informal basis due to personal connections on the part of the Mediation Office and NGO staff. C. CONCLUSIONS 1. THE CENTRAL GOAL OF TASK TWO IN HELPING TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT THE MOJ’S MEDIATION SERVICES IS CLEARLY NOT BEING SERVED BY THE MAJORITY OF FJP GRANTEES. Many of the NGOs interviewed did not consider informing beneficiaries about Family Courts and Mediation Offices as part of their outreach mandate. On the contrary, they explicitly stated that it is not in the best interests of the beneficiaries to go to the family courts or use the services of the mediation offices. In part this is because they feel that when a case is taken to court or a court￾annexed program (like the Mediation Office), it escalates the conflict beyond reconciliation, but it also seems to reflect a general view that the mediation centers are not offering a high quality service. “They are useless and a waste of time,” said many of the interviewed NGO board and staff members. By requiring that NGO grantees focus on all of the four pillars, the FJP’s central goal of Task Two appears to have been lost. DPK’s evaluation team concludes that the outreach and awareness-raising component of the NGOs’ work should have been dedicated to obtaining the stated objective, including better promotion of the court-annexed Mediation Offices’ services. In most cases the activities within the Economic Empowerment and Family Disputes Settlement pillars were reported by the NGOs and the FJP staff as a bigger community necessity. These are important activities to be sure, but appear to have taken away resources from the outreach and awareness-raising activities. During the interviews, many NGOs reported that in coping with decreasing budgets for their EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 27 programs, they had to decrease funds for the outreach/awareness-raising and information dissemination activities and decided to put more funds into economic empowerment and reconciliation activities. 2. THE NGOS’ PERCEPTION OF THE MEDIATION OFFICES IS A SERIOUS IMPEDIMENT TO THE FJP’S GOALS. There was a strong feeling of competition expressed by the NGOs and many noted they feel it is a waste of time for parties to go to the family court services such as the Mediation Offices, because they would “only have to tell their story all over again.” They do not feel that the court mediators are able to spend as much time with the parties as the NGO, do not provide comprehensive services such as economic support, and cannot conduct needed follow-up or home visits. In addition, NGO staff members are worried about the quality of staff at the Mediation Offices and feel that mediation is simply a hurdle to get over prior to litigation. Some of these concerns are justified but mostly stem from a lack of understanding of the appropriate function of a court-annexed mediation program. 3. NOT EVERY NGO GRANTEE PROJECT NEEDS TO INCLUDE ALL FOUR PILLARS. Many of the NGOs are doing excellent work in their field of expertise, whether it is in working with prisoners and their families, helping families with disabilities, developing micro-credit and economic empowerment support, or providing general social services for women. The evaluation team was concerned, however, that to participate in the FJP grants program, the NGOs were required to adopt the pre-determined project design and incorporate all of the pillars into their services. While the FJP is clearly pushing Egyptian NGOs to provide new services to families to promote access to justice, this donor-driven approach raises concerns for sustainability. Many of the NGO staff members interviewed were recently hired to work on this project, and some of the NGO board members reported that they felt uncomfortable with certain project activities outside of their normal line of work. Only those NGOs that could clearly explain how the FJP fit within their organization’s mission demonstrated a truly long-term organizational commitment to the new services being provided. The evaluation team concludes that NGOs should be more networked together to build on each other’s strengths and complement their services to the communities. The network should include those NGOs within the FJP grants programs, as well as other NGOs and government services providers. (The NGO service provider directory produced by one FJP grantee in Giza is a noteworthy example of this idea.) For the above-mentioned concerns on sustainability, and to reduce redundancy and competition within the NGO sector, the evaluation team concludes that it would be better to allow NGOs to develop their own project design within the framework of the FJP’s goals based on their organizational strengths and mission. This conclusion is distinct from the one-stop￾shop approach that the FJP has been promoting to date. 4. CAPACITY BUILDING TRAINING FOR NGOS SHOULD INCLUDE A STRONG COMPONENT ON THE RULE OF LAW, THE IMPORTANCE OF THE COURT SYSTEM, AND THE APPROPRIATE ROLE OF NGOS IN SUPPORTING THE FAMILY MEDIATION OFFICES. NGOs are an important factor in the success of the Mediation Offices annexed to the Family Courts and the NGO’s role should be clarified for them and for the institutions involved. Additional focus should be placed on the rights-based approach to family justice and on working with NGO staff to present a common message to the community on women’s and children’s rights. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 5. OUTREACH ACTIVITIES SHOULD EMPLOY POSITIVE WORD-OF-MOUTH TECHNIQUES TO COMMUNICATE MESSAGES TO TARGETED AUDIENCES. The Evaluation Team heard mostly about outreach efforts to promote the services of the NGOs’ counseling centers and other project activities, but a renewed focus on the Mediation Offices is needed. Some of the most creative strategies demonstrated by the NGOs targeted men as their central audience for outreach on issues of domestic violence and family communication. 6. THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES OFFERED BY NGOS HAVE BEEN A SUCCESS AND HAVE HELPED MANY FAMILIES STAY TOGETHER. The focus on reconciliation as the primary goal of the dispute resolution services was of concern to the evaluation team only when it appeared that the rights of women were at times sacrificed to keep the family together. For example, usage of Community Councils may be respectful of traditional dispute resolution mechanisms in Egypt, but some of the cases showed that wives may lose some of their rights in Council decisions. The FJP grantees should have a clear strategy for ensuring that the rights of women are protected within these processes and all NGO staff should understand that there are appropriate cases when a woman indeed needs to go to court, and the most important NGO service in those cases is legal aid. If the NGO does mediate a family dispute but it is unresolved, this presents an opportunity for the NGO to explain that a mediation service is also available within the court system. Unfortunately, this does not seem to happen since the majority of NGOs do not value what the court is doing and appear to think they do it better most of the time. 7. ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT ACTIVITIES SHOULD NOT BE OVEREMPHASIZED AT THE EXPENSE OF FAMILY JUSTICE ACTIVITIES WHICH MORE CLOSELY TARGET THE FJP OBJECTIVES. Interviewees gave a disproportionate amount of attention during the evaluation visits to describing economic empowerment activities, perhaps because the NGOs are proud of these cases and can clearly demonstrate a short-term impact on families’ well-being. One of the NGO staff admitted that “it’s most difficult to bring the couple back together, economic difficulties are easier to solve.” The evaluation team was left with the impression, therefore, that there is a large emphasis placed on the economic empowerment activities within the projects to the detriment of the family justice activities which more closely target the FJP objectives. Poverty reduction is the prevailing development challenge facing Egypt and it is, of course, intertwined with other broad development goals in areas such as education, health, and access to justice. NGOs have played a historical role in poverty-alleviation programs through their charity work for the extreme poor, so it makes sense that many of the grantee NGOs would feel most comfortable discussing their available economic aid to communities. But the Evaluation Team is concerned that the discourse in all the NGO visits was overwhelmingly focused on the economic root of family disputes as their primary problem to solve. The objective of the FJP is access to justice and promotion of the family courts, and not poverty alleviation, and the NGOs that participate in this Project should receive instruction from the FJP that their central role is to promote issues like gender equality and the changing role of men and women in the family and to protect the rights of children. Many of the beneficiaries come to the NGOs initially for financial help because that is their immediate need and the request represents a relationship with NGOs that the people know best. Beneficiaries may feel more comfortable talking about their economic needs because of the cultural taboo of talking about family issues with strangers and concerns about confidentiality. But with additional probing on the part of the NGO social workers, the NGOs can discover problems with the EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 29 in-laws, early marriage, domestic violence, second wives, sexual problems, blood feuds, inheritance issues, and neighborhood disputes. Access to a process or service to address these types of legal issues is the central domain of the FJP. 8. SUSTAINABILITY OF THE NGO PROGRAM IS PERHAPS ONE OF THE LARGEST CHALLENGES FACING THE FJP. The FJP should work to guarantee sustainability of the NGO activities. There are positive signs that many NGO services will continue past the life of the FJP. As mentioned, those NGOs that have clearly incorporated the family justice services within the core mission of their organization seem the most poised to continue the activities. For example, they have fundraised from other sources and incorporated part of the counseling services within other projects. Almost all of the NGOs use volunteers, including board members, to keep the costs down, and have begun to offer the educational programs and seminars with their own staff instead of hiring consultants or experts. One of the most promising sustainability strategies was evidenced by those NGOs working directly with the counseling services of the Ministry of Social Solidarity to ensure their on-going institutional capacity to provide quality services to the community. Many NGOs have turned to local businessmen for financial support of their services (although during the economic crisis this has been a dwindling resource to draw upon). For some NGOs the FJP has been their first “donor project” and they do not have relationships established or access to other international donors. Conversely, some of the more established FJP grantees now have the capacity necessary to successfully compete for grants directly from USAID. A central strategy reported by many NGOs was to generate revenues from their job skills program to support their other family justice services. For example, sales of embroidered dresses, computer and internet time, photocopies, baked goods, jewelry, or leasing their space for community events could generate enough revenue to support the NGO counseling and dispute resolution services. The evaluation team is dubious of this strategy because experience shows it is very difficult to generate enough funds for the operating expenses of an NGO through these types of programs and also offer financial support to the beneficiaries who manufacture the products for sale. It remains to be seen, however, whether this may work for some of the FJP grantees. 9. NGO PARTICIPATION IN POLICY MAKING IN THE CASE OF THE CHILD LAW AMENDMENTS WAS A HUGELY SUCCESSFUL EXPERIENCE. Now that the NGOs are faced with the new FCL there is another opportunity for this participation to take place in a positive manner. The FJP is just one of many donor projects supporting NGO roundtables on the FCL and it would be useful to link in with those other efforts and promote ongoing networking of NGOs working in this field. 10. THE MEDIA CAMPAIGN HAS FACED MANY OBSTACLES. Obstacles include initial resistance from the MOJ to the mass media idea and changes in leadership within the MOJ and national TV decision-makers. Mass media is an important tool in Egypt, especially television and satellite TV; however, it is expensive and the sought-after change in attitudes will take years. There is a strong need to involve religious leaders and opinion leaders in these efforts and to continue to break the cultural taboo of discussing family problems and the changing role of women and men in the family. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 11. THE IMPACT OF TASK TWO ACTIVITIES WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE EVALUATION TEAM TO DETERMINE BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF BASELINE INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON COMMUNITY KNOWLEDGE AND SUPPORT FOR THE COURT MEDIATION SERVICES, OR ON COMMUNITY PERCEPTIONS OF FAMILY JUSTICE IN GENERAL. The FJP staff considered the need for this baseline information, but was unable to obtain permission from the necessary government institutions to poll the community in the beginning of the Project life. Data only exists on the number of NGO activities, the number of beneficiaries served by the NGO services, and the number of media pieces about family justice issues. The monitoring and evaluation training program for the grantees probably should have been conducted at the beginning of the FJP grants program cycle before any activities were implemented. This would have helped the grantees to focus on measuring impact and to prepare for monitoring and documenting qualitative indicators which require baseline information and a critical analysis of outputs and outcomes. In addition, the grantees would have benefited from a training on “Strategic Thinking” to help them consider issues such as the consistency of their activities within the FJP￾funded projects and an early acknowledgment and incorporation of the main goal of the FJP Task Two (to provide access to information on the family court mediation services) into their organizational mission. D. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. IDENTIFY AND BUILD CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE. With the time remaining in the FJP contract, it is recommended that the grants program should focus on identifying the NGO grantees that have been successful partners in the program and continue to build their capacity and sustainability as Centers of Excellence for Family Justice. The evaluators believe this is a stronger strategy than starting with a new group of grantees in the final 18 months; with such little time left, the long-term impact of embedding new skills and services within new NGOs is limited. Instead, a strategy of strengthening well functioning and innovative programs with existing grantees, documenting those successes, and seeking to disseminate those experiences and know-how within the NGO sector-- through ‘Lessons-Learned and Best Practices Booklets, Events and/or Spots on Websites’ and ‘Institutional Mentoring Programs’-- will have a lasting impact. 2. BUILD ON NGOS’ EXISTING CORE COMPETENCIES AND ESTABLISH PROPER NETWORKS. The one-stop-shop approach is not sustainable for the NGOs where a new service has been imposed rather than complementing their existing programs. Therefore, it is suggested that NGOs not be required to incorporate all four pillars of the FJP into their program, but rather allow the grantees to focus on their core competencies and determine for themselves which components of the program fit within their established mission. To offer a complete service for families living in the pilot regions, the FJP should work with existing grantees to develop effective referral network systems (frameworks, mechanisms, and tools) to other NGOs, government service providers, and private sector institutions (especially those who have a Corporate Social Responsibility program) in the pilot areas. The FJP could build upon successful products such as publishing and disseminating directories and templates for protocols of cooperation and referrals, and building capacities in a grantee NGO in each geographic region to be able to act as a convener for the local network. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 31 3. CONDUCT AWARENESS BUILDING AS COMMON THREAD/DEVELOP A COMMON MESSAGE. While allowing each NGO grantee to focus on the areas of the project that fit within their core competencies, a common thread for all grantees should continue to be the awareness raising component. The FJP should continue to insist that all grantees include outreach activities on issues such as women’s and children’s rights, prevention initiatives on parenting, communication skills, and pre-marital seminars for young people which have been very effective and should continue as the main focus across all grants. Outreach has been most effective when embedded within other activities, for example when an NGO gathers a group of young women together for a computer skills training and also touches upon women’s rights and pre-marital issues during the training. The FJP should encourage these types of synergies within the grants program and should continue to develop a central message amongst grantees based on their common understanding of the rights-based approach and commitment to family justice. 4. SUPPORT PERSONALIZED/TARGETED OUTREACH. The evaluation team recommends that the FJP continue to focus the NGO communications strategy on targeted outreach within the communities to build awareness through community celebrations, religious events, educational seminars, organizational relationships, referral network, and personal connections – and less on mass media. 5. RE-EVALUATE CURRENT EMPHASIS ON ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT AS THE BASIS FOR RESOLVING FAMILY CONFLICTS. The Evaluation Team suggests that the FJP work with each of their grantees to find a more appropriate balance between economic empowerment activities, and creating awareness among beneficiaries of their rights and building confidence in the family counseling services, which are the central goals of the FJP. The FJP could offer more training to continue to build the skills of NGO social workers and legal specialists on how to move beyond the economic hardships facing the family and to give them the tools to probe deeper with each beneficiary about the family conflicts they face. 6. FOLLOW THROUGH WITH CAPACITY BUILDING FOR NGOS. The FJP grants program and technical assistance seems to have improved the capacity of the NGO grantees, especially in financial management, project management, and monitoring and evaluation. The evaluation team recommends that the capacity assessment tool be used for more individualized feedback with the NGOs participating in the program. After filling out the assessment tool twice in two years, many of the interviewed NGOs reported that they felt unclear about the results of their assessment and how the training program had been designed to fit their needs for improvement in specific areas. The FJP staff might consider convening meetings with each NGO grantee to go over the assessment results and offer specific feedback and suggestions for the capacity-building needs of individual NGOs. While the FJP may not be able to provide individualized training for each NGO, the specific feedback would allow their grantees to seek training or resources to improve in identified areas through other sources. 7. FOCUS ON SUSTAINABILITY. With a recommended focus on fewer grantees and creating Centers of Excellence in Family Justice, the evaluation team suggests that the FJP should continue with targeted technical assistance for each of their grantees and convene NGO-specific workshops with staff and boards to develop EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT sustainability plans based on the needs and level of services of each NGO. For some of the NGOs this was their first experience managing a grant from an international donor and they may need particular assistance in crafting projects and approaching new donors. 8. PROMOTE THE FAMILY LAW COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION OFFICES. The FJP should hold additional roundtables with their grantees to discuss the appropriate roles of NGO dispute resolution and counseling services, as opposed to the role of the court-annexed mediation offices, to dispel existing confusion and alleviate the sense of competition. In addition, protocols should be developed and disseminated along with trainings for NGO counselors and staff on what cases should appropriately be referred to the court mediation program. Improving respect for the rule of law and the role of the Family Courts and the Mediation Offices in protecting the rights of women and children will make the NGOs more effective partners in achieving the goal of improved access to family justice. 9. CONDUCT MORE IN-DEPTH TRAINING FOR SOCIAL WORKERS. The family counseling and dispute resolution services are the core of the FJP’s innovative and progressive agenda, and the NGO social workers are the key to providing an effective service that builds trust and confidence in the community. The Evaluation Team recommends that the FJP conduct additional in-depth training programs for social workers based on international best practices and standards to improve their skills and create new leaders in the Egyptian field of social work. Including social workers from the Ministry of Social Solidarity might increase the sustainability and reach of the training program. 10. ENCOURAGE NGO PARTICIPATION IN PUBLIC POLICY. The FJP grantees have grassroots experience with the everyday lives of families in Egypt and possess valuable insights for policy makers on necessary changes in laws to further promote effective family justice and protection of the rights of women and children. Many NGO coalitions are working on reforms to the FCL and some donor projects in Egypt are dedicated to fostering civil society participation (such as the GTZ-funded Coalition of Women’s Rights’ NGOs). The Evaluation Team recommends that the FJP reach out to coordinate efforts with existing coalitions, attend their meetings, and share FJP grantees’ input to their discussions, processes, and recommendations. The FJP should consider including in its training program for NGO grantees a course on Effective Coalition-Building and Cooperative Advocacy to effectively negotiate their interests with other NGOs and determine appropriate advocacy strategies to follow up on implementing regulations. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 33 CONCLUSION In conclusion, the FJP has done an excellent job overall of advancing the agenda of improved access to justice for families in Egypt. Most importantly, the very competent FJP staff has maintained strong working relationships with all of USAID’s government counterparts, negotiating different perspectives and positions on sensitive cultural and political issues. This has allowed the FJP to move forward at a slow but steady pace, winning the trust and confidence of the Government and court officials necessary to implement the Project’s activities. The mediation offices within the Egyptian courts are an extremely helpful service to families in reaching a timely resolution of their disputes and have helped many families to reconcile. While this new service is still maturing, the FJP has made great strides towards improving the technical skills and infrastructure necessary for a competent service. The biggest challenge facing the Project, as mentioned, is the integration of the two tasks. While the NGO grants program has also been very successful in building new capacities within Egyptian NGOs to provide family justice services, there is still much work to be done to ensure that civil society is an effective and appropriate complement to other governmental and judicial services to increase access to justice for Egyptian families. The challenge of finding the right balance between the functions of the NGO sector and the formal justice system is not only faced in Egypt, however, and the FJP has provided a good basis from which to build better understanding and cohesion. Please see Annex 14 for photo album of the assessment. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT APPENDICES EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 35 ANNEX 1: FJP’S ORGANIZATIONAL CHART EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 37 ANNEX 2: USAID/EVALUATION OF THE FJP STATEMENT OF WORK SECTION C – DESCRIPTION / SPECIFICATIONS/STATEMENT OF WORK C.1 BACKGROUND To facilitate Egypt's determination to strengthen equal access to justice, to enhance family stability, and to protect the rights of children, the United States Agency for International Development, in cooperation with the Government of Egypt, established the Family Justice Project. The project’s overall objective is to strengthen access to justice, enhance family stability, and protect the rights of children. Specifically, the Project supports the implementation of Law Number 10 of 2004, pertaining to family court mediation, working closely with the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and The National Council for Childhood and Motherhood (NCCM) (now known as the Ministry of Family and Populations). The project has two main Tasks including the following: 1. Strengthening family mediation; 2. Improving public access to and information about family court legal services. The Family Justice Project opened its office in Cairo on January 15, 2006, and anticipates completion of its work by July 15, 2010. The project is implemented by Management Sciences for Development, Inc. (MSD), a Washington, D.C. based consulting firm. One of the main activities of the Project is the development and implementation of a training program in family mediation for Family Court mediation panels, and the development of a program to familiarize judges working in Family Courts with issues in family mediation. To accomplish this goal, the Family Justice Project is working with its partners, including the Ministry of Justice to:  Develop a training curriculum for Family Court mediation panels and other court personnel, and train staff in 26 pilot courts and mediation offices located in the governorates of Giza, Minya and Port Said;  Devise and implement a national training plan for family mediation, including training of trainers;  Deliver training for family court judges on the mediation process and family law issues. The other major activity is to improve public access to and information about the family court system. To accomplish this goal, the Family Justice Project is working with its partners, including the NCCM to:  Establish a $3 million dollar grant program in cooperation with NCCM for Egyptian non￾governmental organizations that will award funds to support activities that raise public awareness of the Family Courts, and that encourage use of family mediation services;  Improve the public face of the 26 pilot mediation offices through material improvements and training of administrative staff;  Develop an overall public media strategy for the family courts, and support media activities of the counterparts to raise public awareness of Family Court mediation services. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT C.2 OBJECTIVES Monitoring and Evaluation of the Family Justice task order #DFD-I-05-04-00175-00, implemented by Management Science for Development, Inc. The consultant will review project achievements to date to evaluate the effectiveness of the interventions. Specifically, the consultant will review the package of services in the pilot regions (i.e. training, infrastructure repairs, media support, NGO activities) to determine the effect on improving mediation services and public access to and information about family court legal services. To evaluate the completed activities the consultant will answer the following list of questions, in addition to others suggested by the consultant and approved by USAID: 1. What was the impact of the mediation training program, both initial and follow-up? Are mediators more competent as a result? Do they now work more effectively as a team? What additional training or interventions are required to ensure their competency and support family mediation? 2. What was the impact of infrastructure repairs to the mediation offices? Did this allow mediators to perform their duties more effectively? Did it change their attitude about their work? Were families more comfortable and therefore more inclined to participate in the mediation process? 3. Did more families seek access to mediation services, either as a result of better knowledge, more confidence in mediators due to media campaigns or better facilities in which to hold mediation? What are some lessons learned from the media campaign that may be applied to other activities engaged in social marketing? Were more cases settled at court mediation offices after the FJP interventions? And were the cases settled in timely manner? 4. Has NGO capacity been increased? Are activities/services sustainable by the NGOs? Did the public effectively utilize the services (i.e. psychological counseling, legal services, etc.) offered by the NGO grantees? Is the public more aware of their rights as a result of public awareness campaigns? Were the NGOs able to settle significant numbers of cases and therefore avoid burdening the court mediation offices with additional caseloads? C.3 SCOPE OF WORK The services required under this Scope of Work should be accomplished in seven weeks. In addition to focusing on activity-level results and impacts, the consultant should also assess the broader enabling environment for family justice and mediation services to assist the Mission in understanding factors and trends outside of the manageable interest of the activity that affect the prospects for success and sustainability. 1. Is mediation a trend beyond this sector? Are there lessons learned under this program that can be applied to promoting the use of mediation services in other sectors? Has the Ministry of Justice and other counterparts become more interested in mediation in general as a viable form of alternative dispute resolution in Egypt? 2. What role did the NGO community play in the development of the Child Law Amendments? What were the practical benefits, both for the development of an efficient law and to the NGOs themselves? Should this process be replicated for future laws, policies, and regulations? What were the benefits to the Ministry of Family and Populations (and prospectively, for other ministries or quasi-governmental organizations) in working with EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 39 NGOs in the development of the child law amendments? Now that the amendments have become law, what additional support can NGOs or the USG provide to support the effective implementation of the law? What inputs and resources are needed to ensure that the law is applied and doesn’t remain in name only? 3. What is the perspective of the Ministry of Justice and the Judiciary on the role of civil society in this project? Has that perspective changed during implementation? Will the Ministry of Justice and/or the Ministry of Family and Populations continue working with NGOs after the life of project? Are there lessons learned on the integration of NGOs that could be applied to other projects in DG? The consultant should review the documents listed below for quantitative inputs as well as meeting with the FJP M & E Specialist to obtain significant data on number of people trained, number of people served by NGO counseling centers, the reach of public awareness activities, and other relevant numerical data. In order to obtain the qualitative data, the consultant should conduct interviews with mediators, administrative staff, and judges in the pilot governorates who completed FJP training to determine its impact, as well as the impact of the additional interventions (i.e. infrastructure, media support, NGO support, etc.) The consultant should also meet with clients of the NGO counseling centers to determine the quality of services received and the impact those services had on their lives. The consultant should meet with key contacts at partner institutions including the MOJ and the Ministry of Family and Populations. The consultant should also meet with academics, civil society activists at the national and community levels, international donors, and others not directly involved in the implementation of the project to obtain a broad perspective on the project activities and the sector as a whole. The consultant should also provide documentation of impact by NGO grantees and changes that resulted from their support. This documentation should be provided in a “story format” (see UNICEF report from Girls Education Project with NCCM for requested format) and focus on the lessons learned from the process, how cultural issues were addressed, and highlight the contributions that could be replicated. Additional documents to be reviewed by consultant: FJP FY 2007 Annual report FJP FY 2008 Annual report FJP FY 2008 Work plan FJP FY2008 Quarterly reports FJP FY 2007 Monitoring and Evaluation Report FJP Updated M & E Data for 2008 FJP Assessment of mediator training NGO Scorecard results UNICEF report from Girls Education Project with NCCM The consultant shall provide USAID and FJP with a list of any additional materials s/he wants to review. The consultant should coordinate closely with FJP to set up any necessary interviews. Task One: In Fiscal Year 2007, Task One of the Family Justice Project completed the following project activities: 1) assessed pilot mediation offices organizational structure and workflow; 2) conducted comprehensive on-site infrastructure assessments of the mediation offices in the 26 pilot family EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT courts; 3) provided infrastructure repairs in the mediation offices of the 3 family courts in Port Said; 4) trained, certified and conducted graduation ceremonies for over 260 legal and psycho-social specialists in the three pilot governorates; 5) developed, refined and made adaptations to training curricula for mediators; 6) developed systems and procedures for nationwide training with training of trainers strategy; 7) initiated training of trainers workshop and nationwide training of family court mediators in Cairo governorate; and 8) developed banners and brochures to support information dissemination of the FJP along with a short documentary film about mediation. In Fiscal Year 2008, the FJP, in coordination with the MOJ: 1) launched nationwide training for family mediators completing to date 7 governorates; 2) conducted training of 562 family court judges; 3) carried out train the trainer workshops for MOJ trainers to support national training efforts; 4) conducted on-going technical assistance and support to mediators in the three pilot governorates including skills enhancement training; 5) completed infrastructure repairs in the Giza pilot mediation centers; 6) began infrastructure repairs in the Minya pilot mediation centers; and 7) provided MOJ and mediation offices in pilot sites with media support. Task Two: In Fiscal Year 2007, Task Two of FJP awarded 20 grants in an effort to strengthen civil society organizations in Minya and Giza, totaling more than 1.1 million USD. To date, an additional eleven grants have been awarded bringing the total to 31 (26 NGOS and 5 extensions) and almost $2 million. NGO grantees successfully implemented program activities focusing on counseling services for families, community awareness and education efforts on the law and related child rights. To complement the work of the NGOs in the pilot communities, the FJP launched the first phase of a comprehensive community awareness and media campaign to educate the public about legal rights, family court services, and community support for family justice. Furthermore, Task Two is providing capacity building through on-going training and technical assistance to NGO grantees. In an effort to leverage resources and create greater impact, the FJP is currently developing a unified methodology to ensure standardized training and complementary messages by NGOs on topics such as: human rights, children’s rights, visitation and custody, conflict resolution and the role and rights of women in the family. The community awareness and media activities also continue to support NGO activities and behavior modification in the community. The media component of Task II works directly with NGO grantees to develop and disseminate messages on family justice to children, youth, parents and community leaders. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 41 ANNEX 3: BIBLIOGRAPHY Egypt, Family Courts Legal Assessment and Design Team Final Report, ARD, Inc., 2004 "Family Courts in Egypt”, Recent Reforms in Personal Status Laws and Women’s Empowerment, Mulki Al-Sharmani, American University in Cairo Social Research Center, Pathways for Women’s Empowerment, 2007 Family Justice Project’s FY 2007 Annual Report (October 1, 2006 – September 30, 2007) Family Justice Project’s FY 2008 Annual Report (October 1, 2007 – September 30, 2008) Family Justice Project’s FY 2008 Annual Workplan (October 1, 2007 – September 30, 2008) Family Justice Project’s FY 2008 1st Quarterly Report (October 1, 2007 – December 31, 2008) Family Justice Project’s FY 2008 3rd Quarterly Report (April 1, 2008 – June 30, 2008) Family Justice Project’s FY 2009--1st and 2nd Quarterly Reports (October 1, 2008 – March 31, 2009) Family Justice Project’s “Frequently Asked Questions” about Personal Status Issues Family Justice Project’s Legal Manual for Mediation Offices Staff, October 2008 Family Justice Project’s Monitoring and Evaluation Report FY 2008 (October 1, 2007 – September 30, 2008) Family Justice Project’s National Training for Family Court Judges Final Report, December 2008 – March 2009 Family Justice Project’s Nationwide Mediation Office Training - Final Report, January 2009 Family Justice Project’s Psycho-Social Manual for Mediation Offices Staff, October 2008 Family Justice Project’s Report on “Financial Management” Training Workshop for Partner NGOs, December 2008 Family Justice Project’s Report on “Project Management, Monitoring and Evaluation” for Partner NGOs, April 2008 NGO Scorecard Assessment FY 2007 NGO Scorecard 2nd Assessment FY07/08 The Girl’s Education Initiative in Egypt, Ronald G. Sultana, UNICEF, 2007 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT ANNEX 4: INTERVIEWS/FIELD ACTIVITIES BY EVALUATION TEAM IN EGYPT and Questionnaires used CAIRO/GIZA ACTIVITIES/VISITS 21 April- Meeting at USAID/Cairo with the Mission Director, Team Leader for Rule of Law, other USAID staff, and COP of FJP; and meeting at FJP office with FJP COP and staff 22 April- Meeting with MOJ and MOFP’s Ministers and respective staff 23 April- Meeting with representatives of 5 Grantee-NGOs (Seti Center/Caritas-Egypt, Hawaa Elmostakbal-Imbaba, Misr Elmahrousa, Azhar Elkarma, and New Horizon) at FJP office in Maadi; site visit to Boulaqe Eldakrour NGO (Elkhairia Eleslamia for Community Development/New Horizon), where Evaluation Team members met with beneficiaries, Board members, management, and staff 24 April- Evaluation Team Meeting to prepare Report outline 26 April- Visits to family courts (Ayat and 6 of October): met with mediation center staff, mediators, lawyers, users of the mediation service, and judges (including Chief Judge in Ayat Court and three Family Court Judges in 6 of October Court) 27 April- Site visits to two Grantee-NGOs, Shemou and Hawaa Elmostakbal: met with beneficiaries, Board members, management, and staff PORT SAID ACTIVITIES/VISITS 28 April- Visit to a family court: met with Chief Judge, a Family Judge, mediation center staff (a psychological specialist, two psychological experts, and three legal specialists), mediators, lawyers, and users of the mediation service; site visit to SME Development Associates Office where Evaluation Team met with the Chairperson, project staff, and beneficiaries 29 April- Site visits to offices of two NGOs in Port Fouad (Port Fouad Association for Urban Development and Port Fouad Association for Family and Child Care): met with beneficiaries, Board members, management, and staff 30 April- Meeting at USAID/Cairo for debriefing and to meet the Chairperson for ‘Alliance of Arab Women’ which was not planned or arranged by the FJP and/or USAID 1 May- Evaluation Team meeting to start the write-up of the first draft of the Report MINYA ACTIVITIES/VISITS 2 May- Evaluation Team travels to Minya 3 May- Round table meeting with representatives of five Grantee-NGOs (Future Eve, Population and Health NGOs’ Federation, Good Shepherd Association, Social Services and Integrated Development Association, and Evangelical Association for Sustainable Development) at hotel; three site visits to offices/premises of Saft ElKhamara NGO and ElGamaia Elkhairia Eleslamia (partners of Health and Population Federation) in Saft Elkhamara and Beni Ebid villages, and to the Good Shepherd EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 43 Association’s Office in a slum area of Minya to meet with beneficiaries, Board members, management, and staff 4 May- Visits to family courts in Edwa and Maghagha: met with Chief Judge, mediation center staff, mediators, lawyers, and users of the mediation service 5 May- Meeting with Future Eve Association at hotel: met with beneficiaries, Board members, staff, management, former FJP COP, and current FJP COP; Team returned to Cairo 6 May- Evaluation Team Meeting to review notes/findings and prepare for presentations to USAID, MOHP, and MOJ 7 May- Meeting with two program managers from the Center for Egyptian Women’s Legal Affairs/CEWLA at the Center’s premises in Ard Ellowaa (not a FJP grantee, but very involved in forming a coalition of NGOs defending women rights, funded by GTZ); meeting with three members/counselors from the MOJ’s Technical Office for Mediation, meeting with FJP staff 9 May- Evaluation Team Meeting at hotel to finalize presentations to USAID, MOFP, and MOJ 10 May- Meeting with USAID director and staff to present and discuss the Evaluation Team work, findings and recommendations 11 May- Evaluation Team made Presentation of findings and recommendations to MOFP and MOJ 12 May- Meeting with the FJP COP and media specialist to gather more information about the General Awareness Campaign that has been conducted by the FJP for the past five years EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT Interview Protocol- Judges and Court Experts QUESTION POSSIBLE FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS 1. How does the mediation fit into your family court system? Do you refer cases to mediation after case initiation? If so, is there a particular point at which it is most effective? Do you meet regularly with the mediation staff? 2. Was FJP training for judges important for you to attend? If you did not attend, would you like to if given the opportunity in the future? If you did attend, what was the most beneficial aspect to the training for you? What could be done to improve it? 3. What NGO service providers do you know of that are providing services to families in your community? Are you aware of the work done in your area by________[NGOs]? If no, [tell them a little about it] – does that sound interesting to you? Would you like to learn more about it? If yes, do you think the services they provide are benefiting the public? In what way? Can you see the benefits of these services in your courts? What services do you think are the most beneficial to litigants – psychosocial counseling, legal advice, etc? Are there other services you think should be provided? 4. Do you support the further development of family law mediation in Egypt? Why or why not? 5. Can you envision mediation being useful in the resolution of other types of legal disputes in Egypt? Which kinds of cases? 6. . What are the obstacles to implementation of a mediation services project – what is needed to overcome them? In family law? In other areas of the law? Who (person or group) is most like to support mediation services? Who is likely to oppose? EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 45 Interview Protocol- Technical Bureau for Family Courts MOJ QUESTION POSSIBLE FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS 1. What type of case management issues (procedures & cases) does the mediation service help to address? Does it help reduce the total volume of cases? Does it help resolve particular types of cases? Does it help with problems the court has found difficult to handle? 2. Do you find that the mediation staff is adequately trained? Are the mediators fair and unbiased? Do the mediators understand their roles and stay within their established assignments? Or do they tend to overreach their authority? Is there a system for the public to lodge complaints with the court about the mediators? Have you received any complaints? 3. What are the most significant benefits to the court from the mediation program? Is there any particular issue, process, or procedure that the mediation project has been particularly helpful with? Is there something you expected it to help with that it had not? 4. What are the most significant benefits to the public from the mediation project? What do you think is the most significant benefit to litigants? Access to information about legal rights? Ability to reach agreements? Timely dispositions? 5. What suggestions do you have to the FJP mediation project that would help improve the mediation services? EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT Interview Protocol- NGOs- Beneficiaries AUDIENCE QUESTIONS 1. NGO grantees board members and executive staff) 1. Why did your organization apply for a grant from the FJP? 2. How, in your opinion, is/was your organization’s project relevant to your organization’s vision and mission? and to targeted communities’ priority needs/problems? 3. What are your NGO’s role, goals, and objectives in the FJP (compare board and executive staff perception to each other and to USAID and/or FJP’s Management and Staff)? 4. Have the Project Activities help/ed accomplish your organization’s role, goal and objectives in FJP? What activities are/were most crucial? 5. What indicators do/did you use to measure your organization’s success? 6. What are/were the main obstacles to implementation of project activities, accomplishing results, and having positive impact? 7. What are/were the main factors that facilitated implementation of project activities, accomplishing results and having positive impact? 8. Did your organization receive Training and Technical Assistance from the FJP? Which ones are/were most useful to accomplishing your NGO’s role, goals, and objectives in the FJP? Are there any trainings that you felt irrelevant? 9. Are/were there other resources provided by the FJP that are/were particularly useful (data/info, guidebooks/how-to manuals, etc.) 10. If you were to participate in the Project all over again; what would you change? And why? 11. What is your relationship or level of coordination with the government/courts? 2. Beneficiaries of grantee￾NGOs and other community members and 1. What was the service you used at this NGO Center (mediation, counseling, legal advice?) 2. What was the quality of the service in your opinion? Was your EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 47 AUDIENCE QUESTIONS leaders issue/dispute/problem taken care of? 3. How did you learn about the NGO’s services? 4. What do you think of the relevance of this NGO project and its effect on community members’ lives? 5. Were you involved in the design of the project in any way? (Participate in a seminar, workshop, consultation, outreach event?) 6. Do/did you have suggestions that you think will make or could have made the project more successful/effective? Did you try to communicate your suggestions to Project and/or NGO management or staff? What was the response? 3. Mediation participants 1. Have you used mediation services to resolve a family dispute? If so, what was the issue in dispute and are there issues you would not seek to resolve through mediation? If not, why not? 2. What mediation initiatives/service providers (private, donor, government, business or NGO-sponsored) do you know of? 3. What do you know about the differences among these different providers? 4. How did you learn about mediation? What made you decide to use the mediation service? 5. When did you decide to seek these services -- prior to your dispute entering litigation or during the court process? 6. What were your impressions of the quality of the service and were you satisfied with the outcome? 7. What was the quality of the mediator? Did you feel he or she was neutral and helpful to your resolution? 8. What were the strengths and weaknesses of the process? 9. Would you recommend this service to others as a way to resolve family law disputes? 10. What needs to be done to make the mediation process more accessible, efficient, and effective? EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT Interview Protocol- Mediators QUESTION POSSIBLE FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS 1. What issues are most amenable to resolution through mediation? How are cases screened for suitability? How are safety issues handled? What happens when there are issues of child neglect/abuse, spousal abuse, or other family violence? Do you conduct separate mediation sessions? 2. What issues should not be the subject of mediation? What are the characteristics of these issues? How are they identified? What happens when an issue is not suitable for mediation? How are emergency matters handled? 3. How does the mediation program fit into your family court system? Does the mediation project fit into an overall case management structure in the family court? Do you meet with the judges and other court staff on a regular basis to address issues that arise and keep everyone informed of current activities? Does it help reduce the total volume of cases? Does it help resolve particular types of cases? Does it help with problems the court has found particularly difficult to handle? 4. How have the psychological and social work components of the mediation program been accepted by the court (judges and court staff)? Has the therapeutic jurisprudence model been well received by judges and court staff? Does it translate to the courtroom in any way? 5. How do you view your role as a family mediator? How is working as a mediator different from your profession in the private sector? How have you worked to maintain the appearance of neutrality in your mediation work? 6. What do you think is the most important part of the work you do as a mediator? Getting an agreement? Protecting the best interests of children? EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 49 QUESTION POSSIBLE FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS Helping parties make informed decisions? Helping disputants learn to resolve their own disputes? Assisting the court with reports? Reducing the court’s workload? Writing reports to help judges make decisions? 7. What is the process for making reports and communicating with judicial officers? Are the litigants given copies of all reports? Are the mediators then available for questioning in court by litigants or their attorneys about the reports? Do the reports contain any recommendations based on the opinions of the mediators as to what would be a good decision by the judge? Or are they limited to factual information? Do the mediators have any ex parte communications with judges about the merits of cases - or are all communications noticed with an opportunity for examination and comment? 8. What steps would you recommend to improve the efficiency of the mediation process? 9. What programs or procedures would you recommend to make the experience easier for disputants? 10. Is mediation staff adequately trained and, if not, what areas would you recommend as needing improved or further training? Are the mediators fair and unbiased? Do the mediators understand their roles and stay within their established assignments? Or do they tend to overreach their authority? Is there a system for the public to lodge complaints with the court about the mediators? Have you received any complaints? 11. What training or continuing education in mediation have you received? How would you rate the quality of the training you have received? What additional training would you find helpful? EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT QUESTION POSSIBLE FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS 12. What are the most significant benefits of the mediation program? Is there any particular issue, process, or procedure that the mediation project has been particularly helpful with? Is there something you expected it to help with that it had not? 13. What are the most significant benefits to the public from the mediation program? What do you think is the most significant benefit to parties? Access to information about legal rights? Ability to reach agreements? Timely dispositions? 14. What do you think has been the impact of the infrastructure repairs to the mediation offices? What has been the effect on the willingness to mediate? What other effects on the court? What else should be done? 15 Can you envision mediation being useful in the resolution of other types of legal disputes in Egypt? Which kinds of cases? 16. What are the obstacles to implementation of a mediation services project – what is needed to overcome them? In family law? In other areas of the law? Who (person or group) is most like to support mediation services? Who is likely to oppose? EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 51 Interview Protocol- National Stakeholders AUDIENCE QUESTIONS 1. Ministries 1. What is your perception of the USAID FJP? Impact and results? 2. What activities of the project have been most successful? 3. What activities of the project have been the most challenging? 4. What mediation programs (court or NGO-sponsored) have been the most successful? 5. What has been the most significant impact of the family law mediation program? 6. What actions do you feel need to be taken (legal, financial, practical) to increase the use of mediation for family disputes? 7. Do you think mediation has become a well-known option for disputants in family cases? Are families willing to use this option to resolve their disputes? 8. What community outreach campaigns about mediation have been most effective? Are there other popular education methods that should be used to spread the word? 9. Has the Egyptian legal community accepted mediation in family cases? Are there opportunities to expand mediation to other types of cases in Egypt? 10. What additional support for the Family Mediation Program do you believe is the most necessary? 2. Academics/legal professionals/civic leaders/international donor community 1. What is your perception of the USAID FJP? Impact and results? 2. Do you support the further development of family law mediation in Egypt? Why or why not? 3. What mediation initiatives/service providers (court or NGO-sponsored) do you know of and think are the most successful? 4. How would you assess these different providers? What actions do you feel need to be taken (legal, financial, practical) to increase the use of mediation for family disputes? 5. What group do you feel is the biggest proponent of mediation? 6. What group do you feel is the biggest opponent of EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT AUDIENCE QUESTIONS mediation? 7. Do you think mediation has become a well-known option for disputants in family cases? Are families willing to use this option to resolve their disputes? 8. What community outreach campaigns about mediation have been most effective? Are there other popular education methods that should be used to spread the word? 9. Has the Egyptian legal community accepted mediation in family cases? Are there opportunities to expand mediation to other types of cases in Egypt? 10. What additional support for the Family Mediation Program do you believe is the most necessary? EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 53 ANNEX 5: LIST OF FJP TRAINING WORKSHOPS PROVIDED TO STAFF OF MEDIATION OFFICES, BY DATE, SITE, AND PARTICIPANTS’ CHARACTERISTICS, THROUGH MARCH 2009 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT FY2006 & 2007 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 55 FY2008 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT ANNEX 6: LIST OF FJP TRAINING WORKSHOPS PROVIDED TO FAMILY COURT JUDGES, BY DATE, SITE, AND PARTICIPANTS’ CHARACTERISTICS EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 57 FY 2008 FY 2009 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT ANNEX 7: EXCERPT FROM THE FJP’S FY2008 M&E ANNUAL REPORT ON TRAINING SATISFACTION LEVELS EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 59 1. NATIONWIDE MEDIATION TRAINING During FY08 nationwide training of mediation office specialists continued and will be completed in November 2008. This year the project trained a total of 960 Specialists including 516 males and 444 females. This number represents 126 psychologists, 317 social workers, 425 legal specialists and 92 administrators. The mediation training was suspended temporarily during the judicial training. The MOJ also decided to stop sending administrative personnel and secondees whose future with the mediation offices was not confirmed, to the nationwide training. The training materials and length of program was adjusted from 4 to 3 days and the work plan figures were reduced accordingly. In June 08 Task 1 began to work with a revised plan. The FY08 work plan trainee estimate of 1008 was revised to 1036 trainees. Total number actually trained was 960 representing 93% of the revised target. 2. TRAINING OF JUDGES The MOJ requested training for family court judges and estimated the number of attendees to be 300, which was included in the FY08 workplan. However, the program resulted in the training of 562 judges in three-day sessions in Cairo and Alexandria, a 187% achievement of the original target. The MOJ has requested an additional two-day training program for family court judges, which is included in the FY09 workplan. 3. TRAINING OF TRAINERS In accordance with the workplan and to promote sustainability of mediation training, training of up to 20 trainers for mediation specialists was targeted. The Project successfully completed a train-the￾trainers program during June and July for 14 trainers from the MOJ. 4. SKILLS ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM As targeted by the workplan, skills enhancement training was completed in all three pilot governates as a follow-on to training provided in the prior fiscal year. This was a three-day program covering social, psychological and legal issues. The objective was to meet with specialists in the field, exchange experiences and enhance acquired skills. An evaluation of the training impact on performance was conducted with a focus on the following:  The extent of impact on performance  The need for additional training and the specific topics to be covered  Rate of satisfaction with the training materials, format and instruction level A separate assessment report was prepared for each governorate compiling the benefits to trainees, obstacles encountered and recommendations of specialists. A comparative report of the three governorates was also prepared, which summarized common concerns and recommendations. Copies of the all reports were provided to USAID and the MOJ. 5. FEEDBACK EVALUATION  Below are the results of the trainees evaluation collected through the application of the evaluation tools. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT A. Training Module Evaluation The following represents a summary of the reported trainee feedback on training materials,format and level of instruction based on the evaluation questionnaire: Nationwide training: an average satisfaction rate of 86% Skills Enhancement Training Program satisfaction rate: Giza: 85%, Minya: 82% and Port Said 97%; with an average rate of 88% B. Training impact on performance A pre and post assessment of training benefits at the beginning and completion of the training revealed the following: Nationwide training: average increase in knowledge of 15% Skills Enhancement training: average increase in knowledge of 22% EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 61 ANNEX 8: LIST OF EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS PROVIDED BY FJP TO FAMILY COURTS, THROUGH MARCH 2009 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT FY 2007 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 63 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 65 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 67 ANNEX 9: MOJ DATA ON MEDIATION OFFICES EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 69 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT ANNEX 10: RFP ISSUED BY FJP TO LOCAL GRANTEES Family Justice Project NGOs Family Legal Services Support Grant Request for Applications Grant Cycle: #1 Issued: June 29, 2006 Submission Deadline: July 31, 2006 at 4:00 PM (Cairo time) Submission Format: Signed 4 copies and one electronic copy saved to CD Submission Location : MSD Cairo Office Family Justice Project 75/77 Degla Plaza Road 199, Maadi, Cairo ABOUT THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT To facilitate Egypt's determination to strengthen equal access to justice, to enhance family stability, and to protect the rights of children, the Government of Egypt, through the National Council for Childhood and Motherhood and the Ministry of Justice, has established the Family Justice Project in cooperation with the United States Agency for International Development. They have selected Management Sciences for Development (MSD) Egypt as the implementing agency for this Project. The purpose of the Project is to enhance access to justice for families. Specifically, the Project will support understanding and implementation of Law Number 10 of 2004, pertaining to the family court system. The Family Justice Project began work on January 15, 2006, and anticipates completion of its work by July 15, 2010. The project will initially concentrate its efforts in three pilot governorates: Giza, Minya and Port Said. Among its activities, in cooperation with the National Council of Childhood and Motherhood, the Project has undertaken a grant initiative to support non-governmental organizations working in fields that support larger project objectives. In addition to the NGO grant program, the Project is working with the Egyptian Ministry of Justice and other entities to strengthen the Family Courts and related family support services. This Request for Applications relates only to the grant initiative undertake in cooperation with the National Council of Childhood and Motherhood. EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 71 GOAL OF THE GRANTS & TYPES OF ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED The purpose of this grant program is to support activities in the non-governmental sector that promote the core project objective of enhancing access to justice for families. In general, the grants will support activities that:  Raise awareness about the family courts and family court legal services, especially family dispute resolution;  Raise awareness of legal rights for children and families, and about other services supporting children and families;  Encourage use of the family court dispute resolution services, make more accessible resources in support of families and children in crisis; and/or  Build capacity of Egyptian NGOs to provide dispute resolution services, public awareness and other related services in support of family stability and child welfare. The Family Justice Project will not dictate the types of activities it will support, or the content of individual proposals. We encourage eligible NGOs to come forward with any and all project ideas that support the core objective of enhancing access to justice for families. Merely to illustrate the types of activities that would support the Projects core objectives, some suitable activities might include:  Media products, and/or media campaigns to promote legal rights for families, and the rights and best interests of the child;  public information products, or media campaign to promote family mediation services;  providing direct family mediation or other family support services to supplement court-based mediation;  providing legal services to family court petitioners;  training programs to support work with family court mediation services;  training programs to foster a culture that discourages violence in the family. GRANT AMOUNT AND DURATION Maximum Grant Amount: LE 1,000,000 (one million pounds) Minimum Grant Amount: LE 150,000 (one hundred and fifty thousand pounds) Duration: The length of the grant period will be flexible, depending upon the proposal, except that activities under the grant cannot commence before 1 December 2006, and must terminate by 31 December 2009, provided that the grant lifetime will not be less than twelve months. Family Justice Project encourages NGOs with limited experience in grant management to apply for the minimum amount as mentioned, or to partner with organizations with a proven track record in grant administration. ELIGIBILITY OF NGO EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT Required:  Registered Egyptian NGO  Proved to have no financial violations Preferred:  Active nationally or in one of three target governorates: Giza, Minya, and/or Port Said  prior experience with activities relating to families, women, children and/or the law;  a proven track record in grant management  demonstrated ability to network and form coalitions with other NGOs to pursue common goals ELIGIBILITY OF ACTIVITIES Required--Proposed activities must:  Meet all technical requirements set out in this RFA, and comply with Egyptian law;  have a demonstrable connection to the objectives of the grant program;  have national impact, or impact in one or more of three target governorates of Giza, Minya or Port Said; Preferred—Proposed activities should:  strengthen the long-term internal capacity of the applicant to carry on with activity after termination of grant;  be collaborative activities with the involvement of other NGOs and the community at large  include a cost-sharing component, which can be made up of volunteered time or other resources. COMPONENTS OF THE PROPOSAL The applicant NGO should follow the following format for the proposal:  Cover page: includes NGO profile and basic information of the proposed activity – in Arabic and English  Activity Summary : provides an articulate briefing of the proposed activities – in Arabic and English  Activity Description: provides; 1. An articulate cause/issue that the NGO will work on during the lifetime of the grant and how it is related to the NGO mission statement, 2. roles and responsibilities of the partners, 3. the proposed activities and the outputs/results  Capacity Statement EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 73 1. Describes internal capacity of applicant and its partners (if any) to carry out the proposed activities; 2. Describes past experience with other donor funded projects; 3. Describes how the applicant will use the grant to develop its own capacity further.  Detailed Implementation Plan: Provides a chart showing the progress of proposed activities over time. 1. Management, Monitoring & Evaluation Plan: Describes the how the activity is managed, measured, evaluated and reported to MSD. The monitoring and evaluation plan will be further developed with the winning grantee. In addition to regular monitoring by MSD personnel, successful grantees should expect an external audit during the term of the grant. 2. Budget: provides a detailed budget broken down over time. The budget should include the cost-share contribution of the NGO and any partners, and reflect the design of the proposed activities, including any sub-grants to partner NGOs (if applicable). GRANT-MAKING TIMELINE (TENTATIVE) July 2, 2006--The Request for Applications (RFA) released. Copies can be obtained from the Family Justice Project office in Degla Maadi (address is given below). The RFA will be provided either in hard copy or electronically at the request of the applicant. July 9 – 13, 2006--Grant orientation workshops held in Cairo or Giza, Minya and Port Said. The orientation workshop will answer questions regarding to grant and provide some writing guidance (only NGOs that registered will be invited). To register in one of the grant orientation workshops, interested NGOs should fax or e-mail MSD to express their interest. 4:00 PM (Cairo Time), July 27, 2006--Deadline to receive two copies of the proposal applications from NGOs. The applications must be presented in two hard copies at the MSD office no later than the stated time. July 28, 2006—Initial Review. A committee comprised of representatives of NCCM, USAID, and MSD will review the applications and select finalists for further consideration. August 6-31, 2006—Site visits to finalists. Family Justice Project staff will visit the premises of finalists for the grant to assess capacity of organization. September 4 and 5, 2006—Proposal Development Workshop. Family Justice Project will hold a single workshop in Cairo for finalists to revise and improve their proposals. September 14, 2006—Revised proposals due from Finalists September 28, 2006—Grant Awards Announced. CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING GRANTS APPLICATIONS Quality and clarity of idea (15 points) EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT Impact of activity (15 points) Relevance to Project Goals (15 points) NGO and partners' ability to implement, manage, and follow up on the activity (15 points) NGO and partners' experience in implementing similar activities (10 points) Sustainability of Activity (5 points) Quality of Capacity development Plan (10 points) Realism of Budget (10 points) Gender and child rights considerations (5 points) FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT CONTACTS Head Office Address: 75/77 Degla Plaza, Road 199, Degla, Maadi, Cairo Phone No.: 02- 5170224 – 5170226 – 5170228 – 5170231 Fax: 02-7549001 Website: www.msdglobal.com Email: info@msdegypt.com ATTACHMENTS  Proposal Application EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 75 ANNEX 11: GRANTS DISTRIBUTED TO NGOS AND STATUS OF THE GRANTS, THROUGH MARCH 2009 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 77 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 79 ANNEX 12: LIST OF ALL TRAININGS PROVIDED BY THE FJP TO NGOS, THROUGH MARCH 2009 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT DATE TRAINING # TRAINING SUBECT GOVERNORATE # NGO’S TRAINED # OF TRAINEES Oct-07 1 FJP reporting and financial training Giza 10 27 Nov-07 1 FJP reporting and financial training Minya 12 40 Nov-07 1 Legal workshop with Ministry of Justice Minya/Giza 76 Dec-07 1 Orientation for 2 new grantees Giza 2 8 Jan-08 1 Legal Specialist training Giza 12 39 Feb-08 1 Legal Specialist training Minya 10 76 Feb-08 1 End of grant Financial orientation Minya 5 5 Mar-08 1 Financial orientation &reporting mechanisms for Port Said & refresher training for Giza P. Said/Giza 3 18 Apr-08 1 Project Management & M&E Giza/Minya/P.Said Giza 14 Minya 10 P.Said 2 32 Apr-08 1 Roundtable of Selected NGOs Giza/Minya/P.Said 12 Jul-08 1 Advocacy and training manual Giza/P.Said Giza 12 P.Said 3 42 Jul-08 1 Advocacy and training manual Minya 10 36 Aug-08 1 Financial Orientation for 1 grantee Port Said 1 4 Dec-08 1 Financial management for accountants Giza/Minya/P.Said Giza 14 Minya 10 P.Said 3 39 Feb-09 1 Sustainability roundtable Giza 14 25 Mar-09 1 Sustainability roundtable Minya 10 25 Apr-09 1 Legal Specialists Workshop Giza/P.Said 40 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 81 ANNEX 13: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SCORECARD RESULTS AT BASELINE AND FIRST ANNUAL APPLICATION IN NOVEMBER 2007 AND SEPTEMBER 2008, RESPECTIVELY EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT SCORE CARD ASSESSMENT SUMMARY REPORT MINYA Governorate 5 Management Areas Weighted average 20 25 15 15 25 FY 07/08 Balanc e Grant No. Grant No. NGO Name Strategi c Program Information External R. Financial Card SCORE % improve d Scor e Scor e Score Score Score Score Minya GA-263-06 Businessmen 01 Ass. Base Sep08 5 23 10 11 22 71 GA-263-06 Samalut Culture 03 P.Pioneers Base Sep08 18 25 15 15 20 93 GA-263-06 Minya Coalition 04 of Health Base 17 25 15 7 22 86 Sep08 20 25 15 13 25 98 3 0 0 6 3 12% GA-263-06 Social services & 05 Integ.Develop. Base 13 25 11 5 22 76 Sep08 15 25 11 5 25 81 New Vision 2 0 0 0 3 5% GA-263-07 Assoc.for 07 Develop. Base 20 25 15 15 25 100 Egypt Sep08 0 GA-263-07 Renaissance 09 Foundation Base 17 23 13 9 22 84 Sep08 18 21 15 13 25 92 1 -2 2 4 3 8% GA-263-07 The Good 10 Shepherd Base 20 25 12 7 25 89 Sep08 20 22 12 9 25 88 -3 2 -1% GA-263-07 Evangelical 15 Association Base 20 25 12 7 25 89 Sep08 20 25 15 11 25 96 3 4 7% GA-263-07 16 Future Eve Base 20 25 13 11 22 91 Sep08 20 25 15 15 25 100 0 0 2 4 3 9 9% GA-263-07 17 Sayedat Misr Base 20 24 15 5 25 89 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 83 SUMMARY MINYA NGOs Minya Coalition of Health Social services & Integ.Develop. Egypt Renaissance Foundation Good Shepherd Evang￾elical Assoc. Future Eve Sayedat Misr Base 86 76 84 89 89 91 89 Sep-08 98 81 92 88 96 100 97 EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 85 SUMMARY NGO's New Horizo n's Found . Future Girls Assoc. Defe nse of rights Haw aa Shemo u Arab alliance El mahrosa Carita s Hey a Yad b Yad Egypt found￾ation Light of Life Base 80 78 67 94 78 100 67 75 53 74 43 96 Sep￾08 91 94 66 80 95 100 86 95 89 82 85 96 % Increa se in Capac ities 11% 16% 0% 0% 17% 0% 19% 20% 36% 8% 42% 0% EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 87 ANNEX 14: EVALUATION PHOTO ALBUM EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT Women’s Empowerment Project in Giza Court Mediation Office Staff in Minya EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT 89 NGO and FJP Staff in Giza Evaluation Team with FJP and NGO Staff in Port Fouad EVALUATION REPORT OF THE FAMILY JUSTICE PROJECT Young beneficiaries of a job skills training showing their jewelry NGO grantee hands-on training session