April 2012 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS). FINAL ASSESSMENT OF USAID/DRC SOCIAL PROTECTION SGBV PROGRAMMING Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming ii Prepared for the United States Agency for International Development, USAID Contract Number AID-RAN￾I-OO-09-00015, Task Order Number: AID-623-TO-10-00004 Implemented by: Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS) 4600 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 402 Arlington, VA 22203 Phone: +1 703-465-9388 Fax: +1 703-465-9344 www.onlinedts.com Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming iii FINAL ASSESSMENT OF USAID/DRC SOCIAL PROTECTION SGBV PROGRAMMING April 2012 DISCLAIMER 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. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The assessment team would like to thank all U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and USAID/Washington staff who provided feedback on the foundations of this study to assess USAID/DRC/Social Protection (S.P.) sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) programming. Special thanks to the Social Protection Technical Office and to the Program Office for their guidance throughout this exercise. We would also like to thank USAID/DRC Implementing Partners and their local and international associates for sharing their views and experiences with us, and for providing support, advice and logistics – often under very challenging circumstances. The assessment team also appreciates the insights of various UN agencies, MONUSCO, and other local and international stakeholders that are active in preventing and responding to SGBV in DRC. Last but not least, heartfelt thanks to the members of the different communities throughout the DRC that we visited for this assessment. We are grateful for your honesty, and for taking the time to share your experiences and perspectives with us. Together we will continue to fight against sexual and gender-based violence in the DRC. Lina Abirafeh Sandra Sotelo Reyes Alexandre Diouf Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming v ACRONYMS ABA American Bar Association ABA-ROLI American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome AWID Association for Women in Development BCC Behavior Change Communication BCZ Bureau Central de la Zone de Santé BPRM U.S. Department Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration CAMPS Center of Social Medico-Psycho-Accompaniment CASE Care, Access, Safety, and Empowerment CEDAW Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women CELPA Free Pentecostal Community Church in Africa CFEF Center for Women, Families and Children CIP Centre d’Intervention Psychosociale COOPI Cooperazione Internazionale COP Chief of Party CPLVS Provincial Committee to Fight Sexual Violence CC Community Center CSBC Communication for Social and Behavior Change CSO Civil Society Organization CTC Joint Technical Committee CTLVS Territorial Committee to Fight Sexual Violence CPLVS Provincial Committee to Fight Sexual Violence CBO Community-Based Organization CHW Community Health Worker CODESA Local Health and Development Community Committee DFID Department for International Development DPKO Department for Peace Keeping Operations DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo EC Emergency Contraception EMOC Emergency Obstetric Care EPI Expanded Program on Immunization ESPOIR Ending Sexual Violence by Promoting Opportunities and Individual Rights FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FARDC Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo FBO Faith-Based Organization FDLR Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda FG Focus Group GBV Gender-Based Violence GBVIMS Gender Based Violence Information Management System GDRC Government of the Democratic Republic of Congo HAP Humanitarian Action Plan HC Health Center HGR Hôpital Général de Réfèrence Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming vi HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus HQ Headquarters IDP Internally Displaced Person IEC Information Education and Communication IGA Income-Generating Activity IMC International Medical Corps INGO International Non-governmental Organization IP Implementing Partner IRC International Rescue Committee ISSSS International Security and Stabilization Support Strategy LRA Lord’s Resistance Army MARA Monitoring, Analysis, and Reporting Arrangements MDG Millennium Development Goals M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MISP Minimum Initial Service Package for Reproductive Health in Emergency Settings MOH Ministry of Health MONUC Former name of UN Mission in the DRC MoU Memorandum of Understanding MONUSCO UN Mission in the DRC MSA Multi Sector Assistance MSF Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) NGO Non-Governmental Organization OCHA UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights OPJ Officier de Police Judiciaire (Judicial Police Officer) PEP Post-Exposure Prophylaxis PMP Performance Management Plan PNC Police Nationale Congolaise (National Congolese Police) PSA Psychosocial Assistant PSS Psychosocial Support PTSD Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RCD Rassamblement Congolais pour la Démocratie RFA Request for Applications RHC Referral Health Center ROLI Rule of Law Initiative SGBV Sexual and Gender-Based Violence SNVBG Stratégie Nationale de Lutte contre les Violences basées sur le Genre SMT Senior Management Team S.P. Social Protection SSAPR Security Sector Accountability and Police Reform SSR Security Sector Reform STAREC Stabilization and Reconstruction Plan for War-Affected Areas STC Save the Children STI Sexually Transmitted Infection SV Sexual Violence TBA Traditional Birth Attendant Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming vii TOT Training of Trainer UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Program UNFPA United Nations Population Fund UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNOCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs UNSCR United Nations Security Council Resolution UNSSS United Nationals Security Stabilization Support Strategy US United States of America USG United States Government USAID United States Agency for International Development VCT Voluntary Counseling and Testing WFP World Food Program WfWI Women for Women International WHO World Health Organization YCHW Youth Community Health Workers Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming viii CONTENTS Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1 Background and Purpose of Assessment................................................................................................... 1 Methodology................................................................................................................................................... 1 Problem Statement......................................................................................................................................... 2 USG Response................................................................................................................................................ 2 Findings............................................................................................................................................................ 2 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 9 Background..................................................................................................................................................... 9 Purpose and Objectives................................................................................................................................ 9 Report Structure...........................................................................................................................................10 Methodology............................................................................................................................11 Human Subjects Protocol........................................................................................................................... 11 Quantitative and Qualitative Assessment Methodology........................................................................13 Assessment Tools........................................................................................................................................13 Terminology..................................................................................................................................................14 Assessment Challenges and Limitations ..................................................................................................14 Problem Statement...................................................................................................................16 Background and Context............................................................................................................................ 16 Types of SGBV............................................................................................................................................16 Consequences of SGBV ............................................................................................................................. 18 The Government of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s (GDRC) Response.......................19 USAID/DRC/S.P. Response .................................................................................................. 21 Gender Integration ......................................................................................................................................21 Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) ..........................................................................................................22 International Community Response........................................................................................25 Assessing USAID SGBV Initiatives in Comparison to Broader Norms and Standards..........30 Findings ...................................................................................................................................32 Assessing USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV Programming Objectives and Quality of Services...............32 Programming Objectives......................................................................................................................32 Accomplishments and Strengths of Programming Objectives......................................................33 Gaps and Opportunities in Programming Objectives.....................................................................33 Quality of Services................................................................................................................................. 35 Assessing Strengths, Limitations, And Lessons From USAID Implementing Partners..................36 Cooperazione Internazionale (COOPI)............................................................................................. 37 IMA World Health ................................................................................................................................ 42 International Medical Corps.................................................................................................................45 International Rescue Committee.........................................................................................................48 Comparison of IP Approaches..................................................................................................................50 Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming ix Psychosocial Support ............................................................................................................................ 50 Legal Support..........................................................................................................................................52 Socio-economic Activities....................................................................................................................52 Assessing Community Perspectives And Experiences............................................................54 Accomplishments and Strengths...............................................................................................................54 Gaps............................................................................................................................................................... 55 Opportunities ...............................................................................................................................................55 Gaps and Opportunities Analysis ............................................................................................57 Conclusions..............................................................................................................................58 Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 61 Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE OF ASSESSMENT The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has demonstrated its commitment to preventing and responding to the rampant sexual and gender￾based violence (SGBV) that has profoundly and detrimentally affected the health, psychological, social and economic well-being of survivors and their communities. USAID/DRC commissioned an assessment of all SGBV projects funded under the Social Protection (S.P.) Portfolio. The assessment sought to assess the effectiveness, impact and sustainability of all SGBV projects funded by USAID/DRC S.P over the past five years. It also sought to identify gaps and lessons learned through USAID/DRC/S.P.’s SGBV programs that respond to the needs of Congolese communities in the fight against SGBV. The assessment also identified areas where improved guidance and support are needed for in-country USAID Implementing Partners (IPs), and focused on IPs whose SGBV programming is mature enough to generate lessons that can be widely applied. Processes and results related to key components of SGBV prevention and response were examined – specifically medical, psychosocial, legal and socio-economic responses – along with community engagement and mobilization. The assessment was conducted by Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS) between August to October 2011 in Kinshasa and in various locations throughout Eastern Congo, where most of the SGBV activities are centered. Kinshasa was an important site for the study because some of the organizations have their offices and senior staff in the capital. The assessment team was able to meet with senior representatives in Kinshasa who provided a robust picture of the SGBV sector. The team conducted this assessment in North Kivu, South Kivu and Orientale provinces. METHODOLOGY This assessment utilized mixed methods of research (qualitative and quantitative), though qualitative methods were relied on more heavily due to limitations in the accessibility and reliability of quantitative data. Lack of harmonized data collection tools and indicators across SGBV IPs created challenges to consolidating data across projects. There is strength, however, in the qualitative approach, as it highlights the voices at the community level whose experiences and perspectives shed light on the impact and reach of programming. Triangulation was used to increase the reliability of findings. Both data collection and data analysis were iterative processes. Data collected in earlier stages of the research informed and was tested against data from later stages. To ensure the validity of findings, the data was continuously analyzed, and the methodology refined. All SGBV IPs funded by USAID/DRC/ S.P. were included in the assessment. Many local IP partners were also consulted, along with other players who are external to USAID’s work, but crucial to the DRC’s SGBV landscape. Purposive rather than random sampling was used in order to select communities that were considered representative of the implementing partners that were part of this assessment. This assessment followed a human subjects protocol based on principles of respect for participants and recognition of the risks they might face by participating in the assessment. These include psychological risks such as anxiety, stress, or discomfort discussing the subject matter; social and economic risks that might Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 2 diminish the subject’s status relative to others by virtue of having participated in this research; and loss of confidentiality. PROBLEM STATEMENT Tens of thousands of women, girls, men, and boys have become survivors of sexual violence (SV) over the past 15 years. Since 2005, in South Kivu province alone, the UN Mission in Congo has documented 80,000 reported cases of sexual violence, including rape, sexual assault, abductions and physical aggressions with unprecedented levels of brutality. According to an extensive study conducted in 2006 and 2007, published by the American Journal of Public Health, 1.8 million women in the DRC have been raped in their lifetimes. In certain areas of Eastern Congo, particularly locations surrounding artisanal mining, exploitation and sexual violence against minors reaches 40%.1 The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 20% of rape survivors are HIV positive.2 The consequences of SV are profound and far reaching. In particular, SV is destroying the familial fabric of Congolese society. The stigma and subsequent excommunication frequently experienced by survivors and children born of rape also has devastating economic consequences. In many of the affected households, women are the main providers, engaging in subsistence farming and microenterprise. By attacking and paralyzing these women through fear, perpetrators threaten the livelihood of entire communities. USG RESPONSE SGBV and the fight against it are a main international and United States Government (USG) concern. To date, USAID/DRC/ S.P. has spent millions on SGBV activities, including care and treatment for survivors, and awareness and prevention activities. USAID-supported programs aim to address the immediate, medium and longer-term consequences of sexual violence for survivors, their families and communities so that survivors can recover from trauma and reintegrate into their families and communities. Outreach and community mobilization activities, including legal advocacy, aim to prevent new acts of SGBV in targeted areas. These programs were highlighted during Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s August 2009 trip to the DRC, where she addressed sexual violence. USAID currently has programs in North and South Kivu provinces, Ituri, Orientale and Maniema. USAID/DRC operates by awarding contracts to international NGOs, who in turn, work to strengthen the capacity of local organizations and public institutions. The programs are comprehensive and largely reflect the nationwide strategy adopted in 2010 by USG agencies in the DRC.3 FINDINGS Data gathered across key stakeholders, including IPs, community members and leaders, revealed important information about the effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the USAID/DRC/S.P.s response to SGBV. USAID IPs have documented that 73,378 people have benefitted from medical, psychosocial or economic recovery activities, and 1,522,947 others have been reached through USAID-sponsored communication activities over the past five years. The following conclusions emerged through the assessment and analysis. USAID is recognized for its commitment and response to SGBV in the DRC. USAID’s focus on the long term and emphasis on holistic support for survivors is a notable success. There is appreciation for 1 Data collected by COOPI in Ituri district (Oriental Province). 2 World Health Organization. Health Action in Crises: Great Lakes Region. Resource Mobilization for Health Action in Crises 2006. Available at: http://www.who.int/hac/donorinfo/cap/Great_Lakes_advocacy_Dec06.pdf . Accessed April 26, 2008. 3 The only known exception is USAID promoting Bi-therapy while GDRC has articulated Tri-therapy as the national protocol. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 3 USAID efforts, and recognition of the Agency’s role as the key donor in SGBV efforts. USAID is further recognized for clearly establishing SGBV as a priority. USAID can quickly mobilize resources and coordinate many actors in an effective SGBV response that includes a strong focus on medical, psychosocial, legal, and socio-economic support. USAID’s coordination and partnership with IPs has also been viewed positively, and holds promise for effective collaboration in future programming. Local and international partnership and consortium arrangements have built capacity and provided a platform for knowledge-sharing in a contextual framework. Health and psychosocial support are programs’ greatest strengths. Programs work effectively in economic, health, legal, medical, and psychosocial support. Among these programs, medical and psychosocial support was identified as the greatest strengths. The quality of medical response has improved in the past five years, with the majority of IPs’ medical supervisors linked to SGBV programming to ensure regular and effective follow-up. Psychosocial support has improved as the basic principles established for working with SGBV survivors are adhered to by IPs and their partners. Community members and leaders recognize USAID IPs and programs as providers of key services for survivors. Economic opportunities were identified as one of the most critical elements of programming that should be expanded. Further, community distrust of the legal system highlights the need to further integrate legal services into programming. Community awareness efforts are attributed with leading to positive change within target communities. Community members and leaders noted the impact of awareness-raising initiatives. USAID programs have increased awareness about SGBV and the types of support available to survivors. Where positive changes have been observed regarding incidences of some forms of SGBV, participants often associated the change with USAID program interventions. Specific programs were identified as contributing to positive change. The most effective awareness initiative discussed by members and leaders alike is radio programming on violence against women. Over 81 percent of women and 86 percent of men who participated in the community survey had heard radio programs about SGBV. Lessons learned through SGBV programming can be applied in other areas of DRC. A key lesson is the importance of socio-economic support not just for survivors but for all members of the community. Another lesson that can be applied elsewhere in the DRC is the need to work with men. More men are also survivors of SGBV and need to be supported in their own right, or they risk increasing resistance to SGBV programming. Working with the military (formal and informal), peacekeepers and police is also essential, as they play key roles. They can be supporters, or they can undermine efforts if they are not engaged. Other avenues for intervention that could be applied throughout the DRC include the continued use of churches and religious institutions as an entry point to SGBV prevention, response and community awareness. The training and capacity building of all actors involved in SGBV prevention and response is another opportunity, as it fosters linkages and exchanges between social workers and psychologists that broaden their skills and capacities. IP partnership and consortium arrangements increase capacity for both local and international organizations. IPs employ different arrangements with local partners. Some focus more heavily on training and capacity building with local partners than others. Emphasis on local capacity-building appears related to the IPs relative level of technical skills, support from headquarters, and experience in capacity building. Regardless, partnership and consortium arrangements that place local and international NGOs together is a capacity building experience for both the local and the international organization. IP engagement with GDRC is strongest within the medical component. IP engagement with GDRC varies. The most significant collaboration exists with the GDRC Public Health System through the support of Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 4 health centers. To this end, IPs have signed memorandum of understandings (MoUs) and/or other agreements with medical authorities (Medecin Chef de Zone, Medecin Chef de District, etc.) in order to ensure appropriate medical assistance for survivors (e.g., delivering training about medical protocols and providing specific drugs) and to assist with tracking and collecting data related to survivors. At the provincial level, IPs work primarily with the GDRC via representatives of the Ministry of Health. Once the National GBV Strategy is in place, IPs will also deepen their collaboration with the Ministry of Gender, Family and Children. At the national level, IPs are able to collaborate with this Ministry more strongly, particularly regarding issues around implementation of the National Strategy on Combatting Gender-Based Violence. Holistic engagement with the community is most likely to increase sustainability of outcomes. USAID and its IPs can increase the likelihood that efforts are sustainable by further engaging communities as a whole. This entails meeting community demands such as expanding socio-economic support and working more with men. Continued strengthening of behavior change communication (BCC) messaging, prevention activities, and working with youth are important aspects of sustainability. Contextualizing programming and messaging is essential, particularly in a country as diverse as the DRC. The continuation of long-term programming and long-term approaches is also crucial, as it allows for capacity building of local groups. In addition, IPs can ensure the capacity of service providers through a more structured transfer of technical and organizational skills. Further addressing community vulnerabilities could improve attention to gender issues in projects. Addressing SGBV is, among many things, a gender issue. SGBV is an obstacle to gender equity. Assessment findings indicate the need to further incorporate and address gender issues in programs. For example, lack of women on staff that can attend to female survivors in health and psychosocial centers indicates a lack of attention to gender dynamics in survivor support programs. Shifting from focusing on SGBV survivors to addressing community vulnerabilities would create space for programs to identify and address gender issues in SGBV prevention and response. For example, interventions that focus on the empowerment of women through microfinance or women’s cooperatives offer opportunities to address economic vulnerabilities. Additionally, promoting women’s access to leadership and decision making could be a positive component of a gender strategy. This is particularly relevant in light of the upcoming election, where women’s roles as voters can be promoted as a starting point for their engagement in politics. Opportunities exist for strengthening programming by addressing limitations and gaps. SGBV Prevention. USAID should consider working with the security sector. This is a missing link in SGBV work and can benefit communities as a whole. Actions that address this gap include increased police sensitization and training, the creation of safe spaces for reporting within police stations, and proactive hiring policies that encourage the recruitment and retention of women officers. Key stakeholders also identified the need to engage men more as supporters in SGBV prevention work. BCC campaigns are an important prevention strategy that can benefit from additional coordination and targeted messaging. This assessment revealed the strength of radio messaging. USAID can leverage this and work more closely with radio stations to deliver SGBV messages. SGBV Response. In terms of SGBV response, the referral pathway must be strengthened, including promoting services that are accessible to survivors. Better geographic coverage of services is also needed, so that survivors do not have to travel long distances to access support. Medical support services need access to post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) at all times. This is a major gap in response that can be resolved quickly. The quality of psychosocial support varies across IPs. USAID should standardize psychosocial support by promoting internationally-recognized standards and good practice in psychosocial support (PSS) and aligning its IPs through a certification program that ensures that they have the appropriate technical skills. While Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 5 socio-economic support is being addressed by a number of organizations, USAID is the only donor with the capacity to scale this in a significant way and focus not just on women, but on communities as a whole. USAID can promote legal support through information, education and communication (IEC) that changes the perception of the legal system. Communities will regain trust in the system when they see that perpetrators are convicted. As the police are frequently the entry point for reporting cases, USAID can work to ensure that they have the capacity to handle cases safely, effectively and appropriately. Specific attention should also be placed on men and child survivors. Sustainability. USAID can focus more strongly on building the capacity of local partners (via IPs) to ensure they have the skills needed to continue SGBV work. USAID also could support government processes through continued alignment with the National Strategy to ensure sustainability of SGBV prevention and response, and by strengthening the capacity of GDRC Ministries such as the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Gender. Monitoring and Reporting. The debate around data must be resolved quickly. USAID has put significant effort into promoting the Gender-Based Violence Information Management System (GBVIMS) and the unique incident code, but this should be resolved and applied as soon as possible so that effective national data collection can take place. This includes an understanding of why data are collected, with whom they will be shared with, and how. It also includes commonality among IPs in typology, consent forms, and information sharing protocols that include pre-agreed data points. High-level Advocacy. There is a need for additional high-level advocacy, not just on SGBV prevention and response but also security and justice sector reform. USAID is well placed to conduct this advocacy. The recommendations listed below reflect gaps and opportunities identified in order to further strengthen existing and future programming efforts. Recommendations are organized into three categories: those relating to USAID, IPs, and programming (current and future). Specific actions are suggested for implementing each recommendation. Further, each action is evaluated as a short, medium or long-term USAID priority. Under programming recommendations, actions related to current programs are classified as short or mid-term. Those related to future programming are classified as long-term. Recommendation Priority Short Term Mid Term Long Term Leverage and increase advocacy on key issues With Ministry of Health With Ministry of Gender, Family, and Children With UN Mission in the DRC With Ministry of Justice USAID With the Military Address challenges related to data collection and measuring SGBV work Support GBVIMS to compile & share data and conduct statistical analyses Push unique incident coding forward Define information sharing protocols Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 6 Recommendation Priority Harmonize information collection, analysis, reporting, and dissemination Align sexual violence reporting with Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Arrangements (MARA) IPs Increase coordination and collaboration among IPs Complete, finalize and share mapping Rework monthly IP meetings around resolving challenges and concerns Establish a monthly IP meeting at the provincial level Ensure stakeholder agreement around information needs Standardize tools used by IPs – particularly for M&E Standardize terms used Create an agreement among SGBV IPs to increase collaboration when they overlap in an area Establish common data gathering and reporting tools Increase knowledge sharing among IPs Encourage a collaborative learning environment Share skills across IPs Create a shared database Enhance IP technical skills to improve SGBV work Build IP technical capacity Focus on competency-based training Programming Standardize psychosocial response Update referrals frequently Provide health staff with PSS skills and knowledge of the referral system Ensure that IPs assume responsible for the quality of PSS provided Provide child-friendly PSS Build on strengths of existing approaches Address challenges in health support Clarify referrals Ensure adequate medical supplies Identify and address constraints to recruiting and retaining women staff Streamline PEP Share findings of the PEP kit assessment done by Per SCMS with IPs Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 7 Recommendation Priority Clarify contents Provide pediatric PEP Ensure supply Integrate and clarify legal assistance Clarify policy for dealing with cases perpetrated by the military Strengthen legal referrals Recognize and remove obstacles to accessing legal support Expand socio-economic SGBV prevention and response activities Scale up socio-economic support Support all members of the community Encourage appropriate vocational skills Implement VSLA + Income Generation Activities for beneficiaries Address constraints to women’s economic empowerment Engage security and justice sectors Understand the linkages between security, justice, and SGBV Understand how communities define “security” and how to achieve it Advocate for good practices in the justice sector Engage police in prevention and response Provide training to police Link with the Security Sector Accountability and Police Reform (SSAPR) Project Encourage women-friendly policing practices Shift focus from “victims” to vulnerabilities Clarify criteria to determine who is vulnerable Integrate all members of the community Strengthen engagement with men in SGBV work Increase socio-economic support for men Provide support to male survivors Scale up men’s leadership training Reach more men through radio programming Engage religious leaders and institutions to reach men Increase and tailor psychosocial support for men Explore long-term view of working with men Increase focus on child survivors Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 8 Recommendation Priority Learn more about the situation of child survivors Use and share child survivor protocols Strengthen participatory BCC Leverage existing BCC efforts Increase use of radio Learn from good practices in BCC Secure community participation in messaging (including religious community) Ensure that messaging is contextual, relevant, and targeted Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 9 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has demonstrated its commitment to preventing and responding to rampant sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) that has profoundly and detrimentally affected the health, psychological, social, and economic well-being of survivors and their communities. In order to garner lessons learned and inform future SGBV programming, USAID/DRC commissioned an assessment of all SGBV projects funded by USAID/DRC’s Social Protection Unit. The assessment was conducted by Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS) between August to October 2011 in Kinshasa and in various locations throughout Eastern Congo, where most of the SGBV activities are centered. Kinshasa was an important site for the beginning of the study because most of the organizations have their offices and senior staff in the capital. The assessment team was able to meet with senior representatives in Kinshasa who provided a robust picture of the SGBV sector. The team also conducted this assessment in North Kivu, South Kivu, and Orientale provinces. For a full list, please see Appendix B. The assessment team was comprised of experts that have the technical, sector, academic and country experience needed to achieve the objectives of this complex, sensitive assessment. Specifically, the team included: • Lina Abirafeh, PhD, International SGBV Expert • Sandra Reyes Sotelo, DRC SGBV Expert • Alexandre Diouf, Senior Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Advisor for the DRC dTS M&E Project • Kisubi Akobe Rocky, SGBV Data Collector • Chantal Bira, SGBV Data Collector • Clarisse N’Ibamba, SGBV Data Collector • Jean Baptiste Luthala Muee Kaseme, SGBV Data Collector • Ombeni Kikukama, SGBV Data Collector • Augustin Safari, Videographer Appendix N contains biographies of these team members. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES The assessment sought to identify the effectiveness, impact, and sustainability of all SGBV projects funded by USAID/DRC/S.P. over the past five years. It also identified gaps and lessons learned from USAID programs that respond to the needs of Congolese communities in their fight against SGBV. This assessment focused on the following objectives: 1. To document the results and potential impacts of USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV prevention and response activities over the past five years Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 10 2. To compare the strengths and weaknesses of USAID/DRC/S.P.’s SGBV initiatives against the most common norms and standards in the area of SGBV 3. To provide forward-looking recommendations to strengthen programming in the area of SGBV; and 4. To provide recommendations to foster synergies between USAID/DRC/S.P.’s SGBV implementing partners (IPs) and between the IPs and the USAID/DRC Social Protection Unit. The assessment also identified areas where improved guidance and support are needed for in-country USAID IPs. It focused on IPs whose SGBV programming has sufficiently matured to generate lessons that can be applied widely. It examined processes and results related to all key components of SGBV prevention and response, specifically medical, psychosocial, legal, and socio-economic responses, along with community engagement and mobilization. More broadly, this assessment generated evidence on best practices and opportunities for improvement on all key components of the prevention and response to SGBV in the DRC. The assessment considered the clarity of roles and responsibilities between IPs, the definitions and understandings of SGBV and types of SGBV with each IP, the consistency of data collection tools and analysis, the extent of information sharing between groups – with a view to gaps and overlaps, referral protocols and coordination, measuring impact, and ethical considerations. REPORT STRUCTURE This report is structured in accordance with the assessment’s statement of work (SoW). Section 1 (Introduction) begins with background, including the purpose and objectives of the SoW. Section 2 (Methodology) provides the approach, methodology, and tools utilized throughout the assessment process. Background and context for SGBV is presented in Section 3 (Problem Statement). The responses of the Government of the DRC (GDRC), USAID, and the international community are presented in Sections 4, 5, and 6, respectively. Section 7 compares USAID’s initiatives to broader SGBV norms and standards. Findings from information gathered from IPs and their counterparts are detailed in Section 8 (Findings). Section 9 (Community Perspectives) summarizes community perceptions of USAID SGBV programming. Gaps and opportunities across program objectives, across programs, and within programs are discussed in Section 10 (Gaps and Opportunities Analysis). Section 11 (Conclusions) presents the conclusions that emerged, and finally, Section 12 (Recommendations) organizes recommendations into three categories: those related to USAID, IPs, and programming (current and future). Appendices can be found in a separate document and include the terms of reference for this study, the assessment schedule, assessment team bios, a list of research participants, references, and tools used. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 11 METHODOLOGY Conducting an assessment of SGBV programming requires a range of skills and approaches that not only includes knowledge of assessment methodologies and protocols, but also an understanding of the sensitive and complex nature of SGBV. In particular, assessing SGBV is an extremely sensitive subject that requires an understanding of potential risks and ethical implications. Priority was placed on safe, ethical information gathering that was respectful of survivors at all times. The assessment team was responsible for ensuring that information was collected and used in a way that promoted protection for those at risk – including all prevention and response activities. In this vein, the assessment team sought to ensure that no harm was done to participants in the study, and set out to safeguard their welfare and interests within the context of the research. HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTOCOL This assessment followed a human subjects protocol based on principles of respect for participants and recognition of the risks they might face by participating in the assessment. These include psychological risks such as anxiety, stress, or discomfort in discussing the subject matter; social and economic risks that might diminish the subject’s status relative to others by virtue of having participated in the research; and loss of confidentiality. Given the sensitive nature of this research, all information shared during the assessment was held in strict confidence. The research team also signed confidentiality agreements. Names of participants have been withheld. Participant consent was obtained verbally and each person understood the nature of the research, the purpose of their participation, and the expected final outcome. The following guidelines were shared with and agreed to by the research team before the assessment commenced: • Participant safety is the number one priority • Sign interviewer confidentiality agreement • Conduct interviews in private; ensure no distractions (telephone, etc.) • Do not record confidential information • Do not force participant to answer questions • Do not judge, criticize, offer advice, etc. Treat the participant with respect. • Be aware of local support for survivors, if additional support is needed • Ensure permission for interview – informed consent (use consent form) • Make sure participants understand the study, use of information, and risks involved • Follow the same procedure for each interview • Listen carefully and be attentive • Respect privacy CORE PRINCIPLES The assessment team’s research was guided by core principles of SGBV programming and research, including: 1. Safety 2. Respect 3. Confidentiality 4. Non-discrimination Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 12 • People have the right to refuse to participate, and can withdraw at any time • Ensure confidentiality – protect identities • Be sensitive to questions that increase harm or risk • Offer breaks when necessary • Do not attempt to be a counselor • Ensure participants are comfortable • Speak clearly and make sure the participant understands • Be aware of special consideration for child participants – consult parents/guardian Three interlinked approaches to SGBV programming informed the analysis: 1. Human rights-based approach a. Analyzes root causes and aims to redress discrimination b. Based on international human rights and humanitarian law standards c. Involves state (duty-bearers) and non-state (rights-holders) d. Addressed within political, legal, social, and cultural contexts e. Empowers survivors and communities 2. Survivor-centered approach a. Places priority on rights, needs, and wishes of survivors above all else b. Survivors have the right: i. To be treated with dignity and respect ii. To choose iii. To privacy and confidentiality iv. To non-discrimination v. To information 3. Community-based approach a. Engages communities as key partners in developing their own protection and assistance strategies b. Ensures participation of people in all decisions affecting their lives c. Ensures that those who provide assistance share information with communities in a transparent way d. Strengthens community capacity and resilience e. Uses resources more effectively and appropriately Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 13 QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY This assessment utilized mixed methods of research (qualitative and quantitative), though qualitative methods were relied on more heavily due to limitations in the accessibility and reliability of quantitative data. Lack of harmonized data collection tools and indicators across SGBV IPs created challenges to consolidating data across projects. There is strength, however, in the qualitative approach, as it highlights the voices at the community level whose experiences and perspectives shed light on the impact and reach of programming. Triangulation was used to increase the reliability of findings. Both data collection and data analysis were iterative processes. Data collected in earlier stages of the research informed and was tested against data from later stages. To ensure the validity of findings, the data was continuously analyzed and the methodology refined. All SGBV IPs funded by USAID/DRC/S.P. were included in the assessment. Many local IP partners were also consulted, along with other players who are external to USAID’s work, but crucial to the DRC’s SGBV landscape. Purposive rather than random sampling was used in order to select communities that were considered representative of the implementing partners that were part of this assessment. ASSESSMENT TOOLS The methods and tools below were used for this assessment. Appendix H contains a detailed explanation of each method and the tools used. Tool Description Key Document Analysis This was the entry point into the research to understand engagement with SGBV programming on paper to compare with what exists in practice. Interviews with USAID These discussions helped frame the assessment and guide the team’s understanding of the Social Protection Unit’s work. Interviews with Implementing Partners In-depth, semi-structured interviews with this group shed light on the work of each IP and its engagement with USAID and other stakeholders at the Kinshasa level. This provided key insights to understanding the successes and challenges of IPs and their local partners. Observational Assessment Checklists This tool was used in sector-specific sites to obtain an impression of the services in each site, mostly operated by local partners. Interviews with Local Partners These discussions further reinforced the findings of initial observations and outlined the key themes that form a part of this assessment. Interviews with Community Leaders These discussions served as an entry point to obtain the communities’ perspectives and experiences, through the voices of their leaders. Focus Group Discussions These sessions brought together men and women community members to gain a broad overview of SGBV concerns as well as response and prevention strategies at the community level. Community Survey These surveys with women and men helped obtain detailed information that further reinforced findings from the focus groups and discussions with leaders, prioritizing the voices of Congolese women and men. Interviews with Key Informants These interviews and discussions with external stakeholders helped close the feedback loop and provide context, as they are engaged in SGBV prevention and response in DRC (although not necessarily with USAID). Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 14 TERMINOLOGY The term sexual and gender-based violence, in its widest sense, refers to the physical, emotional or sexual abuse of an individual.4 The nature and extent of specific types of SGBV varies across cultures, countries, and regions. Examples include: • Sexual exploitation/abuse and forced prostitution • Rape • Forced/early marriage • Harmful traditional practices like female genital mutilation Sexual violence is “any sexual act, attempt to obtain a sexual act, unwanted sexual comments or advances, or acts to traffic a person’s sexuality, using coercion, threats of harm or physical force, by any person regardless of relationship to the victim, in any setting, including but not limited to home and work.”5 The terms “victim” and “survivor” are often used interchangeably. “Victim” is often used in the legal and medical sectors because these sectors deal with people who have passed away as a result of violence. In these cases, “victim” refers to both the person who has passed away and the person who has survived. “Survivor” is the term generally preferred in the psychological and social support sectors because it implies resiliency. This study uses the term “survivor” instead of “victim” to denote a living person who has experienced sexual and gender-based violence. ASSESSMENT CHALLENGES AND LIMITATIONS LANGUAGE Translation and language challenges were overcome by engaging five Congolese research assistants – three men and two women – who were fluent in French, Swahili, and various local languages, and who had experience working with NGOs in the region. They all also had experience collecting SGBV data and had participated in similar assessments focusing on SGBV. They were familiar with the concepts as well as the ethical considerations. The use of local researchers helped reduce the impact that outsiders might have had on the data, and provided a contextual analysis that was essential to this type of work. The assistants served as interpreters for members of the assessment team, and also provided cultural and contextual interpretation to enhance understanding. They also assisted in translating and transcribing the data. A full-day debrief was held with the assessment team to review the data obtained and to ensure that information gathered was accurate and clear. Research assistant biographies can be found along with Assessment Team biographies in Appendix N. SAFETY AND SECURITY Research on SGBV in post-conflict environments like the DRC presents certain security risks. The research and methodology had to be flexible to accommodate these issues. During the assessment, the team was aware of the environment and was able to avoid certain high-risk situations and seek help when needed. Contact 4 Sexual and Gender Based Violence in Africa, Population Council, February 2008 5 Ibid. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 15 was maintained with a variety of security personnel, including those with the UN, local partners, and INGOs. The team prioritized security and remained informed of ambient dangers. The team also addressed the emotional risk of SGBV work, including being aware of the possibility of vicarious trauma and understanding strategies for self-care. Trauma and stress can be a likely outcome as it is not uncommon to experience vicarious or secondary trauma when working on SGBV issues. During the research team training, concerns around the sensitive and potentially upsetting nature of this research were raised. DATA AVAILABILITY The assessment examined data that was both qualitative and quantitative. For SGBV data, qualitative information is easier to obtain. Quantitative data can present discrepancies, because SGBV is under-reported everywhere – even in countries with functioning, high-quality services. In the DRC, where basic services have been lost, it is unlikely that reported cases of SGBV will reveal the true magnitude of the problem. It is therefore recognized that the data obtained will not present a complete picture of the SGBV landscape in the country. SCOPE OF WORK CHALLENGES Assessments are useful for identifying areas that require adjustment, seeing that survivors receive the best quality care and support, and ensuring that communities are engaged in the fight to prevent SGBV. While the assessment team sought to fulfill the requirements outlined in the SoW, questions related to the cumulative effect of USAID/DRC/S.P.’s SGBV programs will require an impact evaluation. The following question, for example, could not be adequately addressed: What is the cumulative effect of USAID’s SGBV programs? This question requires a longer-term study to measure impact. Information on number of survivors who have benefited or been reintegrated is presented under each IP section to the best extent possible. There were challenges with obtaining this information from IPs, as they were not collecting the same type of data and there was no system in place to track beneficiaries across the different service providers. Documented evidence, however, has shown that as many as 73,378 have been provided with medical, psychosocial, or economic recovery services, and another 1,522,947 individuals have been reached through USAID-supported communication/sensitization activities over the past five years. Partner # of people benefitting from Psycho social, health, legal and socioeconomic activities # of people benefitting from communication/sensitization activities COOPI 21 043 711 156 IRC 43 599 IMC case 5318 IMC Bcc 0 811 791 IMA 3418 TOTAL 73, 378 1,522,947 The team tried as much as possible to avoid double counting, however, it should be noted that at the time of this assessment, there was no system in place to do eliminate that double counting. Further cumulative effects and impacts are too early to determine at this stage in the projects. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 16 PROBLEM STATEMENT BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT For more than a decade, the DRC, particularly its Eastern provinces, has been the scene of conflict, leaving its population in the middle of a battle for control between local and foreign militias, the Congolese army, and UN forces. The people have suffered continuous waves of violence. The conflict has claimed an estimated 5.4 million lives since 1998. 6 This figure does not take into account the countless other lives destroyed as a result of sexual and gender-based violence. Attacks, kidnappings, rapes, movement of populations, torture, lootings, and regular threats form part of everyday life for entire communities. In this context, women and children suffer the worst aspects of this violence, as they constitute the most vulnerable groups in societies with strong patriarchal patterns. Tens of thousands of women, girls, men, and boys have become survivors of sexual violence (SV) over the past 15 years. Since 2005, the UN Mission in Congo has documented 80,000 reported cases of sexual violence, including rape, sexual assault, abductions and physical aggressions with unprecedented levels of brutality in South Kivu province alone. According to an extensive study conducted in 2006 and 2007, published by the American Journal of Public Health, 1.8 million women in the DRC have been raped in their lifetimes. In certain areas of Eastern Congo, particularly locations surrounding artisanal mining, exploitation and sexual violence against minors reaches 40%.7 The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 20% of rape survivors are HIV positive.8 Nevertheless, official statistics are only estimates that do not represent the total number of cases reported.9 The data collected fails to paint a true picture, due to a significant lack of coordination and leadership in harmonizing data collection procedures, principles, and tools. In addition, only a small number of service providers are trained in how to report incident data and how to refer cases among the different services. Difficulties accessing services are another reason why data estimates fail to accurately represent reality. There are limited quality services available in the DRC. Even if a survivor knows of their existence and how to access them, she or he may not be able to reach them in a timely manner. Mobility constraints and lack of security are common realities throughout the country. Social stigma, fear, and various threats also prevent survivors from reaching needed services. TYPES OF SGBV Abuse of power is the main cause of sexual and gender-based violence worldwide. Congolese women and girls contribute greatly to the livelihood of the family, but effectively have no rights, no decision-making authority, and no representation in any institution. They occupy the lowest positions of the social strata. In times of war, their vulnerability increases, and they become targets of abuse from both armed groups and the civilian population. 6 Moszynski P. The report states that 5.4 million people have died in DRC since 1998 because of conflict. BMJ 2008; 336:235. 7 Data collected by COOPI in Ituri district (Oriental Province). 8 World Health Organization. Health Action in Crises: Great Lakes Region. Resource Mobilization for Health Action in Crises 2006. Available at: http://www.who.int/hac/donorinfo/cap/Great_Lakes_advocacy_Dec06.pdf Accessed April 26, 2008. 9 According to HRW report “Soldiers who rape, Commanders who condone” Human Rights Watch report 2009. http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/drc0709web.pdf , UNFPA reported 2,883 cases for 2008 in South Kivu, and the CPLVS (Provincial Commission of Fight Against Sexual Violence) reported 10,644 cases for the same year in South Kivu. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 17 The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) mapping report titled Democratic Republic of Congo 1993-2003 affirmed the following: Impunity, a lack of discipline, ethnic hatred, the normalization of violence, mystical beliefs, mental coercion exercised over child soldiers, the passive or active encouragement of the institutional and rebel military hierarchies all help to explain the widespread sexual violence to which women of all ages, from girls sometimes as young as five to elderly women, were subjected.10 In zones of concentrated conflict such as North Kivu, South Kivu and Oriental Provinces in the Eastern DRC, sexual enslavement, rape, kidnapping, physical aggression, torture and unimaginable acts of violence had been experienced by women during attacks on their villages or on a regular basis while working in the fields. A mix of myths, anger, hatred, and limited knowledge of military discipline became the perfect combination for horrific abuses and torture of civilians – especially women and girls. 11 Violence, instability, fear, poverty, and frustration experienced by men contribute to increased cases of domestic violence. Men and boys are also targets for sexual abuse. According to organizations such as Oxfam, Human Rights Watch, the UN and several Congolese aid organizations, the number of men raped has risen sharply. 12 In 2007, Forced Migration Review addressed the issue of male rape survivors in the DRC. Even if men and boys represent a smaller portion of the total cases identified compared to women and girls, they need to be fully represented in international and local laws on sexual violence. 13 Other acts of sexual and gender-based violence identified in the DRC, not necessarily linked to the conflict, are abuse in schools and health facilities, forced pregnancies and forced abortions, incest, child prostitution, and traditional practices like rapt. 14 Illiteracy is high, and education poor – only 46% of women and 66% of men have completed primary school. 15 Approximately 60% of the population in DRC lives below $1.25 per day.16 These factors, combined with entrenched myths and traditions, make women and girls vulnerable to “being victims of violence all along their life.”17 The existent culture of impunity also contributes to SGBV in DRC. The Congolese law against sexual violence, created in late 2006, has not yet resulted in notable successes against impunity. The virtually nonexistent judicial system, coupled with the challenges of building rule of law in an immense territory where customary laws are often the only recognized authority, create significant constraints to legal organizations and stakeholders engaged in fighting impunity. Conflicts are circuitous and an end to fighting does not necessarily bring an end to sexual and gender-based violence. In the aftermath of many conflicts, SGBV is likely to increase because of a pervasive culture of impunity and continued community vulnerabilities. Post-conflict violence – and even the fear of it – prevents 10 OHCHR, Democratic Republic of Congo 1993-2003. UN Mapping Report, August 2010. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/ZR/DRC_MAPPING_REPORT_FINAL_EN.pdf. 11 Human Rights Watch, “Soldiers who rape, Commanders who condone” 2009. http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/drc0709web.pdf . 12 New York Times, “Symbol of Unhealed Congo: Male Rape Victims” by GETTLEMAN Jeffrey. August 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/05/world/africa/05congo.html . 13 Forced Migration Review nº 27, “Sexual violence against boys and men”, WYNNE Russel, 2007 http://www.fmreview.org/FMRpdfs/FMR27/contents.pdf. 14 Rapt consists of kidnapping a young woman with the intention to rape first and then marry her. 15 World Bank, The Little Data Book on Gender 2011, 2011. 16 Ibid. 17 Extract from an interview with an INGO worker in Lubero (North Kivu province). “Nobody knows the exact number. Men here, like anywhere, are reluctant to come forward. Several who did say they instantly became castaways in their villages, lonely, ridiculed figures, derisively referred to as “bush wives.” Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 18 women from accessing economic and educational opportunities and from participating in peace-building and other aspects of public life. CONSEQUENCES OF SGBV The consequences of SGBV for women, communities, and the nation are severe. SGBV is a public health, human rights, and security issue. Unwanted pregnancies, HIV/AIDS, chronic diseases, and many other medical issues like prolapse and fistula are among the most visible consequences of the abuses experienced by women and girls in the DRC. 18 Post-traumatic stress disorders (PTSD) and many related, long-lasting psychological effects emerge alongside social stigma, social exclusion and/or family abandonment – all common experiences of SGBV survivors. Men who have witnessed or been subjected to such brutal acts often leave their families out of shame for not having been able to protect others or themselves. Sexual violence in the DRC is destroying the familial fabric of Congolese society. The stigma and subsequent excommunication experienced by survivors and children born of rape also has devastating economic consequences. In many of the affected households, women are the main providers, engaging in subsistence farming and microenterprise. By attacking and paralyzing these women through fear, perpetrators threaten the livelihood of entire communities. In the best cases, even though an aggressor is identified and prosecuted, he might not be convicted, and the survivor will have to deal with his presence in the community thereafter. This often results in increased threats toward the survivor and/or survivors’ relatives, as the police lack the means to ensure their protection. 18 Prolapse is a medical condition where organs like the uterus fall down or slip out of place. Uterine prolapse occurs when the female pelvic organs fall from their normal position, into or through the vagina. A fistula is an abnormal connection or passageway between two epithelium-lined organs or vessels that normally do not connect. Vesicovaginal and rectovaginal fistulas may also be caused by rape, in particular gang rape and rape with foreign objects, as evidenced by the abnormally high number of women in conflict areas who have suffered fistula. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 19 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO’S (GDRC) RESPONSE After a decade of conflict during which it was impossible to grasp the dimensions of the conflict and its consequences, Congolese women began demonstrating and advocating against the SGBV that many were suffering in the eastern provinces. Few figures about abuses had emerged from the Provincial Committees to Fight Sexual Violence (CPLVS) by 2004.19 These Committees served as the coordination mechanisms for UN agencies, NGOs, and the GDRC, functioning under the umbrella of the Initiative Conjointe. 20 This project established networks for information sharing, coordination, and referrals among services that are still used in certain areas. In July 2006, the GDRC passed the first Law on Sexual Violence. 21 Through international community advocacy and pressure, and with the initiative of Congolese civil society, the law was approved and promulgated. It contained a number of innovations, including the inclusion of new offenses stemming from international humanitarian law, like sexual harassment, sexual slavery, forced marriage, genital cutting, forced sterilization, and forced prostitution that were previously not punishable under the law. Even with incoherencies and incertitude around implementation mechanisms, this first attempt to legislate and punish acts of SGBV was a very significant step forward. It has been said that the 2006 law resulted in a paradigm shift in addressing SGBV, and as a result, more women want to speak out about their experiences and seek support. However, it is also believed that SGBV crimes remain unpunished because of failure to instigate legal action and the perceived incompatibility of the law with some Congolese socio-cultural norms. The law is an amendment of the penal code that intended to prevent SGBV and punish perpetrators, and yet, cases brought to the police are unlikely to be pursued. For instance, in 2010, less than one in three cases brought to the police in North Kivu were actually investigated. 22 In some parts of the country, a woman who has been raped is believed to be “dirty” and is ostracized from the community. Therefore, women must “weigh [their] desire for justice against the social consequences.”23 In May 2011, a meeting was held in Goma to evaluate implementation of the law and to support government efforts for increased enforcement. Recommendations from this meeting included creating a fund to support survivors, and perpetrator sentencing that included freezing assets. 24 After the first Congolese national democratic elections in November 2006, the GDRC, together with 10 neighboring countries, signed the Pacte sur la Paix, la sécurité, le développement et la démocratie dans la Région des Grands Lacs. This agreement aimed to bring the DRC, Angola, Burundi, Central African Republic, Republic of 19 Provincial Commission on Combating Sexual Violence (CPLVS). These meetings, held on a regular basis, were the first initiative to coordinate project activities all along the Eastern provinces and to collect data on the GBV cases. 20 UNFPA, Initiative Conjointe de lutte Conjointe de Lutte contre les Violences Sexuelles Faites aux Femmes aux Hommes aux Jeunes et aux Enfants en République Démocratique du Congo : Les outils harmonisés de collecte, dans de le cadre de la lutte contre les Violences Sexuelles, October 2006. 21 The law had been developed by civil society organizations of DRC with the support of Global Rights http://www.globalrights.org, and in synergy with the High Commissioner for Human Rights of the United Nations (OHCHR) / Loi sur les violences sexuelles 06/018 July 20th 2006. 22 IRIN: Humanitarian News and Analysis, Analysis: New laws have little impact on sexual violence in DRC, 7 June 2011. 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 20 Congo, Kenya, Rwanda, Sudan Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia together to cooperate in four fields: (1) security, (2) democracy and governance, (3) economic development, and (4) humanitarian affairs and social protection. Prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity, particularly the perpetrators of sexual violence against women and girls, was clearly considered under the security component. The agreement also engaged these countries in developing positions regarding the improvement of women’s role in society and in achieving human rights. An institutional and legal framework integrated by several international initiatives and regional organizations (the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), Protocol of the African Charter on Human Rights and UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) 1325 (2000), 1820 (2008), and 1794 (2007) highlighted the responsibility of the UN Mission in the DRC (MONUSCO) to prevent, protect and intervene in the domain of sexual and gender-based violence in armed conflict. This was the foundation of an important strategy document, developed in response to the country’s SGBV situation. The Comprehensive Sexual Violence Strategy has been incorporated into the joint GDRC-UN Stabilization Plan for the East (STAREC) at the short and medium term,25 and validated in the government’s own broader, long￾term national SGBV strategy. 26 The National Strategy states, “[a]t the short and medium term, the National Strategy’s implementation will be assured by the implementation of the Comprehensive Strategy against Sexual Violence within the frame of the National Program for the Stabilization and Reconstruction in the East of the DRC execution.”27 To this end, MONUSCO created a Sexual Violence (SV) Unit to technically support the supervision and coordination of the action plans defined for each of the UN Bodies Pillar leads of the Strategy, together with the Ministry of Gender, Family and Children. The DRC is a priority country for the UN Action Strategic Framework 2011-2012. The SV Unit plans to provide strategic support to help MONUSCO “develop, or advance the implementation of joint Government-UN Comprehensive Strategies to Combat Sexual Violence.” Improving data collection patterns, including introducing the Gender-Based Violence Information Management System (GBVIMS), is an aspect of knowledge building under the UN Action Strategy. Within the GDRC, several legal documents must be reviewed for discrimination against women, including the Code de la Famille (Family Code), Code du Travail (Labor Code), and Code Civil (Civil Code). These documents should align with commitments made in the Strategy and with international instruments endorsed by the government. The Congolese government made the courageous decision to establish a specialized mixed court in response to the DRC 1993-2003 UN Mapping report, which identified impunity as a key contributing factor to SGBV. This court could give victims hope that they will finally see justice for the vicious cycle of unpunished violence that has plagued the DRC for decades. 25 Stabilization and Reconstruction Plan for War-Affected Areas. 26 In order to clarify the use of different names for the Strategy, the assessment team found that when referred to the STAREC, the Strategy is commonly known as the STAREC Sexual Violence Strategy, applied to priority provinces where the Stabilization and Reconstruction Program is executed. When referring to the Strategy at the government level, it is known as the National Strategy on Combating Gender-Based Violence, and in this case, is understood as having nationwide coverage over the long term. 27 Stratégie Nationale de Lutte contre les Violences basées sur le genre (SNVBG) http://monusco.unmissions.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=nWyo8L3cvg8%3d&tabid=4097&mid=4340 “The phenomenon of sexual violence continues today as a result of this near-total impunity, even in areas where the fighting has ended. And it has increased in those areas where fighting is still ongoing.” Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 21 USAID/DRC/S.P.RESPONSE SGBV and the fight against it are a main international and USG concern. Since 2002, the USG has supported programs to end SGBV in the DRC. These programs were highlighted following Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s August 2009 DRC visit, where she addressed sexual violence. USAID is committed to helping prevent SGBV by supporting legislation against it and by leading activities with programs in the provinces of North and South Kivu, Ituri, Orientale and Maniema. USAID/DRC/S.P. operates by awarding contracts and grants to UN agencies and international NGOs, who in turn, work to strengthen the capacity of local organizations and public institutions. USAID programs also provide care and treatment services for select communities and SGBV survivors. The programs are comprehensive and largely reflect the nationwide strategy adopted by USG agencies in the country in 2010. This strategy – The US Strategy to Address Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2010 – seeks to: 1. Reduce impunity for SGBV perpetrators 2. Increase prevention of and protection from SGBV 3. Improve the capacity of the security sector to address SGBV 4. Increase access to high-quality services for SGBV survivors. USAID/DRC/S.P. has spent millions on SGBV activities to provide care and treatment for survivors and for awareness and prevention activities. USAID-supported programs aim to address the immediate, medium, and longer-term consequences of sexual violence for survivors, their families, and communities so that survivors are able to recover from trauma and reintegrate into their families and communities. Outreach and community mobilization activities, including legal advocacy, aim to prevent new acts of SGBV in targeted areas. GENDER INTEGRATION USAID has an Agency-wide commitment to gender, which provides a strong foundation for SGBV work. USAID’s Planning Policy states: Gender issues are central to the achievement of strategic plans and Assistance Objectives (AO) and USAID strives to promote gender equality, in which both men and women have equal opportunity to benefit from and contribute to economic, social, cultural, and political development; enjoy socially valued resources and rewards; and realize their human rights.28 Gender integration and analysis are mandatory components of USAID programming. Various USAID documents outline the Agency’s responsibility for gender integration and analysis. For their purposes, gender 28 USAID, ADS Chapter 201, Planning, 2011. Eliminating violence against women has long been a goal of the United States. The US Government recognizes that the equal participation of women in the political, economic and social spheres of society is a key ingredient for democratic development. At the same time, unless women fully enjoy their human rights, to which freedom from violence is inextricably bound, then progress toward development will continue to fall short. - USAID Website Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 22 integration “entails the identification and subsequent treatment of gender differences and inequalities during program/project design, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.”29 USAID’s understanding of gender analysis is built around two key questions:30 1. How will the different roles and status of women and men within the community, political sphere, workplace and household affect the work to be undertaken? How will the anticipated results of the work affect women and men differently? These overarching questions allow for the framing of more detailed questions in order to understand the gender dynamics affecting specific contexts. This, in turn, ensures the creation of more strategic programming. Gender analyses often lead to the identification of constraints experienced by women because of their historic disadvantage in society. While emphasis is often placed on women’s needs and interests, sustainable changes are more likely when interventions engage men, not only to transform their behaviors, but also in terms of facilitating more equitable access to resources and opportunities. Research from humanitarian actors in emergency contexts stresses the need to target men, specifically in livelihood and socio-economic programming, to overcome their sense of powerlessness, which contributes to continued cycles of violence and abuse. This is a key strategy in SGBV reduction and a demand made by women themselves. MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) In 2011, USAID adopted an evaluation policy that emphasized the use of rigorous techniques and the central role of sex-disaggregated data. USAID’s 2011 Evaluation Policy requires the Agency to base “policy and investment decisions on the best available empirical evidence.”31 To this end, the information gathered in this assessment seeks to highlight and prioritize the voices of Congolese women and men in line with USAID’s focus and programmatic direction. The high visibility of this issue combined with the national context intensifies the focus on the DRC, and the question of what USAID/DRC/S.P. programming has achieved over the past five years. Coordination and harmonization of M&E for DRC SGBV activities is a challenge, as there is not a nationwide system to monitor SGBV, even though it is part of the UN mandate. Available data has been extracted from the systems of different service providers but this does not yield an accurate picture. In addition, data collection and analysis is not coordinated at the country level. Most nationwide data reported by the UN Population Fund (UNFPA) and other stakeholders are based on studies using a multi-stage random sample design, mostly in Eastern DRC and in Orientale and Maniema provinces. UNFPA is the designated lead in tracking and reporting SGBV incidence at the country level. The agency is tasked with designing a database that can capture the numbers and nature of different SGBV incidents taking place in the DRC, aggregate numbers from different service providers, and share the aggregated results. To date, nothing tangible has been obtained from UNFPA. As a result, stakeholders have expressed concerns over its work and progress. It has been recommended that another UN agency be appointed to continue this crucial work. There has been no progress on this front. 29 USAID, Guide to Gender Integration and Analysis Additional Help for ADS Chapters 201 and 203, 2010. 30 Ibid. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 23 The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA) has developed its own system to capture and report on SGBV cases taking place in its areas of operation. However, its lack of presence in many places, coupled with differences between its system and various service providers, has made it impossible to effectively capture the magnitude of the problem. The International Rescue Committee (IRC) and a number of other UN agencies have received funding to develop a system that can accurately capture the number and nature of GBV cases. This system, known as the Gender-Based Violence Information Management System (GBVIMS), “was created to harmonize data collection on GBV in humanitarian settings; to provide a simple system for GBV project managers to collect, store and analyze their data; and to enable the safe and ethical sharing of reported GBV incident data.”32 GBVIMS supports service providers in better understanding the GBV cases being reported, and enables actors to share data internally across project sites and externally with agencies for broader trend analysis and enhanced GBV coordination. The system was recently launched in the DRC. Apart from IRC and a few of its partners, at the time of this evaluation, no other organization was using it. There is value in the GBVIMS, however, it does not cover the full range of USAID data requirements. It does not currently track beneficiaries over time, and cannot trace a beneficiary across different service providers. The system is further limited by a restriction in the amount of records that can be stored (65,536), which will make medium and long-term historical comparisons difficult. To complement GBVIMS, USAID/DRC pioneered the use of a unique incident code that is easy to generate and that does not need to be carried by the beneficiary as she or he moves from one service provider to another, which partially addresses the issue of stigmatization. The system was recently launched, and is used by the three major IPs and their sub-grantees. The proposed coding system takes the following format: Survivor Code/# Incident/Year/Health Center/ 1. Determine the survivor code as indicated by GBVIMS a. Name of the survivor: take the third letter (example: T for faTou) b. Name of the survivor’s father: take the third letter (example: E for clEment) c. Place of birth: take the third letter (example: B for luBero) d. Name of the survivor’s mother: take the third letter (example: A for diAne) e. Order of birth (defined as live births by the client’s mother): take the digit (example 2 if the mother had 3 children and the survivor is the second child of the three) f. In our examples, the client code becomes: TEBA2 2. Ask the question: How many times did the survivor have a SGBV incident this year? For example, if the survivor has been assaulted twice, then the number is 2. This is important because in case the survivor has had two incidents in a year, reported at the same health center, the second one will not be counted when one determines the number of unique individuals who have been served. a. Add the last two digits of the year: example 11 for 2011 b. Add the health center code: example 0601010104/0600020 for Kahero Health center in Bagira health zone (HZ), in South Kivu The incident code for our example becomes: TEBA2/2/11/0601010104/0600020 Therefore, any service provider receiving this survivor will assign her the same code. 32 http://gbvims.org/what-is-gbvims/purpose/ Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 24 It is worthwhile to examine the level of synergy between USAID M&E instruments and national and international tools and efforts in order to establish a link between what USAID is asking IPs to report on and what is happening at the national or international level. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 25 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY RESPONSE The incidence, cause and consequence of SGBV in the DRC have been the subject of several studies and reports. Human Rights Watch, for example, keeps this issue at the forefront of the human rights agenda. In July 2009, the report Soldiers who Rape, Commanders who Condone accused the 14th Brigade of the DRC Army (FARDC) of perpetrating a range of war crimes and human rights violations, including sexual violence, in Eastern Congo. 33 In June 2002, another report, War within the War, 34 exposed the “systematic use of rape and other forms of sexual violence in the Rwandan-occupied areas of eastern Congo” by different perpetrators, including “soldiers of the Rwandan army and its Congolese ally, the Rassemblement Congolais pour la Démocratie (RCD), as well as other armed groups opposed to them – Congolese Mai Mai rebels, and Burundian and Rwandan armed groups.” The absence of viable security in the country has been noted time and again – as has the need to more fully invest in and support security sector reform. In certain areas of the country, like the Haut Huelé in Orientale province, the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) forces operate beyond control, ravaging communities, raping civilians, and abducting and abusing children, even if “publicly, the governments of Uganda and Congo both maintain that the LRA is no longer a serious threat in Northern Congo.”35 In order to reform the security and justice sectors, leadership and coordination must be strengthened. A 2011 Refugees International report commends the US for its work on improving the justice sector, but goes on to say that GBV will not be eradicated until the GDRC assumes its responsibility “to fight impunity, achieve real security sector reform, and to revitalize the justice sector” to protect all Congolese – particularly women. 36 In order to achieve this, the report recommends pressuring the government to take on this task and building their capacity to better meet the needs of its population. In a June 2008 New York Times article, Nicholas D. Kristoff referred to the DRC as the “rape capital of the world.”37 International media attention such as this maintains focus and generates interest and funding for SGBV programming. Effectively, in a country where it is “more dangerous to be a woman than to be a soldier,”38 the reality is that Congolese civil society in general, and Congolese women in particular, are asking for security and justice above all else. This need merits further attention – and robust action. SGBV in the DRC continues to be an attractive issue for the media, which has undoubtedly contributed to increased fundraising for implementing partners. Many donors fund programs for survivors of sexual violence through multi-donor initiatives such as the Interagency Humanitarian Action Plan (HAP), funded by the common humanitarian Pooled Fund, and managed by UNOCHA and UNDP. The HAP 2011, 39 under the protection cluster, aimed to meet the needs of 15,000 SGBV survivors and train 300,000 people in general 33 Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Soldiers who rape, Commanders who condone, July 2009. 34 Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of the Congo, War within the war, June 2002. 35 Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Trail of Death: LRA Atrocities in Northeastern Congo, March 2010. 36 Refugees International, DR Congo: Too Soon To Walk Away, July 2011. 37KRISTOF, Nicholas D., Op-Ed – NYTimes, “The weapon of rape,” 15 June, 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/opinion/15kristof.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin 38 Major General Patrick Cammaert, U.N. force commander in Democratic Republic of Congo 39 Humanitarian Action Plan 2011: Democratic Republic of Congo, Mid-term review, June 2011, http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/reliefweb_pdf/node-435326.pdf Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 26 SGBV aspects. As of 30 June, only 33% of the budget was covered for protection programs, though other donors fund specific SGBV projects bilaterally. Many international NGOs are also devoting significant non-state funding to assisting survivors of sexual violence. Demand for survivor support and assistance well exceeds supply and the effort is further hampered by insufficient coordination. Nonetheless, increases in funding have helped improve the situation for a considerable number of survivors in the country. In 2008, a Senior Adviser and Coordinator for Sexual Violence in DRC was appointed and the Comprehensive Strategy on Combating Sexual Violence in DRC was finalized. The new strategy and position succeeded in accomplishing the following: • A common framework for action for all those working to combat sexual violence in DRC • A pillar lead for each component was identified and mandated: - Protection and prevention (UNHCR) - Ending impunity for perpetrators (Joint Human Rights Office - MONUC/OHCHR) - Security Sector Reform (MONUSCO) - Multi-sector assistance for victims of sexual violence (UNICEF) - Data and mapping (UNFPA) • Protocols for each of the Multi-sector Assistance (MSA) components40 • A unique data and mapping component • A multi-component strategy including the security and justice sectors • The inclusion of the strategy into the UN International Security and Stabilization Support Strategy (UN￾ISSSS) for the Eastern DRC and the Humanitarian Action Plan as a cross-cutting theme • The development of an action plan for each component. Presently, donor SGBV strategies fit into their respective component(s) of the Comprehensive Strategy, and should coordinate with the UN lead agencies and the government, guided by priorities established in the STAREC and the UN-ISSSS in the DRC. The Multi-sector Assistance pillar led by UNICEF has coordinated the elaboration of protocols in order to serve as reference guidelines. These protocols were developed over a period of one year by the actors that were technically leading each sector of the response. Although the official versions were not available at the end of this assessment,41 a draft version of the Protocol for PSA and Mental Health Care, Medical Care, and Socio-Economic and Social Reintegration for Sexual Assault Survivors had been shared with a number of local and international NGOs. From the first impressions, these protocols constitute an important step forward to assure technically sound assistance from the different service providers working with survivors. While this is a challenge, it is crucial to 40 The protocols available were still in draft form. UNICEF confirmed that they were already in the hands of the government, waiting to be reviewed and officially launched as National Protocols. 41 According to the UNICEF MSA focal point at the Kinshasa level. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 27 foster consistency across providers, including a minimum package of assistance, procedures and best practices. These very detailed protocols provide lengthy explanations about clinical care phases, treatment￾specific content (i.e., PEP kits), and references to other services, while paying attention to child survivors’ assistance. Once nationalized, the protocols will become the first technical reference at the national level. These important contributions reflect internationally recognized good practices and guidelines from IASC and WHO to ensure the highest possible technical standards. Though they may be a theoretical compilation of concepts, processes, approaches, and consequences more than practical tools, these protocols could nonetheless become the key tool for the government and all stakeholders committed to SGBV response in the country. Various strategies in existence – including the National Strategy – have yet to be fully implemented and are said to have little Congolese buy-in. “Kinshasa-based architects have developed the plans without sufficient consultation and input from civilians and IDPs in eastern Congo.”42 According to research conducted by Refugees International, one member of a women’s group called the strategy “a political construction for funding for international agencies”– a dangerous, but valid perception that risks undermining the strategy. 43 The National Strategy needs increased donor support if it is to succeed, including addressing gaps in coordination and stronger implementation. There are emergency situations that should not be neglected, however. According to Refugees International, the increased focus on SGBV “tends to obscure communities’ wider protection needs, which are currently severely under-funded.”44 The same report recommends that “international donors, particularly the US, should commit funding to support the STAREC sexual violence strategy and the Humanitarian Action Plan,” and that the US and UN should exert pressure on GDRC to take the issue of sexual violence in Eastern Congo more seriously – especially concerning impunity and security sector reform. One big impediment to this is the lack of accurate data. UNFPA, the Data and Mapping pillar lead, has fallen short in its task of collecting data and harmonizing tools. UNFPA should put effort into implementing the GBVIMS, 45 a database it helped create and validate at the global level, along with IRC and UNHCR, and help the GDRC use a harmonized incident code. Given the size and scale of the country, certain provinces like North Kivu requested a specific Action Plan that responds more appropriately to the reality in their area. This valid request resulted in a province-specific Action Plan for North Kivu in August 2011 that is coordinated through four levels of regular meetings. This is not taking place in every province, despite need. The four levels are: 1. STAREC pillar component meetings, led by the different pillar leads: UNICEF, UNFPA, UNHCR, MONUSCO and OHCHR. All leads should organize monthly meetings. In reality, UNICEF is the most active through its Multi-sector Assistance Component Meeting, held in conjunction with local and international NGOs, the Health Division, Gender Division, UNHCR and UNFPA. The goal is to coordinate actions among IPs and to share difficulties, lessons learned, and available data. Sub-Commission on Sexual Violence, led by the Ministry of Gender, Family, and Children representative at the provincial level, including only pillar leads and co-leads of the strategy: UNICEF, UNFPA, and UNHCR. The goal is to brief and update the Ministry of Gender, Family and Children representative about achievements and progress on the different strategy components. 42 Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of the Congo: Always on the Run: The Vicious Cycle of Displacement in Eastern Congo, September 2010. 43 Refugees International, DR Congo: Emergency Response to Sexual Violence Still Essential, June 2010. 44 Ibid. 45 Gender-based Violence Information Management System http://gbvims.org/ Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 28 Joint Technical Committee (CTC) STAREC, led by the governor of the province. Its objective is to facilitate information sharing between STAREC technical and operational aspects, identify synergies, and assess its progress. These meetings include the Ministry of Gender, Family and Children representative and UN Agencies engaged in STAREC implementation. MONUSCO Sexual Violence Unit, only including the UN pillar leads to address technical questions. However, “the Sexual Violence Unit needs to assume a stronger leadership role, ensuring that MONUSCO fulfill its mandate to ensure peace and stability – particularly to women at risk.”46 The diagram below shows the complex SGBV coordination arrangements at the national and provincial levels. There is concern that the working groups under this new coordination structure are not established or prepared to address SGBV in emergencies as the previous sub-working group did. “As a result, there is no longer a forum to quickly organize an operational response in case of a new crisis or to take up advocacy.”47 The launch of the sexual violence strategy has “unintentionally led to a loss of attention and funding to address sexual violence in more conflict-affected areas.”48 In order to ensure that a genuinely comprehensive approach to SGBV prevention and response is in place, donors must support this strategy more strongly, but also ensure that emergency needs are met. Protecting civilians, including people who are internally displaced, should remain the key consideration as the government develops post-conflict stabilization and reconstruction policies. The Human Rights Watch report, Always on the Run, advised that “the rebuilding of Eastern Congo should not come at the expense of protection for its most vulnerable citizens.”49 In the same direction, Refugees International stated that “sexual violence prevention programming is rendered 46 Refugees International, DR Congo: Emergency Response to Sexual Violence Still Essential, June 2010. 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 49 Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of the Congo: Always on the Run: The Vicious Cycle of Displacement in Eastern Congo, September 2010. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 29 meaningless when a lack of assistance to IDPs results in women and girls being forced to take these types of risks that expose them to sexual violence.”50 50 Refugees International, DR Congo: Emergency Response to Sexual Violence Still Essential, June 2010. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 30 ASSESSING USAID SGBV INITIATIVES IN COMPARISON TO BROADER NORMS AND STANDARDS Having reviewed the GDRC, USAID/DRC/S.P., and international community’s response to SGBV, this section assesses the extent to which USAID SGBV S.P. initiatives reflect standard norms and practices within the larger SGBV arena. To frame this comparison, it is important to keep in mind that addressing SGBV in DRC requires actors to: • Be proactive about prevention and protection • Ensure women’s access to essential services • Establish monitoring, reporting, and coordination mechanisms. USAID’s progress against each component is described below. SGBV NORMS AND STANDARDS USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV INITIATIVES Be proactive about prevention and protection Prevent incidents by ensuring that women and girls are not at risk. USAID has been working to mobilize communities and increase their own resilience and ability to prevent SGBV. This work varies, depending on the IP working in that particular area. Engage the security sector. Not all of USAID IPs are working with the police – this is a missing link in both prevention and response for SGBV. Strengthening the resilience of families and communities can be the best form of prevention and protection – through livelihoods support and opportunities to decrease vulnerability (thereby avoiding situations that put women at further risk). USAID has supported IPs to provide socio-economic reintegration as an essential component of SGBV prevention and response. This is an excellent effort – but it needs to be expanded. Conduct a BCC campaign with messages to prevent GBV (listed in Annex 13). USAID supports IPs to conduct BCC, but messages need to be coordinated and strategic. This can be taken to scale using more radio broadcasts as the assessment has revealed the effectiveness of radio messaging. Ensure women’s access to essential services Support a system of referral and care to ensure survivors have knowledge and access to healthcare, psychosocial care, and legal aid. USAID could support its IPs to strengthen their referral pathway with a view to what is most convenient for the survivor, regardless of the IP supporting the service. Provide adequate medical support for survivors, including elements such as accessible, free care that includes necessary medication, appropriate examinations, referrals, etc. USAID is supporting services in this area, including the highest￾quality services in the country (i.e. Heal Africa, Panzi) but challenges remain, particularly regarding availability of PEP – a key aspect of medical response. Provide adequate psychosocial support for survivors (listed in Annex 10), including quality case management, survivor￾centered PSS, etc. USAID supports IPs to provide PSS, but the quality varies depending on the IP. USAID can standardize this response to ensure that all survivors are receiving high-quality PSS – regardless of the IP. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 31 SGBV NORMS AND STANDARDS USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV INITIATIVES Provide adequate legal support for survivors. USAID supports IPs that link to high-quality legal services, but challenges in accessing courts and logistical issues remain. There is also the perception that the system is corrupt and that perpetrators will not be convicted. This is a longer-term challenge that needs demonstrated successes in order to change perceptions. Work with security personnel to train them to receive and respond to cases safely, effectively and appropriately. USAID and its IPs work with police on a very limited basis. Provide opportunities for socio-economic recovery. USAID has demonstrated commitment in this aspect, as stated above, and should be expanded. Conduct an IEC campaign to disseminate information on available services for GBV survivors. USAID supports IPs in providing information on services, but this work has not been consistent and varies across IPs. Establish monitoring, reporting and coordination mechanisms Build capacity of public institutions and NGOs in order to determine how to prevent violence against women and fill gaps in services. USAID supports various IPs who have different strategies and very different capacities. More emphasis could be put on building skills to ensure they (and therefore responses) are standardized, such as using a competency-based certification program. Strengthen the national response by aligning work within national processes. USAID could deepen its alignment with the National Strategy– a key for sustainability of SGBV prevention and response. This would include better engagement of and capacity building for the Ministry of Gender. Collect, manage, and use data safely and appropriately. USAID is promoting use of GBVIMS and the unique incident code for data collection, but this issue needs rapid resolution. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 32 FINDINGS ASSESSING USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV PROGRAMMING OBJECTIVES AND QUALITY OF SERVICES This section examines USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV IP program objectives and the quality of services rendered. Information was drawn from observational assessments of service centers run by local partners, focus group discussions, community leader interviews, and community surveys. An overview of program objectives is provided. Next, a discussion of where USAID is making impact is presented, followed by perspectives on gaps within programming. Findings from the observational assessment checklists are also presented. The checklists provide an examination of the extent to which the centers reflect high standards of service. PROGRAMMING OBJECTIVES USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV programming objectives focus on providing holistic support for survivors. SGBV survivors are provided medical, psychosocial, legal, and socio-economic support. Objectives focus on: increasing access to timely and quality services, building the capacity of communities to respond to SGBV, and supporting social integration and socio-economic recovery activities. The table below provides an overview of program objectives. Psychosocial Support and Reintegration of Survivors of SGBV in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo Project Ushindi ESPOIR CASE Enable individuals affected by sexual and gender￾based violence in Ituri District of Orientale Province and in Maniema Province to resume roles within their family and community. Strengthen community responsiveness to sexual and gender-based violence to report individuals against future incidents, particularly at the local level. Ensure that individuals affected by SGBV gain access to quality, timely, and age-appropriate care and treatment services. Increase and improve organizational and community capacity to identify and respond effectively to SGBV and to facilitate survivors' recovery. Improve the ability of individuals, community￾based organizations, and communities to lead and participate in community￾based social integration and economic recovery activities. Strengthen communities’ (individuals & community￾based organizations) ability to prevent SGBV. Ensure that survivors of SGBV have access to timely, high-quality services. Build local capacity to respond effectively to SGBV and facilitate survivors’ recovery. Support community-based social integration and economic recovery activities. Increased access to timely, high-quality services for individuals affected by SGBV. Improve quality of services and interventions for individuals and communities affected by SGBV. Reduce vulnerability of individuals to future acts of abuse and violence. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 33 ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND STRENGTHS OF PROGRAMMING OBJECTIVES Holistic support, including socio-economic reintegration, is central to effective SGBV response and prevention. USAID programming has greatly expanded and improved the quality of its SGBV response over the last five years. Medical support. IRC has incorporated performance indicators to measure the quality of medical service provision. The majority of IPs link medical supervisors to their SGBV programming in order to ensure regular and effective follow-up and supervision with the health centers. Psychosocial support. Establishing basic principles for working with SGBV survivors has improved IP practices related to confidentiality and security. Psychosocial skills have improved, depending largely on the IP’s technical skills. Legal support. Legal response and support has contributed to sensitizing community leaders and community members about the 2006 law against SGBV – a marked improvement in the last five years. Community members and leaders recognize the efforts made through USAID programming. Most highly noted was the support and care SGBV survivors received and how awareness of SGBV is increasing. Leaders noted the importance of raising awareness and community engagement, as well as survivor treatment and support. GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN PROGRAMMING OBJECTIVES While the current holistic approach in programming has many strengths and accomplishments, three gaps and opportunities for strengthening objectives were identified by IP staff, community members, and community leaders. They are: lack of programming in the security sector, limited programming in socio￾economic support, and lack of engagement with men. These gaps are further detailed below. Explore programming in the security sector There is a need to view SGBV as part of a package of overall structural reform. SGBV prevention and response work cannot be sustainable in an environment where security and justice remain precarious. The justice and security sectors are understood as a whole chain, in which the support of a few pieces cannot ensure the provision of quality service. Supporting these other sectors more strongly will create an enabling environment for prevention and protection. For example, an initial priority should be strengthening the leadership and coordination of various actors working in the security sector and justice system. It was repeatedly said that there should be a stronger focus on security as a whole, or the SGBV strategy cannot be sustainable. Focusing on one or two elements and expecting major change was viewed as ineffective – all components are integral to an effective whole-of-government approach to increasing women’s security. This should not be an “à la carte” approach, but instead should be more integrated. It is not possible to expect women to access services for SGBV in a climate that does not make it safe for them to leave their homes, just as it is not possible to have reconciliation in a culture of impunity for crimes against women. IPs felt there is a great need to increase the justice sector focus of SGBV response. Prisons, police, and justice systems are very weak or nonexistent. It was argued that a response cannot succeed without these key elements. Police are not only a crucial stakeholder group, but also key to SGBV prevention and Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 34 response. They are often the first entry point into SGBV cases. They are often also perpetrators, and could benefit from special focus to eliminate the violence they inflict. The Congolese National Police (PNC) has been known for their lack of infrastructure and capacity to deal with security and protection issues, as well as for lack of transparency, particularly in dealing with SGBV cases. International and local NGOs engaged in combating SGBV do not have a relationship with the police who, in theory, should be a key piece of the referral system. In reality, police are viewed as an additional obstacle for SGBV survivors on their way to accessing services. In cases when legal assistance is solicited by survivors, IPs facilitate access to jurists and/or para-jurists who deal with the dossier before the justice institutions, and with virtually no mediation from the local police. In practice, the Congolese Police are largely powerless, and as a result are an invisible actor in the security sector. Expand socio-economic support Discussions with IPs, their partners, community members and leaders revealed a unanimous recognition that socio-economic recovery programming needs improvement and should be further prioritized and scaled up. While socio-economic activity and income-generating activities (IGAs) are not always viewed as a priority for SGBV programming by other donors, one IP staff member argued that “the approach of economic reinvigoration and social cohesion can bring sustainable peace, which in turn will reduce sexual violence.” The socio-economic element of SGBV support has the capacity to have the largest impact in terms of both response and prevention. Most importantly, it is the first demand made by women and men in communities. The need for a stronger focus on economic empowerment – for both women and men – cannot be overstated. Increasingly engage men as survivors and partners in addressing SGBV. There needs to be increased focus on men, both as survivors and partners. Few IPs provide support to male survivors – targeted specifically to them, rather than as an add-on to women survivor support. Panzi hospital noted this and is trying to respond with targeted support. There are additional issues to contend with when trying to reach men survivors, including added stigma and lower likelihood of reporting. Additionally, men need to be engaged more broadly in SGBV prevention, specifically in socio-economic activities, or there is the potential for resentment that could result in backlash. Recent research revealed that: Women’s increasing ability to exert economic influence and make choices based on their own needs can be seen as an additional threat to masculinity. Indeed, evaluations of livelihoods programs suggest that women’s increased decision￾making power leads to an increase in violence by men.51 A global case has been made for working with men. There are strong movements in this direction and experiences to learn from. Men also see that they can be champions for women’s empowerment – or they can be obstacles. Understanding how men think about what it means to be a man or a woman helps to engage them in gender equality and the discourse around it. Directly targeting men and boys improves the effectiveness of development interventions, expands our understanding of human security, and brings us closer to gender equality. Men can be engaged in redefining their roles as brothers, fathers, and husbands. They can lead the fight in ensuring nothing less than zero tolerance to violence in society and in their homes. 51 Lwambo, Desiree, “Before the War, I was a Man”: Men and Masculinities in Eastern DR Congo, 2011. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 35 QUALITY OF SERVICES Through an observational assessment checklist, the team was able to extract general trends in practices within USAID-funded service centers. A total of 23 centers were reviewed: nine health centers, eight centers offering psychosocial support, five socio-economic support centers, and one legal center. Of the centers visited, five were in North Kivu, ten in South Kivu, and eight in Orientale. The centers are run by four IPs and their local partners: IMC (six centers), IMA (six centers), COOPI (seven centers), and IRC (four centers). This section reports the findings by key sector of service, including health, psychosocial, socio-economic, and legal. Health A total of nine health centers were reviewed: three in North Kivu, five in South Kivu, and one in Orientale. Differences in service provision were observed based on location. The centers in North Kivu faced similar issues: • Lack of women on staff to tend to women patients • Lack of child care • Lack of child survivor treatment and support • Limited staff knowledge of SGBV issues • Limited ability of staff to provider referrals • Limited availability of medications and PEP. Staff in South Kivu centers were more knowledgeable about SGBV issues, and their centers better equipped with PEP and medication. Like the centers in North Kivu, other centers lacked women on staff to tend to women patients. The health center in Orientale was similar to those in North Kivu; it did not have special treatment for child survivors and did not have women on staff. Of greater concern was data management – there was no safe, private storage of patient data. Also of note, the community did not appear engaged or involved in the center, and there were no signs leading the community to the center or alerting them of its presence. Further, services were not free. Survivors were charged an additional fee to treat conditions like high blood pressure as a result of the violence. Health center staff indicated that this fee-for-service arrangement was needed to ensure that clients were truly survivors of SGBV rather than community members looking to obtain free medical services. Psychosocial Eight psychosocial support centers were visited: two in North Kivu, one in South Kivu, and five in Orientale. The North Kivu centers were positive in terms of overall impressions of the center and its staff. Staff appeared knowledgeable and well informed. Data was managed and stored safely. The community was aware of and engaged in the center. Technical issues were appropriately addressed. One of the centers, however, did not have independent access to private space to hold discussions with survivors. The South Kivu center fared well in the assessment, but the team raised the question of accessibility, as entrance was only possible through the IP compound. Referrals to medical and legal services were noted as a particular strength. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 36 The five centers in Orientale ranked well in overall impressions, with the exception of one that appeared unfriendly to women, lacking private discussion space, and surrounded by men. This center also did not have appropriate data management or storage protocols in place. This needs to be examined further. In terms of staff accessibility and knowledge, the centers ranked well. Most centers had standardized procedures and protocols for intake, counseling and safety planning, as well as referrals to medical and socio-economic support as needed. Two gaps observed in the Orientale centers were the lack of women on staff for women patients and lack of knowledge about how to treat child survivors. Socio-economic Five centers providing socio-economic support were visited. As previously stated, socio-economic support is the main community demand, and has the potential to make the most significant changes in the SGBV landscape in areas targeted by USAID/DRC/S.P. programming – both in prevention and response. Of these centers, two were in Orientale and three in South Kivu. The Orientale centers ranked well in terms of center and staff approach to socio-economic reintegration, offering a variety of skills. Communities were engaged and the overall impression was positive. The South Kivu centers were extremely strong, and could very well serve as models for other centers. They reflected positive efforts at community engagement and meeting the needs of vulnerable women, not just survivors. This was very well received in the communities. A strong focus on socio-economic support and a shift toward supporting those who are vulnerable, not just survivors, has proved to be a very successful strategy. Legal One legal center, supported by IMC in South Kivu, was part of this assessment. This center was high quality and reflected strong technical knowledge of the legal landscape regarding SGBV in the country. Impressions of the center and staff were very favorable, and the staff appeared highly professional. Data was collected, stored, and managed in line with international good practices and standardized procedures were in place for survivor cases as well as protection. Gaps and Opportunities Health, psychosocial, socio-economic, and legal centers funded through USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV funding provide quality services in their respective communities. Results from the observational assessment checklist highlight opportunities to further improve the quality of services and expand good practices. The legal and socio-economic centers visited reflect practices in line with a high standard of service. Visits to health and psychosocial centers reveal gaps and discrepancies that should be further explored including: • Lack of women on staff to provide care for women survivors • Lack of child survivor treatment and support • Limited availability of medical supplies, including PEP kits ASSESSING STRENGTHS, LIMITATIONS, AND LESSONS FROM USAID IMPLEMENTING PARTNERS Drawing on interviews conducted with IPs and their implementing partners, this section assesses the strengths and limitations of four IPs: COOPI, IMC, IMA, and IRC. For each IP, a brief partner and program description is provided, followed by a discussion of accomplishments and challenges. Comparisons across USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV programs are then discussed. Opportunities for modification and harmonization are provided in the recommendations section. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 37 COOPERAZIONE INTERNAZIONALE (COOPI) Psychosocial Support and Reintegration of Survivors of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo Partner Description Established in 1965, Cooperazione Internazionale (COOPI) is an independent NGO that assists populations affected by emergencies, supporting their civil, economic, and social development. COOPI has managed SGBV projects since 2003 in Ituri, and since 2004 in Maniema. The first projects focused on ensuring the care of women, men, and children survivors of sexual violence and torture during and after the war. Since 2006, COOPI has focused more closely on preventing gender-based violence. In 2003, a project for children associated with armed groups and other vulnerable children, especially girls who experienced rape and sexual slavery, was set up in Ituri. From April 2006 to May 2008, COOPI provided 18,520 survivors with psychosocial support, 6,575 of whom were minors. COOPI provided 14,614 of those survivors with health assistance; 1,800 patients were treated with PEP within 72 hours of the incident. The project sensitized 1,072,819 individuals, community and traditional leaders, and supported 600 communities.52 COOPI’s work on SGBV is guided by the following approach: • A holistic approach to the care of SGBV survivors, considering health as the balanced integration of physical, psychological, and social aspects of human life • A multi-sectoral approach considering psychosocial, medical, socio-economic, and legal aid in the rehabilitation process of SGBV survivors • A strong community-based participatory approach, involving local actors in project and advocacy activities, in order to provide quality services to survivors and fight SGBV. COOPI funds its comprehensive SGBV programming through multiple donors: STAREC, UNHCR, EU, USAID, and UNICEF. COOPI and partner Centre d’Intervention Psychosocial (CIP), organized a referral system around a structure called Carrefour where Income-Generating Activities (IGA) are offered to community members by priority order, according to vulnerability criteria. USAID Project Description COOPI is implementing the USAID-funded Psychosocial Support and Reintegration of Survivors of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo Project, with the following objectives: 1. To enable individuals affected by SGBV in Ituri District of Orientale Province and in Maniema Province to resume their roles within their family and community. To strengthen community responsiveness to SGBV and to protect individuals against future incidents, particularly at the local level. To this end, USAID initially provided COOPI with USD $4,945,045 for December 2009 through April 2012. The project targets Ituri and Maniema in Orientale Province. In Ituri, the project works in eight territories through 31 health zones (HZ) and 60 health centers. In Maniema, the project works in four territories, seven health zones, and eight health centers. The project aims to support the following beneficiaries: 52 www.coopi.org Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 38 • 30,000 SGBV survivors, with no distinction of age or sex. Among them, at least 24,000 survivors will receive quality services to improve their quality of life and reclaim their place in their families and communities • At least 4% of SGBV survivors assisted annually are child ex-combatants or children affected by prostitution or forced labor (TIP survivors) • 60 local medical structures • 3,000 service providers and community members will be trained to identify survivors and provide quality specialized services • 1,500,000 individuals will be reached through community awareness and mobilization activities • 6,000 community leaders will participate in community training activities • At least three public institutions will improve their methods for ensuring care for survivors and preventing SGBV • Local partners will benefit from capacity building The project has identified the following results: Increased access to services that improve functioning for individuals and communities affected by SGBV, particularly in the following sectors: psychosocial and mental health care, health care, educational, and socio￾economic reintegration Improved quality of interventions for individuals and communities affected by SGBV through capacity of local service providers and service delivery organizations Improved awareness of the different types and consequences of SGBV through the promotion of communication strategies that reduce community tolerance of SGBV, particularly at the local level As of June 2011, COOPI has achieved the following results: Indicators Target results 2009-2011 Total achieved 2009-2011 % Psychosocial and Mental Health Services Confidential Identification 30,000 21,043 70 Psychological Support and Counseling 24,000 21,043 88 Minors Receiving Psychosocial Care 7,200 7,811 108 Family and Community Mediation 5,100 3,949 77 Self-Help Group(s) 9,600 6,194 65 Trafficking In Persons (TIP) Victims Assisted 960 374 39 Survivors Recovered 18,000 9,916 55 Medical Referrals Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 39 Indicators Target results 2009-2011 Total achieved 2009-2011 % Beneficiaries Referred 16,740 9,893 59 Beneficiaries’ Partners Referred - 1,927 - Victims Referred Within72 Hours - 2,170 - Social Reintegration Beneficiaries Integrated 12,000 9,558 80 Vulnerable Minors Integrated 4,200 2,659 63 Beneficiaries Integrated in Socio-Cultural Activities - 12,493 - Legal Referrals and Assistance Informed Beneficiaries 24,000 20,800 87 Referred and Assisted Beneficiaries - 53 - Community Awareness - Raising, Training and Advocacy Participation in Community Sensitization Activities (outreach) 1,500,000 811,791 54 Participation in Training for Community Leaders 18,000 9,852 55 Training for Service Providers 3,000 4,968 166 Training for Students and Teachers 9,000 2,402 27 Assessment Findings Accomplishments and Strengths Multi-sectoral approach. Addressing SGBV from multiple angles has led to more targeted community sensitization. The Sexual and Gender-Based Violence Program for Ituri District and Maniema Province is an integrated, multi-sectoral program providing quality services to SGBV survivors. It is composed of five main sectors corresponding to a set of quality services provided to SGBV survivors and communities: 1. Psychosocial and mental health care, including mental health service, community service (Center and Carrefours), and self-help groups 2. Health care, including support and supervised partnership with local health care services, medication distribution, and surgery interventions 3. Educational and socio-economic reintegration, including IGAs, vocational therapy, professional training, and children’s reintegration into schools 4. Sensitization and social mobilization, including community sensitization, sensitization campaigns, and social mobilization activities 5. Training and advocacy, including training community leaders, professional and non-professional service providers, and advocacy Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 40 Community-based Approach. This project encourages preventive measures and ensures high-quality treatment of survivors in order to support their reintegration into their families and communities. The project aims to put in place a strategic approach for survivor support and social change that will be self-sustaining and will build the capacity of communities and national institutions to care for survivors. Key partners in this strategy are CBOs, especially women’s groups promoting women’s empowerment and gender equality at the village level. By working with them, the project enlisted community commitment to the project’s objectives to raise awareness among community members of the problem of violence, and to build the capacity of local health professionals to respond to survivor needs. COOPI’s local partner, CIP, will continue to ensure survivor access to mental health care and play a coordinating role for the provision of psychosocial services, the sensitization and social mobilization of the communities, training, and advocacy activities. The community-centered approach has also created socio-economic activities and opportunities for the general community. Other community activities include a theater group, sports activities for children and youth, and a community library. This approach has helped build trust and increase community engagement in project activities. Creation of Socio-economic Opportunities for Vulnerable Women. Through its partnership with CIP, the project has developed multiple socio-economic activities for vulnerable women in the community, including embroidery, hand-knitting, dressmaking, baking, and skills building. Based in Bunia, the community/social activity center, Centre Femme, Enfant et Famille (CFEF), reaches 12 neighborhoods. Relationship with CIP. COOPI partners with CIP as their national partner for this project. CIP is a national NGO composed of psychologists trained at the University of Kisangani. The organization provides psychological support to reintegrate adults and children affected by violence or natural disaster into society. COOPI’s close, long-term relationship with CIP has been a great success for both parties. Together, COOPI and CIP are able to make decisions on how to improve their response, including use of the referral and counter-referral form introduced by UNFPA for data collection.53 Challenges and Limitations Limited understanding of SGBV terminology. During the assessment, COOPI staff indicated a lack of understanding of SGBV definitions. It was learned that they use SGBV when referring only to sexual violence and GBV as all violence that is non-sexual, such as domestic violence. This lack of understanding of definitions and conflation of terms is not simply an issue of semantics. It must be clarified in order to have a common understanding of the work. There are also implications for reporting and data collection that could arise due to this confusion. USAID’s previous restrictions on contraceptive pills in PEP kits. COOPI expressed concern about USAID’s past restrictions that do not allow the contraception pill to be included in PEP kits. It remains unclear as to whether this is a misunderstanding or their own perception. Currently, COOPI purchases the contraception pill with other funding and adds it to the kit. Distance and Availability of Health Care. A center supported by COOPI is far from the Carrefour, and the health center for the village of Kilo has no PEP. Overlap with IMA. In Komanda, there is an IMA/PPSSP Safe House and a COOPI Carrefour that are funded by USAID programming. Both structures refer survivors to Hôpital Géneral de Réfèrence (HGR), the main hospital in Komanda, and both claim they are the sole supporter of the hospital. Additionally, the focal 53 The UNFPA form is used by COOPI and CIP in the absence of another viable method of reporting and data collection. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 41 point for SGBV survivors is an IMA/PPSSP staff person who is not always available for survivors referred by COOPI/CIP. An additional challenge is how and to whom the hospital reports the data. Perceptions of Legal Prosecution. Community perceptions are a challenge for the project’s legal assistance. The community largely regards legal prosecution of perpetrators as a “way to make judges and police commanders rich.”54 In many cases, according to both IP staff and community members, judges and police demand and receive money from both aggressors and the survivors. Therefore, survivors are unlikely to pursue prosecution. Limited attention to socio-economic activities. COOPI recommends that USAID prioritize socio￾economic activities as a way to empower women, prevent violence, and engage the community as a whole. Program participants need a kit de sortie, (i.e. a package of goods and cash to help them reintegrate into the community after they complete training). Project Gaps Lack of child-oriented package and service provisions that respond to the high incidence of child prostitution in Orientale province. Orientale province faces the specific challenge of child prostitution in and around gold mining activities. As a result, any SGBV programming in the province must be more focused on providing a child-oriented package of service provision, including strong links to child protection programs. These have yet to be established. Currently, no programs focus on the serious challenges of child prostitution around mining areas, and there are no specific socio-economic reintegration activities for children and youth. Additionally, the pediatric PEP kit is only provided by UNICEF, leaving a large gap in many of the decentralized structures. During the period of this assessment, the evaluation team did not find any health center with the pediatric PEP kit because they were all out of stock at the time. Lack of attention to gender dynamics, particularly related to practices surrounding family mediation, and lack of women psychosocial assistants (PSAs) and care providers. The observational assessment noted the lack women staff in the COOPI health center and psychosocial centers. Staff justified the lack of women PSAs because a male PSA is perceived as helpful for family mediation. This raises two issues. First is the lack of women PSAs to provide support for women survivors. Second is the use of family mediation as a tool to address SGBV. Family mediation is a controversial issue in SGBV response. Depending how family mediation is done, COOPI/CIP might be doing harm to survivors by suggesting mediation. Unequal power dynamics exists within families, which usually disadvantage women. Further, mediation does not end the cycle of violence that most domestic violence survivors experience. There is a high risk that mediation reinforces unequal power patterns in the couple, harming the survivor’s well-being. The issue of family mediation should be discussed at the Kinshasa level with other IPs – particularly those with strong SGBV technical skills and counseling techniques such as IRC – in order to determine a shared way forward. It might be determined that USAID should reconsider funding approaches that include mediation, or that do not abide by certain mediation standards. Additionally, such approaches must be accompanied by a woman PSA on the staff and an opportunity for the survivor to speak privately with the woman PSA, outside of the mediation. 54 Quote from a USAID SGBV IP staff member. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 42 IMA WORLD HEALTH Ushindi Program Partner Description IMA World Health provides essential healthcare services and medical supplies around the world. It is a nonprofit, faith-based organization working to restore health, hope, and dignity to those most in need. Since 1960, IMA's programs have reached millions of people in need in many corners of the world in developing countries and areas ravaged by war, disaster and poverty. Over the past 50 years, IMA has provided more than $1 billion in medicine to over 52 countries. IMA is headquartered in the US, with field offices in Tanzania, Haiti, DRC, Southern Sudan, and Kenya. IMA World Health established a field office in Goma. Ushindi is partly being implemented from field offices in Goma, Lubero, and Komanda to better support the extensive health care needs in DRC. IMA provides medicine and supplies, including Safe Motherhood Kits comprised of clean and sterile birthing supplies for expectant mothers to lessen the risk of injury, infection, and death. The organization supports a mass drug administration project, and has contributed to activities that prevent and treat HIV/AIDS and malaria. IMA also worked through the USAID-funded Project AXxes to improve the overall availability, quality, and capacity of healthcare in heavily distressed, post-conflict regions in eastern DRC. IMA supports 25 clinics through CPN+, a maternal and newborn child health project, providing antenatal services to 750,000 people in a remote part of the Congolese rain forest. USAID Program Description IMA is the implementing partner for Ushindi, the $16 million, five year USAID-funded program launched in 2010. Ushindi, meaning “victory” in Swahili, provides responsive care and supports survivors in North and South Kivu where the epidemic of rape and abuse of women and girls is most severe. Through IMA's massive health systems development program in DRC, SGBV survivors are provided access to fistula repair and counseling to treat the physical and emotional ramifications of SGBV. Specifically, the Ushindi project seeks to: 1. Ensure that individuals affected by SGBV gain access to high-quality, timely and age-appropriate care and treatment services Increase and improve organizational and community capacity to identify and respond effectively to SGBV and facilitate survivor recovery Improve the ability of individuals, community-based organizations (CBOs), and communities to lead and participate in community-based social integration and economic recovery activities Strengthen communities’ (individuals and CBOs) ability to prevent SGBV To achieve project objectives, Ushinidi employs a three-fold approach: 1) increase access to timely, high￾quality services for individuals affected by SGBV; 2) improve the quality of services and interventions for individuals and communities affected by SGBV; and 3) reduce the vulnerability of individuals to future acts of abuse and violence. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 43 The project is implemented by a consortium of four NGOs led by IMA World Health. Members work together to provide a comprehensive range of services to survivors in nine health zones that cover four provinces: • Program for Promotion of PHC PPSSP (two HZ) Northern North Kivu (Beni-based) • Heal Africa (four HZ) Central North Kivu and Maniema (Goma and Kindu-based) • Panzi Hospital (three HZ) South Kivu (Bukavu-based) • IMA The three subcontracting partners are supported by five other technical partners: 1. American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative (ABA ROLI): Legal aid and counseling 2. Save the Children: Services tailored for children, child advocacy, and prevention 3. Children's Voice: Child advocacy, parenting, and mass communications 4. CARE: Economic integration and community mobilization 5. IMA World Health: Health zone integrated programming and monitoring. Key results expected from this project include: • 3,600 survivors counseled for psychosocial support per year • 2,700 survivors receiving medical support at health center level per year • 3,600 survivors receiving legal counsel for SGBV-related acts per year • 300 cases referred to paralegal jurists for prosecution per year • 9 Wamama Simameni (WS) Houses established and functioning • 810 community leaders trained (60 leaders and 30 teachers per health zone) • 162 health service providers trained (18 ITs CS, MD, MCZS, Supervisors per health zone) • 21,600 women and children assisted with microfinance grants over three years • 198 forums to discuss the collective and individual impact of SGBV per year • 90 women-led and or children's community groups strengthened over three years Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 44 At the time of this evaluation, the project identified the following results: • 3,418 SGBV survivors supported through the Ushindi project • Of those supported, 1,537 benefitted from legal support, 2,411 from health support, and over 3,412 were supported by PAs. Assessment Findings Accomplishments and Strengths Diversity of consortium members who each bring a unique set of skills and experiences. The consortium uses strategic partnerships to ensure high-quality programming. Each of the four partners is engaged in work that capitalizes on its areas of expertise. The high level of coordination and participatory planning of consortium members’ efforts has allowed the program to be more effective and efficient. Respected technical partners that ensure high-quality care and provide a full package of services to SGBV survivors. IMA has partnered effectively with Panzi Hospital, which is well known for providing health services to survivors. Through various partnerships, Ushindi is able to provide a range of high-quality services that cover all forms of SGBV. Comprehensive technical training for all partners to ensure a consistent level of understanding and a high level of expertise. Partners are often working in health zones where the needs are great and there is limited support from other actors. By providing comprehensive technical training to each partner, the project is able to ensure a high level of expertise throughout all the targeted health zones. Full legal support regardless of perpetrator’s background. Through ABA ROLI, Ushindi provides full legal support to all survivors, regardless of whether the perpetrator is a civilian, a member of an armed group, or part of the Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo (FARDC). Congolese-driven: project effectively engages in partnerships with both Congolese and international NGOs, with Congolese leading efforts. Ushindi has an effective strategy of engaging Congolese and international NGOs in a true partnership, based on capacity building, with Congolese organizations in the lead. International partners recognize that these organizations have the contextual knowledge needed for the project to succeed, particularly in addressing socio-cultural issues. The use of national staff also minimizes the security risk to international staff. Ushindi’s code of cnduct is a good practice that can be shared with other USAID IPs. Challenges and Limitations Lack of Infrastructure. Ushindi works primarily in inaccessible areas. In some intervention areas, not even a bike can be used to reach the zone so staff must travel by foot, and are exposed to great risk and discomfort. Many zones also lack schools. In order to improve sustainability of the program and the quality of beneficiaries’ lives, access to basic education is critical. Many people do not get to enjoy this right. This was clearly expressed by a consortium staff member who said, “Without education, what can we expect to change? This is especially important for SGBV prevention.” Lack of Security. Several Ushinidi partners voiced concerns that the insecurity inside targeted zones poses a threat to program sustainability. Partners recommend additional focus on broad-based activities that can help address security issues. Delays in Startup. Although, overall, Ushindi has a successful consortium strategy, setbacks have been experienced as CARE and the ABA ROLI have experienced delays in their respective activities. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 45 Gaps and Opportunities Ushindi program staff and consortium members identified the following as opportunities for strengthening the program: 1. Develop awareness-raising and training messages that reflect the cultural context and environment to improve message receptivity Recruit local staff from intervention areas to ensure that the program benefits from the cultural and contextual knowledge Enhance local staff technical skills through training and capacity-building Strengthen socio-economic interventions, income-generating activities, and microfinance to improve sustainability and community recovery. INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS Care, Access, Safety and Empowerment (CASE) and Behavior Change Communication (BCC) Projects Partner Description The International Medical Corps (IMC) is a global, nonprofit humanitarian organization established in 1984. It works through health care training and relief and development programs to improve quality of life through health interventions and related activities that build local capacity in underserved communities worldwide. IMC rehabilitates devastated health care systems and helps bring them back to self-reliance. IMC has worked in the DRC since 1999 and served more than one million people; 80% were displaced by the war.55 IMC provides health care, nutrition, food security, sexual violence prevention and treatment, and water and sanitation services. IMC’s SGBV operations in DRC began in 2002 and have evolved into a holistic approach that includes integrating services for survivors into IMC primary health care programs, training doctors and community health workers in SGBV response, and sensitizing communities against SGBV through education and training. IMC collaborates with Panzi Hospital to train doctors in remote areas to repair fistulas, potentially fatal internal ruptures caused by rape, and poor birthing conditions. IMC’s work in DRC (and worldwide) is guided by a gender strategy with the following objectives: 1. Consider the different roles and relationships of women and men, and how these roles will impact participation in project activities Design project interventions to address the different needs of women, men, girls, and boys Involve both women and men in project design, implementation, and monitoring and evaluation activities Recruit men as allies to facilitate women’s participation Recruit female project staff and volunteers Disaggregate project data by gender and age (to differentiate needs between male and female youth as well as women and men) Gather and disseminate lessons learned regarding the gendered outcomes of project activities across sectors of intervention. 55 http://internationalmedicalcorps.org/page.aspx?pid=359 Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 46 USAID Program Description In 2010, IMC was awarded a $16.1 million, five-year cooperative grant from USAID to implement the Care, Access, Safety, and Empowerment (CASE) project to increase access to and quality of medical and psychosocial services for SGBV survivors, and to provide assistance to individuals and families affected by SGBV. IMC was also awarded a $10 million grant in 2010 by USAID to address SGBV through Behavior Change Communication (BCC). This comprehensive and innovative program to prevent SGBV enables IMC and partners to utilize BCC to impact social attitudes, practices, and norms associated with SGBV in eastern DRC. Together, the CASE and BCC projects represent a holistic approach to SGBV prevention and response in the DRC. Through CASE, IMC and its consortium partner, ABA ROLI, aim to increase access to and quality of medical, psychological, social, legal, and economic services for SGBV survivors, and to build communities’ capacity to reduce vulnerability for future acts of violence. This project is expected to reach an estimated 46,460 beneficiaries. IMC will additionally provide $6.7 million in additional non-USAID funding and other in-kind donations. The goal is to protect vulnerable populations from physical violence and abuse, and to assist the DRC in its stabilization and gradual transition from a post-conflict country to a developing one. To achieve this, there are three overall program objectives: increased access to timely, high-quality services for individuals affected by SGBV; improved quality of services and interventions for individuals and communities affected by SGBV; and reduced vulnerability of individuals to future acts of abuse and violence. Both CASE and BCC strengthen GDRC capacity while empowering local civil society actors. CASE also works with the ABA ROLI to provide legal support. BCC works in partnership with Search for Common Ground to provide mass media activities and with the Johns Hopkins Center for Communications Programs to establish changes in knowledge, practice, and attitudes. CASE operates in a total of nine health districts in the two provinces of South Kivu (Kalonge and Bunyakiri health zones) and North Kivu (Walikale and Itebero health zones, including the Chambucha health sector). BCC works directly in all the aforementioned CASE sites, plus all health zones within the provincial capitals of Bukavu (Kaduta, Bagira, and Ibanda health zones) in South Kivu and Goma (Goma and Karisimbi health zones) in North Kivu. BCC-supported radio programs, PSAs and comic books are distributed in five provinces (North Kivu, South Kivu, Orientale, Maniema, and Katanga). For the duration of the project (five years), CASE aims to: 1. Reach an estimated 34,603 beneficiaries, including: a. 3,870 male and female survivors of sexual violence receiving medical care b. 2,300 survivors and vulnerable women receiving legal assistance c. 15,500 vulnerable women receiving psychosocial assistance d. 2,520 individual participating in knowledge building, skill-building and livelihood activities Train 754 services providers to serve vulnerable populations Strengthen the medical and PSS capacity of 247 organizations, health facilities, and service delivery systems. For the duration of the project, BCC aims to: 1. Reach an estimated 1,200,000 beneficiaries through mass media, small group activities, capacity building, participatory theater, and other interactive activities Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 47 2. Train 4,744 individuals to work with communities and individuals to create positive behavior changes, including: a. 1,500 teachers and others providing services to children and youth b. 800 religious and community leaders c. 1,910 police officers and other law enforcement officials. 3. Reinforce the capacity of 247 organizations’ (CBOs, NGOs, etc.) service delivery systems to encourage behavioral change To date, the CASE and BCC projects have achieved the following: CASE BCC Indicator Target FY11 (Oct 10-Sept 11) Achievement (through July 2011) % Target FY11 (Oct 10-Sept 11) Achievement (through July 2011) % Number of people benefitting from USG￾supported services 4,450 5,318 119.5% 215,580 711,156 330% Number of service providers trained to serve vulnerable populations 504 435 86.3% 734 662 90% Number of organizations or service delivery systems strengthened 82 84 102.4% 82 51 62% Assessment Findings Accomplishments and Successes Covering isolated areas. IMC, like most of the other IPs (COOPI in Ituri, IMA in Shabunda) provides coverage to areas that are isolated and insecure. While this creates its own sets of challenges, the CASE project is meeting crucial gaps in service provision. Raising awareness about the law against SGBV. With support from ABA ROLI, the BCC project is increasing awareness about the law against SGBV. This is an important accomplishment, because they are working in areas without previous experience with or presence of a legal organization. Creating a SGBV working group. IMC is in the process of creating a SGBV working group with key SGBV actors at the local and provincial levels to develop SGBV messages and analyze Most Significant Change (MSC) and BCC. Providing activities for vulnerable women. Vulnerable women have access to a wide range of activities in the carrefours including folkloric dance, participative theatre, football matches, activities for children, musical activities, and dressmaking. These activities have generated effective community engagement in the centers. IMC works with volunteers in the community who contribute to sensitization activities and follow up with beneficiaries. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 48 Challenges and Limitations Security. Access to certain sites is challenging due to security issues. Violence in these areas is circuitous. A plan for addressing increases in violence without compromising services should be in place to the extent possible. Limited legal support. Unlike with IMA, under the IMC-implemented project, the ABA ROLI only provides support for cases where the perpetrator is a civilian. This practice is based on an understanding that USAID restricts payment of fees to Military Courts required to process cases perpetrated by military or armed men. USAID is clarifying this with IMC. Gaps and Opportunities Lack of women on staff in health centers. All four health centers observed during the assessment lack women on staff to attend to women patients. Efforts should explore and address constraints associated with hiring women. Limited psychosocial assistance. Psychosocial assistants are not entirely focused on providing support to survivors. They are also responsible for community sensitization sessions and different social activities in the carrefour. Further, PSAs are only provided in the carrefours – four for the entire project – and not in the health centers that are supported by the project. Working with local NGOs and CBOs could help expand psychosocial assistance to new areas. Lack of socio-economic activities. Socio-economic activities are still not available through the CASE Project. The CASE project document explains that economic recovery is essential and states that such training achieves several goals: improves the socio-economic status and independence of women in general and allows them to avoid circumstances that can leave them vulnerable to sexual assault; provides a comfortable social setting for survivors and non-survivors to come together, decreasing stigma and prejudice which may exist; and provides a forum for survivors to share their experiences, allowing non-survivors to learn and better protect themselves. The socio-economic component should be strengthened significantly. INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE Ending Sexual Violence by Promoting Opportunities and Individual Rights (ESPOIR) Project Partner Description The International Rescue Committee (IRC), created in 1933, is a global leader in rapid response and durable solutions for conflict- and crisis-affected populations. IRC responds in a variety of sectors including health, SGBV, education, child protection, livelihoods, and governance and rights. The organization is one of the largest providers of humanitarian aid in the DRC. Present in the country since 1996, IRC is a leader in providing health and emergency response services to those displaced by violence. IRC is also one of the leading organizations addressing sexual violence in Congo, with a team of experts focusing on emergency care, counseling, prevention measures, advocacy, and other support services. Since 2002, IRC has provided critical assistance to 40,000 SGBV-affected people (survivors and their families) in the DRC, in both North and South Kivu. IRC has its own SGBV strategy for DRC that fits into the Comprehensive Strategy for combating SGBV and the National SGBV Strategy. Currently, IRC is providing the following services linked to SGBV programming: • Free post-rape healthcare in 21 health zones through the IRC Health Program • Direct psychosocial support to survivors in North Kivu and Minembwe Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 49 • Partnering with four national NGOs to provide psychosocial and legal services in North and South Kivu • Supporting 42 CBOs in social integration and women’s empowerment activities • Socio-economic activities: - 44 Village Savings and Loans Associations (VSLAs) - 6,300 women enrolled in Women for Women International’s (WfWI) 12-month program for building life skills and income-generating activities • Advocacy Action Plans at the community level. USAID Program Description IRC was awarded ESPOIR, a three-year, $7 million grant ($2.1 million for WfWI’s activities) for activities in North Kivu and South Kivu. The ESPOIR project runs from September 2009 to September 2012. The goal of the project is to promote the well-being of women and girls and to mitigate the consequences of SGBV. ESPOIR is implemented by international and local partners to: • Ensure that survivors of SGBV have access to quality and timely services • Build local capacity to respond effectively to SGBV and facilitate survivor recovery • Support community-based social integration and economic recovery activities. As of June 2011, the main project results included: Life of Activity Targets Results to June 2011 105,515 people benefiting from USG-supported services. 43,599 people have benefited from USG-supported services. 390 service providers trained who serve vulnerable persons. 357 service providers have been trained. 260 USG-assisted organizations and/or service delivery systems strengthened that serve vulnerable populations. 208 organizations and/or service delivery systems have been strengthened. Assessment Findings Accomplishments and Strengths Strong technical skills. IRC has solid technical skills in SGBV prevention and response, and is strongly supported by a SGBV technical unit at the HQ level in New York. This unit is recognized as a global leader in SGBV programming. In DRC, IRC has the additional support of a Senior SGBV Advisor at the national level. Some of their key tools and resources that can be shared across IPs include Quality Criteria Checklists and an impact evaluation that is currently in progress (produced in partnership with Johns Hopkins University). Focus on strengthening local technical and institutional capacities. IRC’s approach focuses strongly on supporting women-led CBOs and local NGOs. They promote women’s empowerment by working closely with these local organizations to strengthen their technical and institutional capacities, empowering women in the community and with the local authorities. IRC ensures that its partners have technical skills and individual support, raising the level of professionalism. The relationships also provide learning opportunities for both Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 50 the local and international partner – for example, not only has IRC trained WfWI staff but WfWI has trained IRC staff in their model of business skills training. Strong focus on socio-economic activities. IRC’s partnership with WfWI ensures socio-economic reintegration by providing training in building life skills and complementing VSLA activities. Gaps and Opportunities. Share IRC SGBV resources and tools with other IPs. IRC has extensive technical knowledge and resources that can benefit other IPs. COMPARISON OF IP APPROACHES Differences in approaches and responses were observed in psychosocial, legal and socio-economic support. An overview of differences is provided below. PSYCHOSOCIAL SUPPORT Each IP employs a different approach to psychosocial response, and each has a different understanding of what constitutes a core package for this type of response. Below is a summary of the concepts, approaches, and terminology used, as well as strengths and limitations of each approach. Maison d’écoute This is the IRC approach consisting of two-room houses located within communities, run by a PSA and a community education officer. The houses are used by psychosocial assistants to meet survivors that have been informed (via community sensitizations and/or friends) of the counseling services offered. Survivors approaching the PSA avoid being stigmatized. These houses are not located on main roads or in very visible sites for protection reasons. PSAs are under the management of a local NGO specialized in psychosocial needs, and are trained directly by IRC psychosocial advisors in a variety of counseling techniques. They receive regular training and are monitored (check-listed and supervised) by both the local NGO (contracted by IRC) and the IRC supervisor. Carrefour This is the concept used by both COOPI and IMC to refer to a structure where socio-economic activities and PSA are provided. The meaning and approach of a carrefour, however, is very different between COOPI and IMC. For COOPI, carrefours were built together with the community. They are run by a president and board members who decide which socio-economic activities to conduct, the fees for using the carrefour’s community equipment (e.g., the mill and oven), and the criteria and priorities for community members (particularly survivors and other vulnerable people) to use them. COOPI supports the carrefours financially; board members are left to manage the details. Psychosocial assistance is provided within the carrefour in a separate, confidential room. The PSA was trained by COOPI’s psychosocial local partner, CIP. IMC carrefours are run directly by IMC, located in IMC’s office in the field sites. Some training and socio￾economic activities are conducted there, including literacy, sport activities for community members, dancing, and theatre. There is a room for the PSA to meet with survivors privately, but they must first enter the IMC compound and ask for the PSA at the entrance. This practice compromises confidentiality. IMC has a medical supervisor who works with the health staff of IMC-supported health centers. It is unclear who is providing the psychosocial training to these health staff or how is it coordinated with the SGBV Officers in the carrefour. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 51 Legal services are also available. The ABA ROLI owns a room in the same structure; however, ABA ROLI staff mentioned that it is challenging (and too expensive) to provide legal assistance in the very remote IMC carrefour sites in Walikale or Chambucha. The assessment team could not reach these areas for accessibility and security reasons. UNICEF in North Kivu was very concerned about the planned implementation of IMC activities specifically in these two locations. Safe House (Wamama Simameni) This is the concept used by IMA. It is similar to IMC’s Carrefour; however, IMA’s Safe Houses include CARE socio-economic activities (which have not started yet) and Save the Children’s child-friendly approach. Safe Houses consist of a house structure located within the selected communities and run by IMA/Heal Africa in North Kivu province, IMA/PPSSP in Orientale province, and IMA/Panzi in South Kivu province. Survivors must approach these structures to access PSA, legal, and/or socio-economic services. PSAs are focused on psychosocial support within the Safe Houses. A few staff from the health facilities have also been trained in counseling techniques and provide a degree of PSA. IMA works with communities through the noyaux communautaires – the community leaders group responsible for sensitization. The goal is to make the community responsible for its concerns and engage leaders to take responsibility for certain activities. Approach Maison d’ecoute Carrefour (COOPI) Carrefour (IMC) Safe House Strengths Quality psychosocial assistance. Referrals to health and legal facilities. Case management. Depending on the location, survivors can enroll in WfWI life skills training. The community manages most operations carrefour in terms of activities and use criteria. Priority on vulnerable people, not just survivors. Promotes self￾financing and good governance at the community level. There is a range of activities for the general community. PSA and legal support is available, including in remote areas where IMC works (e.g., Bunyakiri). All services are integrated into one structure located within the community. IMA supervises health facilities surrounding the Safe House and provides some degree of basic counseling to health staff in order to decentralize support services. Limitations If the maison d’écoute is located in a site where IRC health programs do not work, the medical referral cannot ensure the quality of the medical assistance. The same is true for socio-economic activities where WfWI does not have a site. Legal support is not available in every maison d’écoute location. PSA quality and follow-up is weak. It is unclear how often COOPI/CIP provides training to the PSA in the sites. Health facilities closer to the carrefours are not always supported by COOPI, limiting survivor access to medical care. It is unclear how survivors receive legal support referrals from the carrefours. The quality of the PSA provided by IMC SGBV officers in the carrefours is unclear. IMC does not work with CBOs or local NGOs. Health structures should always refer to the carrefour for PSA - even if it is distant from the health facility. The instructions from the IMC medical advisor are to refer to the carrefour for PSA. Confidentiality for PSA is a challenge, as a number of community members and IMA staff are present in Safe Houses and run daily activities. The noyaux communautaire facilitating community sensitization continue to demand extra “motivation” to stay engaged in raising awareness about SGBV and related protection themes. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 52 In addition to the differences highlighted above, USAID/DRC/S.P.’s SGBV IPs also interpret and prioritize psychosocial assistance differently. COOPI, for example, delineates between PSA and mental health, but it is unclear what services fall under each category. IPs identified the absence of a minimum standard or package of psychosocial assistance that is commonly understood. The new psychosocial protocol does not cover this. This is a challenge when comparing the quality of the psychosocial support provided by the different IPs, PSAs in the Maisons d’Écoute, Carrefours, and Safe Houses; and health staff at health facilities. UNICEF is about to launch new protocols for the different sectors – a crucial initiative in clarifying and establishing good practices and in standardizing and harmonizing the minimum package of PSA among IPs. These protocols fill a gap, and will be very useful for SGBV donors in terms of making indicators related to PSA comparable across IPs. LEGAL SUPPORT IPs use different approaches for providing legal services and provide different levels of support. IMC and IMA, for example, have integrated legal services through the ABA ROLI in their safe house/carrefour structures. COOPI’s local legal partner is Justice Plus, and IRC’s local legal partner is Arche d’Alliance. COOPI and IRC refer cases to their legal partner, often without consideration of distance from or convenience for the survivor. As previously discussed, different levels of legal support are provided across programs. The ABA ROLI is the legal partner on IMC and IMA’s USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV projects. It does not work with SGBV cases referred through IMC that are perpetrated by armed men (a significant number), because these cases should be processed via the Auditorat Militaire. The ABA ROLI states that USAID has restrictions on payment to military institutions. This point requires clarification from USAID (in process) because the ABA’s work with IMA continues unhindered. Through IMA, ABA ROLI is able to process cases perpetrated by the military. This disconnect has serious consequences, as it is estimated that 40% of cases in IMC areas are perpetrated by armed men.56 Legal support from the ABA ROLI is crucial, but must be clarified to ensure a consistent approach. Ultimately, comprehensive legal support should be given to the system in general. Patchy reinforcement of the legal system only for SGBV cases might not be sustainable. Greater advocacy is needed to reinforce the system as a whole. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES Discussions with IPs and their partners revealed unanimous recognition that socio-economic recovery programming needs improvement and should be prioritized and scaled up. Currently, focus and specific efforts to increase socio-economic activities varies across IPs: • IMC has not yet started socio-economic activities, but plans to do so in its second year with a small IGA component. IMC has budgeted $4 per beneficiary for socio-economic reinsertion, but recognizes that it is far less than the $16 per beneficiary that is believed to be needed. • IMA has started VSLA groups with CARE, which are operating on reduced budget. The IMA program does not yet have an IGA. 56 IMC/ABA mentioned that in terms of perpetrators: in Bunyakiri 1 in 3 (33%) of their 127 cases are armed men, and that in Kalonge 3 in 4 (75%) of their 94 cases are armed men. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 53 • IRC has VSLA groups and WfWI’s skills building trainings, in addition to partnerships with CBOs and local NGOs, to support IGA focusing on vulnerable women in the community. Socio-economic activities only operate in certain areas where WfWI is present. Literacy and numeracy have been added by WfWI and appear to be very promising. VSLA is operating alongside a CBO, unrelated to maison d’écoute’s beneficiaries. VSLA groups are not located in the same sites as the maisons d’écoute, but are in sites with existing CBOs. • COOPI has IGAs within the carrefours, open to all women in the community who pay a symbolic price to use the mill and oven. COOPI and CIP, COOPI’s psychosocial and socio-economic local partner, have an IGA center for vulnerable women called Centre Femme Famille et Enfant (CFEF). Socio-economic assistance is hindered by real constraints that will need to be addressed, including women’s lack of land ownership and limited access to finance or capital to start businesses. Additionally, few organizations conduct market analysis. WfWI’s model should be further explored. Without market analysis, projects risk reinforcing overly feminized skills and gender stereotypes, lack of market access, and relegating women to the informal economy. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 54 ASSESSING COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES AND EXPERIENCES This section explores community perspectives of USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV programming. Mixed methods were employed to collect data, including focus group discussions, interviews with community leaders, and a community survey. Data were collected to better understand community perceptions of the accomplishments, strengths, gaps, and opportunities of USAID programming. A total of 13 focus groups were conducted, eight with women and five with men, in North and South Kivu. Sixteen community leaders were interviewed. A total of 106 people (58 women, 48 men) participated in community surveys, which were administered in the three provinces of North Kivu, South Kivu, and Orientale. Key questions posed through the focus groups, interviews, and survey included: • Is violence against women and girls, men and boys a problem in this community? Is this kind of violence different from last year and previous years? • What is done in this community to help survivors of sexual violence? • If your friend said s/he was raped, what would you advise her/him to do? • What do people think about “x” organization? • What should the organization do to better support survivors of sexual violence in the community? The findings from community members and leaders largely corroborate the findings from other stakeholders. ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND STRENGTHS Community awareness has increased. Community members and leaders highlighted the impact of awareness-raising initiatives. USAID programs have increased awareness about SGBV and the types of support available to SGBV survivors. Men and women provided detailed answers to the question, “If your friend said s/he was raped, what would you advise her/him to do?” Healthcare was identified as the entry point. Men and women said, for example, that they would take their friend to a health center, and often identified organizations or programs specifically by name. Participants were aware of PEP kits and the need for treatment to be administered within 72 hours. Men and women also discussed the need for the friend to seek psychosocial support and legal assistance. Community members and leaders attribute positive change to USAID awareness-raising initiatives. Where positive changes have been seen regarding incidences of some forms of SGBV, participants often associated the change with USAID program interventions. Specific programs were identified as contributing to the positive change. Leaders, for example, spoke of how awareness is producing results. The most effective awareness initiatives discussed by members and leaders alike is radio programming about violence against women. Over 81% of women and 86% of men who participated in the community survey had heard radio programs about SGBV. Key messages received through radio programs include: Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 55 • Denouncing SV • Factors that enable SV • The law against SV • Importance of medical treatment within 72 hours • Counseling for victims USAID programs recognized as provider of services. Community members and leaders were well aware of the various organizations and programs at work in their respective areas. Individuals were able to supply program and organizational names, and identify the benefits received through the programs. Individuals identified key benefits, including: • Free medical health care for survivors • Awareness • Village Savings and Loans Association (VSLA) • Psychosocial support • Socio-economic awareness GAPS Limited supply of medication. While community members are aware of the health services provided through USAID programs, one of the most commonly provided recommendations to better support survivors was increasing the supply of medications. Instances were reported where survivors were taken to the hospital or health center and were informed that the facility was out of medication, including PEP kits. Lack of engagement with the security sector. Men and women both expressed distrust and fear of the police. Reporting cases to the police was often described as futile. Police are viewed as corrupt, seeking to use cases as opportunities to collect money from both the survivor and the aggressor. Community responses on the role of the police highlighted the need for USAID programming to incorporate the police as a standardized SGBV response and provide training to police stations. Addressing delays in forensic reports was also cited as a challenge to be addressed. Lack of engagement with men as survivors and supporters. Addressing the important role men play in SGBV prevention and response was identified as a gap in current programming. Community members and leaders noted that programs that focus exclusively on women neglect the fact that men and boys are often survivors, and that they can be key advocates for SGBV issues. OPPORTUNITIES Strengthen socio-economic support. Socio-economic support was overwhelmingly identified as a critical component of SGBV programming that should be expanded. Strengthen engagement with the religious community. The importance of engaging religious institutions was also revealed through community surveys and discussions. Religious leaders have an impact on people’s attitudes and behaviors as many community members seek advice from them. Religious leaders and institutions provide vehicles for sharing information on prevention and access to services and providing Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 56 social services. Religious leaders can also take advantage of gatherings to disseminate messages, particularly to men and those who might not be reached through other means. In terms of IP activity, IMC work in Bunyakiri involves the Protestant and Catholic churches and the Imam, the head of the Muslim community. The IMA/Ushindi project includes religious leaders in the community leader cells created as protection mechanisms in order to ensure that communities can sustain the project. Opportunities for further engaging the religious community should be explored across IPs as well as through high-level USAID advocacy. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 57 GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES ANALYSIS This section summarizes the gaps and opportunities identified throughout the assessment process within program objectives, across programming, and within specific programs. The recommendations section will provide concrete actions to address gaps and seize opportunities to further strengthen USAID/DRC/S.P.’s SGBV programming. GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN PROGRAM OBJECTIVES Gaps Opportunities  Lack of engagement with the security sector  Lack of engagement with men as both survivors and supporters  Expand support to socio-economic activities GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES ACROSS PROGRAMS Gaps Opportunities  Lack of standardized psychosocial response  Lack of clarity of the referral process  Lack of sufficient medical supplies, including PEP kits  Lack of specific attention to child survivors  Lack of sufficient women staff in health and psychosocial centers to attend to women survivors  Increase collaboration and coordination among IPs  Enhance technical skills among IPs  Increase knowledge sharing among IPs  Strengthen engagement with religious community GAPS AND OPPORTUNITIES WITHIN PROGRAMS Gaps Opportunities  Lack of clarity surrounding SGBV terminology  Lack of clarity surrounding USAID policy for handling legal cases perpetrated by military personnel  Explore family mediation practices Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 58 CONCLUSIONS Data gathered across stakeholders, implementing partners, and the community revealed useful information regarding the effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of USAID/DRC/S.P.’s SGBV response. The following conclusions emerged through the assessment and analysis. USAID is recognized for its commitment and response to SGBV in the DRC. USAID’s focus on the long-term and emphasis on holistic support for survivors is a notable success. There is appreciation for USAID/DRC/S.P.’s efforts, and recognition of their role as the key donor in SGBV programming. Furthermore, USAID/DRC/S.P. is recognized for clearly establishing SGBV as a priority. The Mission coordinates many actors in an effective SGBV response that includes a strong focus on medical, psychosocial, legal, and socio-economic support. Similarly, USAID’s coordination and partnership with IPs is viewed positively and holds promise for effective collaboration in future programming. Local and international partnership and consortium arrangements have built capacity and provided a platform for knowledge-sharing in a contextual framework. Health and psychosocial support are programs’ greatest strengths. While programs work effectively in economic, health, legal, and psychosocial support areas, medical and psychosocial support were identified as the greatest strengths. The quality of medical response has improved in the past five years, with the majority of IPs’ medical supervisors linked to SGBV programming to ensure regular and effective follow-up. Psychosocial support has improved as the basic principles for working with SGBV survivors are adhered to by IPs and their partners. Community members and leaders recognize USAID IPs and programs as providers of key services for survivors. With respect to improvement, economic opportunities were identified as one of the most critical elements of programming that should be expanded. Community distrust of the legal system highlighted the need to further integrate legal services into programming. Community awareness efforts are attributed with leading to positive change within target communities. Community members and leaders highlighted the impact of awareness-raising initiatives. USAID programs have increased awareness about SGBV and the types of support for available to SGBV survivors. Where positive changes have been observed regarding incidences of some forms of SGBV, participants often associated the change with USAID program interventions. Specific programs were identified as contributing to the positive change. The most effective initiative discussed by members and leaders alike is radio programming about violence against women. Over 81% of women and 86% of men who participated in a community survey had heard radio programs about SGBV. Lessons learned through SGBV programming can be applied in other areas of DRC. A key lesson is the importance of socio-economic support – not just for survivors but for all members of the community. Another lesson that can be applied elsewhere in the DRC is the need to work with men. Men are also survivors of SGBV. They need to be supported in their own right, or they risk resisting SGBV programming. Working with the military (formal and informal), peacekeepers, and police is also essential, as they have key roles to play. They can be supporters or they can undermine efforts if they are not engaged. Other avenues for intervention that could be applied throughout the DRC include community awareness and the use of churches and religious institutions as an entry point to SGBV prevention and response. IP partnership and consortium arrangements are increasing capacity for both local and international organizations. IPs employ different arrangements with local partners. Some focus more heavily on training and capacity building with local partners than others. Emphasis on local capacity building appears related to Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 59 the IP’s relative level of technical skills, support from headquarters, and experience in capacity building. Regardless, partnership and consortium arrangements that place local and international NGOs together is a capacity building experience for both organizations. IP engagement with the GDRC is strongest within the medical component. IP engagement with the GDRC varies. The most significant collaboration exists with the GDRC Public Health System through the support of health centers. To this end, IPs have signed MOUs and/or other agreements with the medical authorities (Medecin Chef de Zone, Medecin Chef de District, etc.) in order to ensure appropriate medical assistance for survivors (e.g., training on medical protocols and providing specific drugs) and the tracking and collection of data related to survivors assisted. At the provincial level, IPs work primarily with the GDRC via the representatives of the Ministry of Health. Once the National SGBV Strategy is in place, IPs will also collaborate more closely with the Ministry of Gender, Family and Children. At the national level, IPs are able to collaborate with this Ministry more strongly, particularly regarding issues around implementation of the Strategy. Holistic engagement with the community is most likely to increase sustainability of outcomes. USAID and its IPs can increase the likelihood that efforts are sustainable by engaging communities as a whole. This entails meeting community demands, such as expanding socio-economic support and working with men. Strengthening BCC messaging and prevention work are important aspects of sustainability. Contextualizing programming and messaging is essential, particularly in a country as diverse as the DRC. The continuation of long-term programming and long-term approaches is also crucial, as it allows for capacity building of local groups. Additionally, IPs can ensure the capacity of service providers through a more structured transfer of technical and organizational skills. Addressing community vulnerabilities could bolster attention to gender issues in projects. Addressing SGBV is a gender issue – and SGBV is an obstacle to gender equality. Any prevention strategy can be viewed as a gender issue. Findings from the assessment indicate the need to further incorporate and address gender issues in programs. For example, lack of women on staff to attend to women survivors in health and psychosocial centers indicates lack of attention to gender dynamics in survivor support. More broadly, a shift from focusing on SGBV survivors to addressing community vulnerabilities would create space for the programs to identify and address gender issues related to SGBV prevention and response. Additionally, focusing on issues such as promoting women’s access to leadership and decision making could be a positive gender strategy. This is particularly relevant in light of the upcoming election, where women’s roles as voters can be promoted as a starting point to their engagement in politics. Opportunities exist for strengthening programming by addressing limitations and gaps. SGBV Prevention. USAID should consider working with the security sector. This is a missing link in SGBV work and can benefit communities as a whole. Actions that address this gap include police sensitization and training, the creation of safe spaces for reporting within police stations, and proactive hiring policies that encourage the recruitment and retention of women police. Key stakeholders also identified the need to engage men as supporters in work on preventing SGBV. BCC campaigns are an important prevention strategy. While these exist, they can benefit from additional coordination and targeted messaging. This assessment has revealed the strength of radio messaging. USAID can leverage this and work more closely with radio stations to deliver SGBV messages. SGBV Response. The referral pathway needs to be strengthened, including promoting services that are accessible for the survivor. Better geographic coverage of services is also needed, so that survivors don’t have to travel long distances to access support. Medical support services need access to PEP at all times. This is a Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 60 major gap in the response that can be resolved quickly. The quality of psychosocial support varies across IPs. This can be standardized through USAID promoting internationally-recognized standards and good practice in PSS and aligning its IPs through a certification program that ensures that they have the appropriate technical skills. While socio-economic support is being addressed by USAID and others, USAID is the only donor that has the capacity to scale this in a significant way, focusing not just on women but on communities as a whole. USAID can promote legal support through IEC that changes the perception of the legal system. Communities will regain trust in the system if they see that perpetrators are convicted. Police are frequently the entry point for reporting cases in many countries. USAID can work to ensure they have the capacity to handle cases safely, effectively, and appropriately. Specific attention should also be included on men and child survivors. Sustainability. USAID can focus more on building the capacity of local partners (through their IPs) to ensure that they have the necessary skills to continue SGBV work. USAID could also support government processes to ensure the sustainability of SGBV prevention and response. Monitoring and Reporting. The debate around data needs to be resolved quickly. USAID has put significant effort into promoting GBVIMS and the unique code, but this should be resolved and applied as soon as possible so that effective data collection can take place. This includes an understanding of why data is collected, what will be shared, who it will be shared with, and how. High-level Advocacy. Finally, there is a need for additional high-level advocacy not just on SGBV prevention and response but also security and justice sector reform. USAID is well placed to do this. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 61 RECOMMENDATIONS USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV programming is recognized for its commitment and response to SGBV in the DRC. The recommendations listed below address gaps and opportunities identified to strengthen both existing and future programming efforts. Recommendations are organized into three categories: those that relate to USAID, IPs, and programming. Specific actions are suggested for implementing each recommendation; each is evaluated as a USAID short, medium or long-term priority. Under programming recommendations, actions related to current programs are classified as short or mid-term, and those related to future long-term programming. Recommendation Priority Short Term Mid Term Long Term Leverage and increase advocacy on key issues With Ministry of Health With Ministry of Gender, Family and Children With MONUSCO With Ministry of Justice USAID With the Military (where possible) Address challenges related to data collection and measuring SGBV work Support GBVIMS to compile and share data and conduct statistical analyses Push the unique identification coding forward Define information sharing protocols Harmonize collection, analysis, reporting, and dissemination of information Align sexual violence reporting with MARA IPs Increase coordination and collaboration among IPs Complete, finalize and share mapping Rework monthly meetings around resolving challenges and concerns Establish a monthly IP meeting at the provincial level Ensure stakeholder agreement around information needs Standardize tools used by IPs – particularly for M&E Standardize terms used Create an agreement among SGBV IPs to increase collaboration when they overlap in an area Establish common data-gathering and reporting tools Increase knowledge sharing among IPs Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 62 Recommendation Priority Programming Encourage a collaborative learning environment Share skills across IPs Create a shared database Enhance IP technical skills to improve SGBV work Build IP technical capacity Focus on competency-based training Standardize psychosocial response Update referrals frequently Provide health staff with PSS skills and knowledge of the referral system Ensure that IPs assume responsible for the quality of PSS provided Provide child-friendly PSS Build on strengths of existing approaches Address challenges in health support Clarify referrals Ensure adequate medical supplies Identify and address constraints to recruiting, and retain women staff Streamline PEP Share findings of the PEP report with IPs Clarify contents Provide pediatric PEP Ensure supply Integrate and clarify legal assistance Clarify the policy for dealing with cases perpetrated by the military Strengthen legal referrals Recognize and remove obstacles from accessing legal support Expand socio-economic SGBV prevention and response activities Scale up socio-economic support Support all members of the community Encourage appropriate vocational skills Implement VSLA and income generation activities for same beneficiaries Address constraints to women’s economic empowerment Engage security and justice sectors Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 63 Recommendation Priority Understand the linkages between security, justice, and SGBV Understand how communities define “security” and how to achieve it Advocate for good practice in the justice sector Engage police in prevention and response Provide training to police Link with the SSAPR Project Encourage women-friendly policing practices Shift focus from “victims” to vulnerabilities Clarify criteria to determine who is vulnerable Integrate all members of the community Strengthen engagement with men in SGBV work Increase socio-economic support for men Provide support to men survivors Take men’s leadership training to scale Reach men through radio Engage religious leaders and institutions to reach men Increase and tailor psychosocial support for men Explore long-term view of working with men Increase focus on child survivors Learn more about the situation of child survivors Use and share child survivor protocols Strengthen participatory BCC Leverage existing BCC efforts Increase use of radio Learn from good practices in BCC Secure community participation in messaging (including religious community) Ensure that messaging is contextual, relevant, and targeted April 2012 This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International Development. It was prepared by Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS). APPENDICES ASSESSMENT OF USAID/DRC SOCIAL PROTECTION SGBV PROGRAMMING APPENDICES ASSESSMENT OF USAID/DRC SOCIAL PROTECTION SGBV PROGRAMMING Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming ii Prepared for the United States Agency for International Development, USAID Contract Number AID-RAN￾I-OO-09-00015, Task Order Number: AID-623-TO-10-00004. Implemented by: Development & Training Services, Inc. (dTS) 4600 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 402 Arlington, VA 22203 Phone: +1 703-465-9388 Fax: +1 703-465-9344 www.onlinedts.com Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming iii APPENDICES ASSESSMENT OF USAID/DRC SOCIAL PROTECTION SGBV PROGRAMMING April 2012 DISCLAIMER 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. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming iv ACRONYMS ABA American Bar Association ABA-ROLI American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative AIDS Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome AWID Association for Women in Development BCC Behavior Change Communication BCZ Bureau Central de la Zone de Santé BPRM U.S. Department Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration CAMPS Center of Social Medico-Psycho-Accompaniment CASE Care, Access, Safety, and Empowerment CEDAW Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women CELPA Free Pentecostal Community Church in Africa CFEF Center for Women, Families and Children CIP Centre d’Intervention Psychosociale COOPI Cooperazione Internazionale COP Chief of Party CPLVS Provincial Committee to Fight Sexual Violence CC Community Center CSBC Communication for Social and Behavior Change CSO Civil Society Organization CTC Joint Technical Committee CTLVS Territorial Committee to Fight Sexual Violence CPLVS Provincial Committee to Fight Sexual Violence CBO Community-Based Organization CHW Community Health Worker CODESA Local Health and Development Community Committee DFID Department for International Development DPKO Department for Peace Keeping Operations DRC Democratic Republic of the Congo EC Emergency Contraception EMOC Emergency Obstetric Care EPI Expanded Program on Immunization ESPOIR Ending Sexual Violence by Promoting Opportunities and Individual Rights FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FARDC Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo FBO Faith-Based Organization FDLR Forces Démocratiques de Libération du Rwanda FG Focus Group GBV Gender-Based Violence GBVIMS Gender Based Violence Information Management System GDRC Government of the Democratic Republic of Congo HAP Humanitarian Action Plan HC Health Center HGR Hôpital Général de Réfèrence Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming v HIV Human Immunodeficiency Virus HQ Headquarters IDP Internally Displaced Person IEC Information Education and Communication IGA Income-Generating Activity IMC International Medical Corps INGO International Non-governmental Organization IP Implementing Partner IRC International Rescue Committee ISSSS International Security and Stabilization Support Strategy LRA Lord’s Resistance Army MARA Monitoring, Analysis, and Reporting Arrangements MDG Millennium Development Goals M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MISP Minimum Initial Service Package for Reproductive Health in Emergency Settings MOH Ministry of Health MONUC Former name of UN Mission in the DRC MoU Memorandum of Understanding MONUSCO UN Mission in the DRC MSA Multi Sector Assistance MSF Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) NGO Non-Governmental Organization OCHA UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights OPJ Officier de Police Judiciaire (Judicial Police Officer) PEP Post-Exposure Prophylaxis PMP Performance Management Plan PNC Police Nationale Congolaise (National Congolese Police) PSA Psychosocial Assistant PSS Psychosocial Support PTSD Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder RCD Rassamblement Congolais pour la Démocratie RFA Request for Applications RHC Referral Health Center ROLI Rule of Law Initiative SGBV Sexual and Gender-Based Violence SNVBG Stratégie Nationale de Lutte contre les Violences basées sur le Genre SMT Senior Management Team S.P. Social Protection SSAPR Security Sector Accountability and Police Reform SSR Security Sector Reform STAREC Stabilization and Reconstruction Plan for War-Affected Areas STC Save the Children STI Sexually Transmitted Infection SV Sexual Violence TBA Traditional Birth Attendant Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming vi TOT Training of Trainer UN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Program UNFPA United Nations Population Fund UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNOCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs UNSCR United Nations Security Council Resolution UNSSS United Nationals Security Stabilization Support Strategy US United States of America USG United States Government USAID United States Agency for International Development VCT Voluntary Counseling and Testing WFP World Food Program WfWI Women for Women International WHO World Health Organization YCHW Youth Community Health Workers Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming vii CONTENTS Appendix A. References............................................................................................................. 1 Appendix B. List of Research Participants................................................................................ 3 Appendix C. Full Methodology ................................................................................................. 5 Appendix D. Guide for Interviewers........................................................................................13 Appendix E. Agenda for Research Team Training................................................................. 16 Appendix F. Ethics of Conducting Research..........................................................................18 Appendix G. Interviewer Contract...........................................................................................20 Appendix H. Assessment Tools .............................................................................................. 21 Appendix H-1: Interview Questions.........................................................................................................22 Appendix H-2: Observational Assessment Checklist: Health.............................................................. 33 Appendix H-3: Observational Assessment Checklist: Psychosocial ...................................................35 Appendix H-4: Observational Assessment Checklist: Legal................................................................. 37 Appendix H-5: Observational Assessment Checklist: Police ............................................................... 39 Appendix H-6: Observational Assessment Checklist: Other Services................................................41 Appendix H-7: Community Leaders Interview Questions...................................................................42 Appendix H-8: Focus Group Discussion Guide....................................................................................43 Appendix H-9: Focus Group Discussion Form.....................................................................................44 Appendix H-10: Community Survey ........................................................................................................47 Appendix I. Good Practice in Medical Support.......................................................................49 Appendix J. Good Practice in PSS ...........................................................................................52 Appendix K. Good Practice in Legal Support .........................................................................54 Appendix L. Good Practice in Police Support.........................................................................55 Appendix M. Good Practice in BCC........................................................................................56 Appendix N. Assessment Team Bios ......................................................................................63 Appendix O. Assessment Scope of Work ................................................................................65 Appendix P. Assessment Timeline.......................................................................................... 71 Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 1 APPENDIX A. REFERENCES Family Health International, Behavior Change Communications (BCC) for HIV/AIDS: A Strategic Framework, 2002. Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (Megan Bastik, Karin Grimm, Rahel Kunz), Sexual Violence in Armed Conflict: Global Overview and Implications for the Security Sector, 2007. Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of Congo: Always on the Run: The Vicious Cycle of Displacement in Eastern Congo, September 2010. Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of Congo: Soldiers who rape, Commanders who condone, July 2009. Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of Congo: Trail of Death: LRA Atrocities in Northeastern Congo, March 2010. Human Rights Watch, Democratic Republic of Congo: War within the war, June 2002. Institute for War & Peace Reporting, Journalist Recalls Phone Threat Ordeal, 2009, http://iwpr.net/report￾news/journalist-recalls-phone-threat-ordeal. Inter Agency Standing Committee, IASC Guidelines for SGBV Interventions in Humanitarian Settings, 2005. Inter Agency Standing Committee, IASC Guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings, 2007, http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/iasc/content/products. IRIN, DRC: Women politicians “key to promoting rights”, September 2011, http://www.irinnews.org/printreport.aspx?reportid=93645. Gettleman, Jeffrey, Symbol of Unhealed Congo: Male Rape Victims, New York Times, August 2009. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and USAID, Tools for Behavior Change Communication, 2008. Lwambo, Desiree, “Before the War, I was a Man”: Men and Masculinities in Eastern DR Congo, 2011. MEASURE, Violence Against Women and Girls: A Compendium of Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators, 2008. Bolton, Paul, Field-Based Testing of Tools to Assess Function Impairment and Psychosocial Problems Among SGBV Survivors in South Kivu, Eastern DRC, 2007. Refugees International, DR Congo: Emergency Response to Sexual Violence Still Essential, June 2010. Refugees International, DR Congo: Too Soon To Walk Away, July 2011. Reproductive Health Response in Conflict Consortium (RHRH), SGBV Tools Manual for Assessment & Program Design, Monitoring & Evaluation, http://www.rhrc.org/resources/SGBV_manual_chapters/SGBV173- 205a%20-%20program%20MandE%20tools.pdf Reproductive Health Response in Conflict Consortium (RHRH), M&E Toolkit, 2004, http://www.rhrc.org/resources/general_fieldtools/toolkit/. UN Action, Analytical and Conceptual Framing of Conflict-Related Sexual Violence, 2010. UN Action, Reporting and Interpreting Data on Sexual Violence From Conflict-Affected Countries – “Do’s and Don’ts”, 2008. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 2 United Nations Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, Provisional Guidance Note: Implementation of Security Council Resolution 1960 (2010) on Women, Peace and Security (Conflict-Related Sexual Violence), June 2011. USAID Health Policy Initiative, Leading the Way: Health Policy Initiative Mobilizes Religious Leader Response to HIV, 2008. USAID, ADS Chapter 201, Planning, 2011. USAID, Evaluation – Learning from Experience: USAID Evaluation Policy, 2011. USAID, Gender Integration Matrix: Additional Help for ADS, Chapter 201, 2011. USAID, Guide to Gender Integration and Analysis Additional Help for ADS, Chapters 201 and 203, 2010. USAID/ARC/Communication for Change, Communication, Participation, & Social Change: A review of communication initiatives addressing gender-based violence, gender norms, and harmful traditional practices in crisis-affected settings, 2010. USIP, Rape in War: Motives of Militia in DRC, 2010. USIP, The Role of Women in Global Security, 2011. World Health Organization, Ethical and Safety Recommendations for Researching, Documenting and Monitoring Sexual Violence in Emergencies, 2007. World Health Organization/UNHCR, Clinical Management of Rape survivors: Developing protocols for use with refugees and internally displaced persons, 2004. Russel, Wynne, Sexual violence against boys and men, Sexual Violence, weapon of war, impediment to peace, Forced Migrations Review 27, 2007. World Bank, The Little Data Book on Gender, 2011. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 3 APPENDIX B. LIST OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS Date Location Method Name of Person Title Organization 15/08 Kinshasa Interview Mano Ntangui Monitoring and Evaluation Advisor IMA 21/08 Kinshasa Interview Dalita Cetinoglu Director of SGBV Programs & Chief of party SGBV /USAID ESPOIR Project The International Rescue Committee (IRC) 23/08 Goma Interview Catherine Poulton SGBV Program Advisor IRC 24/08 Goma Interview Benjamin Kikobya Program Supervisor NK UNOCHA 25/08 Goma Interview Jennifer Melton SGBV Technical Advisor UNICEF_ NK 26/08 Goma Interview Ildephonse Birhaheka Protection Officer NK & Maniema UNICEF 28/08 Bukavu Interview Dr. Larry Sthreshley IMA Country Representative IMA 28/08 Bukavu Interview Claude Maon Program representative SK ("Accès à la Justice") UNDP 29/08 Bukavu Meeting WxW_ IRC Espoir project Key Staff Director (Christine Karumba) + Program Manager (Gertrude Mudekereza) + key staff Women for Women 29/08 Bukavu Interview Gertrude Mudekereza Programs Director Women for Women 29/08 Bukavu Meeting IRC- Espoir project key staff SGBV Senior Advisor + VSLA manager + key staff IRC 31/08 Bukavu Meeting Panzi Foundation_IMA Ushindi Project Key staff Project Coordinator + other key staff Panzi Foundation 31/08 Bukavu Interview Homer Kabelu Project Coordinator Panzi Foundation 31/08 Bukavu Interview Dr. Ibrahim Balingehe Medical Supervisor Panzi Foundation 31/08 Bukavu Interview Yvette Socio Economic reintegration Supervisor Panzi Foundation 01/09 Bukavu Meeting IMC-CASE project Key staff Country Director (Jimmy) + COP CASE IMC/USAID (Richard) + SGBV Technical Advisor (Tamara Akinyi) IMC 02/09 Bunyakiri Interview Dr. Chris Medical Supervisor IMC/CASE project IMC/CASE 02/09 Bunyakiri Interview Alessia Radice IMC/BCC Project coordinator IMC/BCC 02/09 Bunyakiri Interview ABA (America Bar Association) - IMC Staff based in Bunyakiri Maître Kelvin Kabunga + Maître Olivier Ilenge + Maître Claudine Namuneme + Maître Kinja Barholere ABA/IMC Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 4 Date Location Method Name of Person Title Organization 02/09 Bunyakiri Interview Mamie Mufolo SGBV Officer - Psychosocial component IMC Bunyakiri IMC/ CASE 05/09 Bunia Interview Lorena Di Clemente & Fréderic Nasubi SGBV Program coordinator COOPI 05/09 Bunia Meeting COOPI SGBV Program Key staff Key staff COOPI and partners: CIP (Psychosocial and socio economic) + Justice Plus (legal) 06/09 Kilo Meeting COOPI/CIP site in Kilo COOPI/CIP staff in Kilo site COOPI/CIP Carrefour staff in Kilo site 07/09 Komanda Meeting COOPI/CIP site in Komanda COOPI/CIP staff in Komanda site COOPI/CIP Carrefour staff in Komanda site 07/09 Komanda Meeting IMA/PPSSP partner key staff in Komanda site Kavira _ IMA/PPSSP Program coordinator PPSSP 08/09 Beni Interview Mwakamubaya Nasekwa PPSSP Director PPSSP 09/09 Lubero Interview Pamela Embée Field Officer and focal point for Child Protection component on USHINDI project for Komanda, Alimbongo, Mutwanga and Lubero Save the Children 09/09 Mulo (Lubero) Interview Jaqueline Kiabu Kasongo Heal Africa Focal point in MULO Health Center Heal Africa 09/09 Lubero Meeting Heal Africa_ Ushindi project key staff in Lubero Heal Africa "Safe House" staff in Lubero Heal Africa 10/09 Lubero Interview Dr. Louise Bashige SGBV Advisor for IMA/USHINDI Project IMA 14/09 Kinshasa Meeting Social Protection Technical Unit USAID Mission USAID 21/09 Kinshasa Interview Anne Marie Serrano UNICEF AMS Focal Point UNICEF Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 5 APPENDIX C. FULL METHODOLOGY As described in Section 3 of the report, this assessment is both qualitative and quantitative and employed multiple methods in order to present a complete picture of USAID/DRC/S.P.’s engagement with SSGBV in DRC. The assessment was built using a flexible, iterative approach that combined triangulation and feedback at various intervals. Triangulation increases the reliability of findings through the use of various techniques and sources. Both data collection and data analysis were iterative processes. Data collected in earlier stages of the research informed and was tested against data from later stages. The data was continuously analyzed and the methodology refined in order to ensure validity of the data. The assessment began by testing policy discourse against actual outcomes, starting with analysis of gender and SSGBV policy documents. Documents were examined first against the insights and practices of policy￾makers, policy implementers and sector-specific implementers, then alongside the experiences and perceptions of Congolese women and men – both in and outside the various programs. Findings from all categories of informants have been triangulated using emergent themes. Efforts have been made to close the feedback loop with key informant discussions to share findings. Qualitative methods were used more than quantitative ones because the country lacks reliable data. The SSGBV sector also does not yet have consolidated indicators, which handicaps efforts to monitor progress. Qualitative methods were important for their ability to highlight the voices of those at the community level whose perspectives and experiences should be prioritized. In terms of sampling, all known USAID/DRC/S.P. SSGBV IPs were included in the assessment. Many IP local partners were also consulted, along with other players who are external to USAID’s work but crucial to the DRC SSGBV landscape. Purposive rather than random sampling was used in order to select communities that were considered representative of the implementing partners who were part of this assessment. METHODS USED Key Document Analysis Document analysis examines engagement with SSGBV on paper. This is an entry point to the research to determine how policies are conceptualized and what rhetoric is used. It also served as a basis for comparison between policy texts and actual activities to better understand how these policies have been translated into practice. The following are key themes that were examined. For IP Policy Documents, the analysis took into consideration the extent to which SGBV is addressed as a cross-cutting issue and how it fits into overall organizational plans. This analysis formed the basis for understanding whether there was clarity in engagement with SGBV and if this was understood across the organization. In addition, the analysis examined what gaps might exist. It was not possible to review the HR polices of the various IPs, as this was beyond the scope of the study, but it is recommended that USAID ensure that their IPs have policies in place that specify zero tolerance for violence, a code of conduct, etc. It is likely that the IPs have written policies on sexual harassment in the workplace, but may possibly not address other aspects of SGBV. The gender and SGBV-specific documents of each IP were examined with a similar lens, but also included an analysis of contextual considerations, possible externalities, capacity building of local groups and partners, government engagement, participation in SGBV coordination mechanisms, community awareness and Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 6 mobilization, sustainability and other aspects deemed essential to the environment surrounding SGBV projects. The analysis examined areas of focus within the particular project, including specific sector(s) of SGBV focus, aspects of prevention and/or response, engagement with men, data collection and monitoring, organizational commitments and budgeting, gaps, and ethical issues. The team also examined previous gender and SGBV strategy and assessment documents for the country to understand changes over time, compare what others are doing with USAID activities, and better understand the landscape of coordination and information sharing. Discussions with USAID Discussions and open conversations were held on numerous occasions with Social Protection staff in order to better understand how the SGBV program was conceptualized and designed, and what was expected in terms of outcomes and impact. The following questions were given particular attention: • What frameworks and guidelines determine the direction of USAID’s SGBV work? • Who is responsible for SGBV, and what training/experience do they bring? • How does SGBV programming fit into gender programming overall? Into security programming overall? • What are the priority SGBV focus areas for USAID? • To what extent is SGBV viewed as a cross-cutting issue? Do other programs reflect this? • How did the USAID SGBV strategy guide the selection of IPs? • What is the extent of coordination between organizations – between IPs, between USAID and its IPs, between USAID and government, etc.? • What capacity building and knowledge sharing opportunities does USAID provide its IPs? • What advocacy does USAID undertake for SGBV issues? Interviews with Policy Makers Findings from the above lines of inquiry were reinforced by in-depth, semi-structured interviews with policy makers, heads of organizations and/or senior gender/SGBV advisors (where available) who are responsible for designing interventions and setting policies for their organizations, assigning priorities, committing resources, supervising process of implementation, and who are accountable to their organizations. One-on￾one interviews were conducted to obtain the most candid information. Interviews lasted approximately one hour, sometimes up to one and a half hours. Several required follow-up discussions either in person or by email. The conversations all began with an informed discussion and ended with open questions to allow participants to raise any other issues they felt were relevant. These interviews began as semi-structured, but often evolved into open conversations, covering a broad range of issues and challenges in addressing SGBV. Policy makers were asked about coordination, capacity building, sustainability, technical capacity, organizational skill, level of engagement, data collection, M&E, advocacy, and a variety of other aspects Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 7 contributing to their SGBV work. They were also asked about their experiences with USAID as a donor, and the Social Protection Unit, specifically. Questions covered special considerations for child survivors, sexual exploitation and abuse, HIV, survivor reintegration, the engagement of men, longer-term support, and community awareness and engagement. These interviews raised issues around the perceived strengths and limitations of the organization, successes and challenges faced, gaps identified, lessons learned, good practices that have emerged, and recommendations going forward. Interviews with Policy Implementers Policy implementers are gender focal points/organizational policy implementers – front-line workers and local IP partners of who interface directly with participants, translating policies into action. The focus of discussions was to build on the learning from policy makers and better understand how policies translated into action at the grassroots level. Interviews with policy implementers raised similar issues to those identified by policy makers. They also raised the issues of contextual relevance, positive and negative externalities, support and guidance received, community perceptions and experiences, effectiveness, sustainability, and gaps at the community level. Observational Assessment Checklists Observational assessment checklists were prepared for use in each sector site (health, psychosocial, legal, police and socio-economic) with the intention of being guides for observing sites, listing important themes and guiding questions to take note of beneath each theme. This was an opportunity to watch the site in action and objectively assess its skill level. Points for observation included the following: Overall impressions of the center: • Is the center safe? • Is the center accessible? • Is the center friendly to women? • Is the center private – including a private space to discuss with the survivor? • Are there any IEC materials or documents on display that address gender equality/SGBV? • Are men present? In what capacity? • Is childcare available? • Are services free? Overall impressions of staff: • Are staff friendly and accessible? • Are staff knowledgeable and well informed? • Do female staff tend to females and male staff to males? • Do staff recognize SGBV to be a serious and sensitive issue? Do their actions display this? • Is there referral to other support services as needed? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 8 • Do staff exhibit compassion and understanding? • Do staff possess good listening skills? Data management: • Is information kept confidential? • Is there safe, private storage of data? Community awareness and engagement: • Is the community engaged in the center? • Is there advertising alerting the community to the center? Technical issues: • Sector-specific issues (medical, psychosocial, legal, police, and socio-economic) An observation phase is useful, because it presents observable evidence of skills that are determined to be important for the site’s function. Used as an added method to further reinforce findings, it was important to note whether the team’s observations corresponded with the results of other methods used. Checklists for Health, Psychosocial, Legal, Police, and Socio-economic sectors are available in Appendix H (2-6). Interviews with Local Partners Semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives of the various sectors; the themes below were addressed. For health center representatives, discussions focused on why people visit the health center, survivor treatment, SGBV screening, demographic information, protocols and procedures, training and experience of health center staff, supply of equipment and medication, links between medical and other aspects of SGBV survivor support, reproductive health, outreach to men, link with community health workers, child-friendly health care, accessibility of the center, specific realities of the center in terms of context and security and its evolution, data collection and storage, referrals and relationships to other service providers, and ethical considerations. Legal center staff were asked about survivor treatment, demographic information, cases, perpetrator trials and convictions, referrals to the center, protection of survivors and witnesses, training and skill of legal staff, standardized forms and reporting, ongoing survivor protection, case follow-up, evidence collection and storage and ethical considerations. Legal staff were also asked about the overall national and provincial legal environment, their main challenges and obstacles in accessing the justice sector institutions, the role of traditional legal structures, the national and international human rights frameworks, and the extent to which communities understood and prioritized these aspects. Psychosocial support and counseling center discussions focused on how counseling is defined and addressed, the training and skill of counselors on technical aspects of the SGBV response, survivor treatment in terms of intake, counseling, safety planning, demographic information, male survivors, child survivors, policies and protocols guiding case management and referrals, data collection, information sharing, principles of confidentiality, community engagement in centers, community awareness of activities, peer group work, accessibility of services, referrals, and links to longer-term support, specifically socio-economic support, Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 9 women’s empowerment programs, literacy and vocational training. Counselors were also asked about links to safe houses, maison d’écoute and also about support for secondary or vicarious trauma that they might experience. Police representatives were not met with for this study, as they are not engaged in SGBV prevention and response activities through any of the IPs. This has been identified as a major gap, and will be further addressed in this report. If meetings had been held with police, the following issues would have been addressed: survivor treatment, number of SGBV reports to police in the last month, number of perpetrators arrested and forwarded to the judicial system, reasons for cases without arrest, policies and protocols in place for handling cases, referrals, etc., data collection, training/skill of police in national SGBV laws and in working with survivors, accessibility of the office, privacy of reporting space, presence of female police, presence of OPJ (Officier de Police Judiciaire), referrals and links to legal/counseling/medical support, ensuring survivor safety and confidentiality, protocol for prevention/response, zero tolerance/code of conduct for police violence, reporting and information/data sharing, and community policing/prevention work. Interviews, discussions and observations were also conducted with other support centers, specifically those providing socio-economic support, with a view to how survivors are treated and reintegrated, accessibility, targeted activities for children and/or youth, and extent to which community members – specifically community leaders – are engaged in activities. All interviewed were asked about perceptions of the IP and USAID, community engagement, effectiveness, sustainability, gaps, challenges and successes, lessons learned, and recommendations. Interviews with Community Leaders Community leaders participated in semi-structured interviews and were asked about their perceptions of and experience with the IP and USAID (where relevant). They addressed issues of community awareness and engagement, local government awareness and engagement, relevance to needs, changed attitudes and behaviors, education and awareness raising, and community-based prevention. Community leaders also discussed perceptions of effectiveness and sustainability, what gaps there might be for their communities, and recommendations going forward. Focus Group Discussions The focus group sessions recruited 6-10 volunteers to participate in discussions around their perceptions of and experiences with SGBV services in their communities. Focus groups are beneficial because they enable data collection in a setting that is more comfortable for participants (particularly women), with less imposition on their time. It also allows for discussion and debate within that group. During the focus group sessions, women and men were very comfortable sharing their perceptions and experiences. The groups were told the focus of the research, and expressed willingness and interest in participating. They spoke freely about their concerns and feelings, and were quite vocal in articulating their needs and desires and in voicing their opinions. Discussions were animated, and actually sparked additional conversations beyond those sessions. Each session lasted approximately one hour. A facilitator and a note-taker were present. The facilitator was prepared with a list of guiding questions created by the research team to stimulate discussion. Focus groups are a good arena not only to obtain varied opinions, but also to analyze group dynamics and interaction. Questions were translated into Swahili and local languages and made appropriate to the Congolese contexts. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 10 The following themes were addressed in the focus group sessions: • Key SGBV issues and how they are/are not addressed • Female vs. male SGBV survivors • Community perceptions of the organization • Extent of support provided • Community engagement • Changed attitudes/behaviors • Education/awareness raising • Community-based prevention • Relevance to needs • Ethical considerations • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward. Focus group questions can be found in Appendix H-9. Community Survey A community survey was also conducted with program participants and community members to obtain their perspectives and experiences on violence against women and men in their communities, existing services, remaining gaps and needs, and so on. The survey asked specific questions about community experiences with various programs, their perceptions of the organization and its impact, key community issues, their engagement with the program, perceptions of effectiveness and sustainability, etc. Surveys were conducted individually by members of the research team and involved one-on-one discussions with members of the community. The Community Survey is available in Appendix H - 10. Interviews with Key Informants Key informants were defined as those not within the structure of the implementing partners and their local partners. These included government and UN representatives and other stakeholders engaged in SGBV prevention and response work in the country. These interviews and discussions help verify findings and close the feedback loop. The research team had various discussions with all of those who had commitment to, understanding of, and engagement in gender and SGBV issues in DRC. There is a vast pool of such voices in Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 11 the country. These open-ended interviews and informal discussions provided the opportunity to share the salient points of emerging analysis and offer space for comments, feedback, and verification. Key informants were asked general questions about successes and challenges, gaps, lessons learned, emerging good practice to build on, and recommendations going forward. They were also asked specific questions based on their engagement with SGBV issues. The following questions were posed specifically in interviews with SGBV National and Comprehensive Strategy Pillar Leads (UNICEF, UNFPA, OHCHR, MONUSCO & UNHCR) in Kinshasa: • What is your relationship with USAID? What is your perception of USAID engagement in the SGBV National Comprehensive Strategy? • What is your relationship with government agencies engaged in SGBV programming? • What is your relationship to other coordination mechanisms? • What could the various stakeholders do to better contribute to the National Strategy? • What are the challenges for the development of the following: - UNICEF AMS - UNFPA Data and Mapping - OHCHR Against Impunity - MONUSCO SSR - UNHCR Protection The following questions were expected to be posed in interviews with ministry representatives including Ministry of Gender, Family and Children, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Justice in Kinshasa, however, none of these meetings were organized due to time and logistical constraints. It is recommended that an abridged version of this report be shared with Ministry representatives once USAID has cleared it. The questions that could be explored with further research include: • What is the role of this ministry in supporting the implementation of the SGBV National Comprehensive Strategy? • How does this ministry assess the results of the National Strategy so far? • What challenges are there in implementing this strategy – in this ministry and overall? • How do you view coordination between GDRC and the UN pillar leads regarding the strategy? • How do you view coordination between GDRC and donors – specifically USAID – regarding the strategy? • What suggestions does this ministry have to improve coordination, communication, development and implementation of the strategy? At the provincial level, the research team raised the following issues with the SGBV National and Comprehensive Strategy Pillar Leads (UNICEF, UNFPA, OHCHR, MONUSCO and UNHCR): Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 12 • What are the gaps in the SGBV Comprehensive National Strategy? • What are the challenges at the provincial level in your role as pillar lead? • What are your experiences with stakeholder coordination in the province? • What are civil society perceptions of the strategy? Specific questions posed to key agencies included: • OHCHR: What is OCHCR doing in terms of reparation? How does it fit into the SGBV National Comprehensive Strategy? • UNFPA/UNICEF: Is the CPLVS and/or other coordination mechanisms still working in parallel? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 13 APPENDIX D. GUIDE FOR INTERVIEWERS PURPOSE OF THE STUDY This study is to assess USAID/DRC Sexual Gender-based Violence (SGBV) programming under the USAID/DRC Social Protection portfolio – examining the effectiveness, impact and sustainability of all SGBV projects funded by USAID in the DRC over the past five years. It will also identify gaps and lessons in USAID programs. We will be examining data that is both qualitative (dealing with descriptions, opinions, attitudes – not measured statistically) AND quantitative (data that can be counted). For SGBV data, qualitative information is easier to obtain. Please note that we are not writing a report on the SGBV situation in DRC but are assessing programs to determine, broadly: • Are programs doing what they said they were going to do? • Are programs achieving what they said they would achieve? • Is the project design sound? How can it be improved? • What were the unintended consequences? • What are the successes and challenges? • What lessons have been learned? • How can programs do better? In other words, we will look at ensuring the following: • INPUTS were available, appropriate, adequate • ACTIVITIES were performed as expected • OUTPUTS were appropriate • EFFECTS – negative and positive – are noted and addressed • IMPACT was achieved. SGBV GUIDING PRINCIPLES These are the core guiding principles in SGBV programming and research: 1. Safety 2. Respect 3. Confidentiality 4. Non-discrimination There are three interlinked approaches to SGBV programming: 1. Human rights-based approach Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 14 a Analyzes root causes and aims to redress discrimination b Based on international human rights and humanitarian law standards c Involves state (duty-bearers) and non-state (rights-holders) d Addressed within political, legal, social, cultural context e Empowers survivors and communities 2. Survivor-centered approach a Places priority on rights, needs, wishes of survivors above all else b Survivors have the right: i To be treated with dignity and respect ii To choose iii To privacy and confidentiality iv To non-discrimination v To information 3. Community-based approach a Engages communities as key partners in developing their own protection and assistance strategies b Ensures participation of people in all decisions affecting their lives c Ensures those who provide assistance share information in a transparent way with communities d Strengthens community capacity and resilience e Uses resources more effectively and appropriately ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS/HUMAN SUBJECTS PROTOCOL In all SGBV research, the priority is on SAFE and ETHICAL information gathering. We are responsible for ensuring that the information is collected and used in a way that promotes protection for those at risk – including all prevention and response activities. • Safety of the participant is the #1 priority • Sign interviewer confidentiality agreement • Conduct interviews in private – ensure no distractions (telephone, etc.) • Do not record confidential information • Do not force participant to answer questions • Do not judge, criticize, offer advice, etc. – treat participant with respect • Be aware of local support for survivors if additional support is needed Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 15 • Ensure permission for interview – informed consent (use consent form) • Make sure participants understand study, use of information, and risks involved • Follow same procedure for each interview • Listen carefully and be attentive • Respect privacy • People have the right to refuse to participate – and can withdraw at any time • Ensure confidentiality – protect identities • Be sensitive to questions that increase harm or risk • Offer breaks when necessary • Do not attempt to be a counselor • Ensure participants are comfortable • Speak clearly and make sure participant understands • Be wary of special consideration for child participants – consult parents/guardian. INTERVIEWER CONCERNS Researching SGBV can be difficult – these are sensitive and upsetting issues. Please be aware of the trauma and stress you may internalize. It is not uncommon to experience vicarious or secondary trauma when working on SGBV. Find constructive outlets to manage stress such as: • Ask for help if you need it • Seek support from friends or colleagues (but do not discuss cases and issues!) • Rest, eat, exercise • Seek spiritual support (if relevant) • Remind yourself of the goals of this work – to find the best possible ways to prevent SGBV and protect people from harm. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 16 APPENDIX E. AGENDA FOR RESEARCH TEAM TRAINING 24-25 August, 2011 INTRODUCTION TO STUDY • Objectives and purpose of this study - Who is audience? - Who are participants? • Full spectrum of research - Macro level to grassroots analysis • Our roles as research team - Who does what • Methods to be used - Why use different methods? - Triangulation WHAT IS A RESEARCHER? • Role of researcher • Responsibilities of researcher • Ethical considerations • Role and rights of research participants • Researching SGBV - Research elements and special considerations - Ethical considerations - Risks - Principles - Secondary trauma • Focus group research - Role of facilitator - Role of note-taker • Community survey - Role of researcher • Community leaders conversations Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 17 - Role of researcher FGD QUESTIONS • Review of FGD questions - One at a time, translate as we go (French – Swahili) - Practice response • Practice FGD • Challenges and concerns LOGISTICS • Sign code of conduct • Distribute travel schedule • Distribute other handouts and explain use Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 18 APPENDIX F. ETHICS OF CONDUCTING RESEARCH Adapted from the RHRC SGBV Tools Manual. RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS 1. People have the right to refuse to participate in the study. 2. People have the right to withdraw from the study at any time. 3. Participants must be informed about the general purpose of the study. 4. Participants must be informed about what they will be asked to do if they agree to participate in this study. This study asks participants about their experiences with services for violence against women and men in the community. 5. Participants must be informed of the potential risks associated with participation in the study. These risks may include psychological discomfort related to discussion of topics that may be painful. 6. Participants must be informed of potential benefits associated with participation in the study. Information that is collected from this study will be used to improve programs in their community. The benefits of participation must be greater than the risks. 7. Participants will not receive any compensation personally for their participation other than referral to services should they request them. 8. Participants must be informed about confidentiality. All information shared by the participants will be kept confidential. 9. Participants must be informed about who they can contact if they have any questions about the study. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RESEARCHER 1. Attend and complete all training sessions and practice interviews. 2. Agree to the rules of confidentiality and sign confidentiality contract. Confidentiality is a crucial part of data collection. If people feel that the information given will be told to others at a later date, their responses may not be totally accurate. Moreover, failing to preserve confidentiality may directly or indirectly cause harm to participants and researchers. There may be exceptions to breaking confidentiality, such as when a participant tells you that they may hurt themselves or others. In these cases, immediately seek assistance from your site supervisor. 3. Make every effort to protect the welfare of the participants at all times. • Make sure the room is private – only research participants should be present. • Build rapport with participants – be friendly and establish trust. • Make sure participants are comfortable with their surroundings. • Do not force anyone to answer questions they are not comfortable answering. • Do not be critical or judgmental – it is not appropriate to approve or disapprove of anything that is said. 4. Ensure that you are aware of support services that are available locally. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 19 5. Follow established FGD procedures, so that all discussions are conducted in the same way. 6. Record answers clearly. 7. Never guess at the answer to a question. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 20 APPENDIX G. INTERVIEWER CONTRACT Confidentiality means that information is not shared outside the setting where it was obtained - it is kept private. This is crucial for the safety of participants. As a researcher, I agree to the following: • I will not reveal the names of women or men who participated in this study. • When I share results of this study, I will not identify any individual responses. • I will not discuss any information that I learn during a discussion with anyone except for other researcher team members. • I will not show research materials to people outside of the study. These materials are tools for research that are only to be used by people who have been trained to administer them. • I will keep all my notes in a private, secure place. As a researcher, I agree to abide by these rules of confidentiality. I understand that if I do not abide by these rules of confidentiality, I will be subject to dismissal. Name: ______________________________________________________________________ Date: ______________________________________________________________________ Signature: ______________________________________________________________________ Team Lead Signature: ___________________________________________________________________ Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 21 APPENDIX H. ASSESSMENT TOOLS 1: Interviewer Questions 2. Observational Assessment Checklist: Health 3. Observational Assessment Checklist: Psychosocial 4. Observational Assessment Checklist: Legal 5. Observational Assessment Checklist: Police 6. Observational Assessment Checklist: Other Services 7. Community Leaders Interview Questions 8. Focus Group Discussion Guide 9. Focus Group Discussion Form 10. Community Survey Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 22 APPENDIX H-1: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS These are guiding questions used in semi-structured interviews and discussions. IP POLICY TEXTS – GENERAL DOCUMENTS Method: Textual analysis • Extent of gender/SGBV as cross-cutting issue • How SGBV fits into overall organizational plans • Gender/SGBV mainstreamed throughout organization • Clarity of definitions/understandings of gender/SGBV • Gaps in program plans • Also worthwhile examining HR policies regarding SGBV within organization – zero tolerance, code of conduct, etc. IP POLICY TEXTS – GENDER/SGBV STRATEGY DOCUMENTS Method: Textual analysis • Clarity of definitions/understandings of gender/SGBV • Clarity of goals • Contextual considerations • Understanding of possible externalities • Ethical considerations • Engagement with men • Capacity building of local groups • Community awareness and mobilization • Link to longer-term support, especially socio-economic • Focus of SGBV – response (health, police, legal, psychosocial)/prevention • Focus on other activities (socio-economic, education, etc.) including SGBV as cross-cutting issue • Data collection – and tools used • Extent of M&E – and tools used • What organization has committed to in terms of SGBV programming • Budgeting • Gaps in program plans • SGBV Coordination Mechanisms (national and provincial level) Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 23 PREVIOUS GENDER/SGBV STRATEGY AND ASSESSMENT DOCUMENTS FOR DRC Method: Textual analysis • Assess changes over time • Compare what others are doing with USAID activities • Coordination and information sharing USAID STAFF: SP STAFF + PROGRAM PERSON + EDUCATION + HEALTH Method: In-depth, semi-structured interviews • How program was designed: consultations, baseline studies, etc. • Program goals/targets • Expected outcomes/impact • Link between gender and SGBV programming • How USAID SGBV Strategy is used to guide/monitor/select IPs’ SGBV Strategies and/or IPs’ SGBV Programs • Extent to which SGBV is viewed as a priority • Who is responsible for SGBV? What type of training have they had? What overall framework/guidelines used? • Focus of SGBV – response (health, police, legal, psychosocial)/prevention • Focus on other activities (socio-economic, education, etc.) including SGBV as cross-cutting issue • Participation in international/national SGBV coordination mechanisms • Extent of coordination between organizations – and frequent coordination meetings – knowledge and lessons learned shared among USAID SGBV IPs? Main goal of the USAD SGBV IPs’ regular meetings? • Experience with IPs and procedures for reporting to USAID • USAID feedback/input to IPs’ project reports and their data/indicators • Training/skill of organization and staff – capacity building opportunities • Zero tolerance to SEA in place • Advocacy activities • Data collection – and tools used • Extent of M&E – and tools used • Focus on particular groups/issues • Link to longer-term support, especially socio-economic • Strengths/limitations of organizations involved Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 24 • Engagement with men as supporters/perpetrators/survivors • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward POLICY MAKERS – GENERAL: IP LEADS Heads of organizations and/or senior gender/SGBV advisors (where available), responsible for designing interventions and setting policies for their organizations, assigning priorities, committing resources, and supervising process of implementation. They are accountable to their organizations. Method: In-depth, semi-structured interviews • How program was designed: consultations, baseline studies, etc. • Program goals/targets • Expected outcomes/impact • Number of survivors reached/benefitted • Link between gender and SGBV programming (and other gender issues) • Focus of SGBV – response (health, police, legal, psychosocial)/prevention • Experience with USAID – reporting, shared vision, feedback, perception, etc. • Who is providing you the (additional) technical support/expertise/guidance on SGBV issues for the USAID program? • Data collection – and tools used • Extent of M&E – and tools used • Extent of coordination between organizations – and frequent coordination meetings • Advocacy activities • Focus on SEA • Link to HIV • Special considerations for child survivors • Community awareness/engagement – impact on behavior • Survivor reintegration in communities • Capacity building – from USAID to IP and from IP to local partners • Sustainability • Link to longer-term support, especially socio-economic Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 25 • Strengths/limitations of organization • Engagement with men as supporters/perpetrators/survivors • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward (to USAID/to UN pillar leads/to GDRC) POLICY IMPLEMENTERS Gender focal points/policy implementers and local IP partners of organizations, front-line workers who interface directly with participants, translating policies into action. Method: Semi-structured interviews • How gender/SGBV policies interpreted/implemented • Who is providing you the (additional) technical support/expertise/guidance on SGBV issues for the USAID program when/if necessary? • Coordination with other organizations • Strengths/limitations of organization • Relevance of policies and programs – adaptable to context • Link to longer-term support, especially socio-economic • Actual vs. expected impact • Externalities – positive and negative • Perceptions of communities and participants • Capacity building of local groups • Community awareness and mobilization • Engagement of men • Child survivors friendly approach/special considerations • Ethical considerations • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 26 • Recommendations going forward HEALTH CENTERS Method: Semi-structured interviews and observation • Reasons people come to health center • How survivors are treated – is SGBV screening standard procedure? • Demographic info • # of patients treated every month – of which __ (#) are SGBV survivors – what type of SGBV? • Examination and treatment in accordance with established protocols – medical history, examination, evidence, treatment, referral, counseling, recordkeeping, etc. • Training/skill of health center staff • Supply of equipment and medication necessary (PEP, EC, STIs, etc.) – and when/how administered • Link between medical and legal staff – forensic evidence, etc. • RH activities • Men’s health/outreach to men • Outreach and awareness to community health workers • Child friendly health care (including specific skills and medication as per WHO guidelines) • Accessibility of center – including hours, cost, etc. • Data collection and storage • Ethical considerations • Referrals for counseling • Referrals to police • Relationship to other service providers • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward LEGAL CENTERS/PARTNERS Method: Semi-structured interviews & observation Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 27 • How survivors are treated • Demographic info • # of cases submitted in the last month – of which perpetrators tried ___ (#) /convicted ___ (#) /sentenced ___ (#) /found not guilty ___ (#) /cases dismissed ___ (#) • How are cases referred to center? • Protection of survivor and witnesses (where available) • Training/skill of legal staff • Standardized forms and reporting • Ongoing survivor protection • Case follow-up • Prosecutions • Evidence collection/storage protocol • Legal environment – national laws available/known/translated/respected by all • Role of traditional legal structures • Human rights framework • Ethical considerations • Referrals • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward PSYCHOSOCIAL/COUNSELING CENTERS Method: Semi-structured interviews and observation • How is “counseling” defined? • Who are the counselors? • How survivors are treated (intake, counseling, safety planning) • Demographic info • Male survivors – and male engagement in center Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 28 • Policies and protocols and tools in place for handling cases, referrals, etc. • Data collection • Training/skill of staff – verification of skills and ongoing training/support/supervision • Community engagement in center – and community awareness of activities • Links to longer-term activities • Peer group work • Accessibility of services - hours, cost, etc. • Referrals - link to legal/police/medical support • Link to socio-economic support (women’s empowerment programs, literacy, vocational training, etc.) • Directory of other organizations/services • Ensuring survivor safety – and link to safe houses/maisons d’écoute • Reporting and information/data sharing • Ethical considerations – especially confidentiality and survivor safety • Support for counselors – secondary trauma, etc. • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward POLICE Method: Semi-structured interviews and observation • How survivors are treated • Demographic info • # of reports to police in past month, of which ___ (#) perpetrators arrested and forwarded to judicial system • What was reason for cases w/o arrest? • Policies and protocols in place for handling cases, referrals, etc. • Data collection • Training/skill of police – in national SGBV laws and in working with survivors Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 29 • Accessibility of office – and privacy of reporting space • Presence of female police • Presence of OPJ (Officier de Police Judiciaire) • Referrals - link to legal/counseling/medical support • Ensuring survivor safety and confidentiality • Taking action on cases • Protocol for prevention/response • Zero tolerance for police violence • Reporting and information/data sharing • Standardized incident report and form • Police procedure for receiving reports, conducting investigations, apprehending perpetrators • Community policing/prevention work • Ethical considerations • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward OTHER SUPPORT CENTERS (INCLUDING SOCIO-ECONOMIC SUPPORT, EDUCATION, ETC.) Method: Semi-structured interviews and discussion • How survivors are treated • Demographic info • Ethical considerations • Accessibility to the activities (cost, selection criteria, requirements to participants) • Any activity specific for children and/or youth? • Referrals • Effectiveness • Sustainability Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 30 • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward • Community member and community leader engagement on survivors social reintegration PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS/COMMUNITY MEMBERS Method: In-depth, semi-structured interviews and survey • Experience with program • Perceptions of organization • Impact • Community issues/engagement with program • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward COMMUNITY LEADERS Method: Semi-structured interviews • Perceptions of and experience with organization and its programs • Community engagement • Local government engagement • Relevance to needs • Changed attitudes/behaviors • Education/awareness raising • Community-based prevention • Ethical considerations • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 31 • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward COMMUNITY MEMBERS Those not involved/reached in program. Method: Focus groups and/or community survey • Key SGBV issues – and how they are/are not addressed • Female vs. male SGBV survivors • How community perceives organization • Extent of support provided • Community engagement • Changed attitudes/behaviors • Education/awareness raising • Community-based prevention • Relevance to needs • Ethical considerations • Effectiveness • Sustainability • Successes/challenges • Gaps • Lessons • Recommendations going forward KEY INFORMANTS – KINSHASA SGBV National and Comprehensive Strategy Pillar Leads (UNICEF, UNFPA, OHCHR, MONUSCO and UNHCR) • Relationship with Governments’ agencies of cooperation funding SGBV programs? Coordination mechanisms. • Relationship with USAID with regard to the SGBV National Comprehensive Strategy and USAID/DRC/S.P. SGBV-funded programs. • Implication of GDRC with the different Pillar leads action plans? Appropriation of the National Comprehensive Strategy. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 32 • Main challenges at this stage for the development of the UNICEF AMS/UNFPA Data & Mapping/OHCHR Against Impunity/MONUSCO SSR/UNHCR Protection Action plan. • Is there anything that government donors could do to better contribute to the success of the National Comprehensive Strategy? • What about GDRC? Ministry Representatives: Ministry of Gender, Family and Child, Ministry of Health, Ministry of Justice • Role of the Ministry in supporting the successful implementation of the SGBV National Comprehensive Strategy. • How the Ministry evaluates/assesses the results of the SGBV National Strategy so far. • Main challenges the Ministry found around the Strategy implementation so far. • How is the coordination between the GDRC and the UN pillar leads, as well as with foreign donors/governments with regard to of this Strategy? • What would be the Ministry’s suggestions in order to improve the coordination, communication or development of the SGBV National Strategy? KEY INFORMANTS – PROVINCIAL SGBV National and Comprehensive Strategy Pillar Leads (UNICEF, UNFPA, OHCHR, MONUSCO and UNHCR) • Main gaps at this stage of the SGBV Comprehensive National Strategy. • Challenges UNICEF/UNFPA/OHCHR/MONUSCO/UNHCR is facing at the provincial level in his role as MSA/Data &Mapping/XXX pillar lead. • How is coordination organized with the stakeholders engaged in the different service provision in the province? How is the participation? How frequent are the meetings? • Main gap that has been identified so far with regard to the SGBV Strategy implementation/functionality. • Main challenge so far in order to implement the UNXX Action Plan. How UNXXX foresees to fix/overpass such challenge? • Civil society perception of the SGBV National Strategy. Which are the most active INGOs and/or local NGOs in supporting the pillar lead action plan? SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR: OHCHR • What OCHCR is doing in terms of reparation of victims - in South Kivu. • How does it fit into the SGBV National Comprehensive Strategy? UNFPA/UNICEF • Is the CPLVS and/or other coordination mechanisms still working in parallel? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 33 APPENDIX H-2: OBSERVATIONAL ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST: HEALTH Name of Center: _______________________________ Location: _______________________________ Researcher: ____________________________________ Date: _________________________________ Criteria Yes/No Comment – if necessary Overall impressions of center: Is center accessible? Is center safe? Is center friendly to women? Is center private – private space to discuss with survivor? Are there any IEC materials or documents on display that address gender equality/SGBV? Are men present? In what capacity? Is childcare available? Are services free? Overall impressions of staff: Are staff friendly and accessible? Are staff knowledgeable and well informed? Do female staff tend to females and male staff to males? Do staff recognize SGBV to be a serious and sensitive issue? Do their actions display this? Is there referral to other support services as needed? Do staff exhibit compassion and understanding? Do staff possess good listening skills? Data management: Is information kept confidential? Is there safe, private storage of data? Community awareness and engagement: Is the community engaged in the center? Is there advertising alerting the community to the center? Technical issues: Is there a private space for medical examinations? Are medications available? Are national protocols displayed/used? Are basic wounds treated? Is there special treatment for child survivors? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 34 STAFF Ideally one member of the medical staff should be aware of SGBV principles (confidentiality, safety, respect, etc.) and will be careful when a survivor comes to the center for medical care, following protocols and protecting survivor rights. TREATMENT - Kit PEP (<72 h.) should be provided free of charge. REFERRALS Panzi and Heal Africa Hospitals are the main references for South Kivu and North Kivu, respectively, for treating severe physical consequences of sexual violence, including chirurgical interventions, fistula reparation, prolapses, etc. The idea, however, is to decentralize assistance to survivors. If a case is identified in areas where other health structures have the capacity to treat the case with quality medical assistance, the survivor should not be transported to Bukavu or Goma, but treated locally in order to allow severe cases to be treated in Panzi and Goma. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 35 APPENDIX H-3: OBSERVATIONAL ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST: PSYCHOSOCIAL Name of Center: _______________________________ Location: _______________________________ Researcher: ____________________________________ Date: _________________________________ Criteria Yes/No Comment – if necessary Overall impressions of center: Is center accessible? Is center safe? Is center friendly to women? Is center private – private space to discuss with survivor? Are there any IEC materials or documents on display that address gender equality/SGBV? Are men present? In what capacity? Is childcare available? Are services free? Overall impressions of staff: Are staff friendly and accessible? Are staff knowledgeable and well informed? Do female staff tend to females and male staff to males? Do staff recognize SGBV to be a serious and sensitive issue? Do their actions display this? Is there referral to other support services as needed? Do staff exhibit compassion and understanding? Do staff possess good listening skills? Data management: Is information kept confidential? Is there safe, private storage of data? Community awareness and engagement: Is the community engaged in the center? Is there advertising alerting the community to the center? Technical issues: Is there a standardized procedure and protocols for intake, counseling, safety planning? Is there support for counselors for training and/or secondary trauma? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 36 Note: In DRC, the centers receiving women for psychosocial assistance are known as “Maison d’Écoute” (ME). Best practices in country say that: MAISON D’ECOUTE - A Maison d’Écoute should be situated in a place whose access allows women to preserve their confidentiality. This means that a safe Maison d’Écoute will not be situated on main roads with high visibility, or close to a police station or place that concentrates people on a regular basis (church, schools, etc.) - The Maison d’Écoute should ideally have two rooms, one for individual counseling (must have a door that closes, no exterior windows, and no element, picture, etc. that might distract/be perceived and have an effect over women). The other room may contain one or two beds to allow overnight care for women who need it. In the case where a woman spends the night, a guard (centinelle) will be hired, and the psychosocial assistant will ideally spend the night as well. - The Maison d’Écoute key should be under control of the psychosocial assistant; no one other than her should be present. - A restroom for the women will be available very close to the Maison d’Écoute. - NO panel should announce what activity is being developed in that house, or confidentiality will be completely compromised. For example, a panel saying “Maison d’Ecoute,” “Maison d’Ecoute for survivors of sexual violence,” or “Program for elimination of sexual violence” WILL NOT be considered appropriate AT ALL. DATA - Case management and data collection tools will be locked in a safe with a key only accessible by the psychosocial assistant. COMMUNITY & MAISON D’ECOUTE - The community will be aware (via sensitization sessions with all community members and leaders) of the Maison d’ecoute’s existence, how it can be accessed, who (member of the community) the Psychosocial Assistant is, and how/where she can be found (if not in the Maison d’Écoute). Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 37 APPENDIX H-4: OBSERVATIONAL ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST: LEGAL Name of Center: _______________________________ Location: _______________________________ Researcher: ____________________________________ Date: _________________________________ Criteria Yes/No Comment – if necessary Overall impressions of center: Is center accessible? Is center safe? Is center friendly to women? Is center private – private space to discuss with survivor? Are there any IEC materials or documents on display that address gender equality/SGBV? Are men present? In what capacity? Is childcare available? Are services free? Overall impressions of staff: Are staff friendly and accessible? Are staff knowledgeable and well informed? Do female staff tend to females and male staff to males? Do staff recognize SGBV to be a serious and sensitive issue? Do their actions display this? Is there referral to other support services as needed? Do staff exhibit compassion and understanding? Do staff possess good listening skills? Data management: Is information kept confidential? Is there safe, private storage of data? Community awareness and engagement: Is the community engaged in the center? Is there advertising alerting the community to the center? Technical issues: Is there a standardized procedure for cases? Is there ongoing survivor protection? Are national laws displayed/used? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 38 DATA In DRC, the centers receiving women for legal assistance, best practices in the country indicate that: - Confidentiality of data should be assured to the survivors accessing legal assistance in order to guarantee their protection. - In the case of minors, parents and legal staff should look out for the best interest of the child. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 39 APPENDIX H-5: OBSERVATIONAL ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST: POLICE Name of Center: _______________________________ Location: _______________________________ Researcher: ____________________________________ Date: _________________________________ Criteria Yes/No Comment – if necessary Overall impressions of center: Is center accessible? Is center safe? Is center friendly to women? Is center private – private space to discuss with survivor? Are there any IEC materials or documents on display that address gender equality/SGBV? Are men present? In what capacity? Is childcare available? Are services free? Overall impressions of staff: Are staff friendly and accessible? Are staff knowledgeable and well informed? Do female staff tend to females and male staff to males? Do staff recognize SGBV to be a serious and sensitive issue? Do their actions display this? Is there referral to other support services as needed? Do staff exhibit compassion and understanding? Do staff possess good listening skills? Data management: Is information kept confidential? Is there safe, private storage of data? Community awareness and engagement: Is the community engaged in the center? Is there advertising alerting the community to the center? Technical issues: Is there a standardized procedure and protocols for receiving reports, conducting investigations, apprehending perpetrators? Are police trained in national SGBV laws? Are police trained in working with survivors? Is the OPJ present? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 40 Criteria Yes/No Comment – if necessary Is there zero tolerance for police-perpetrated violence? Is there any engagement with community policing? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 41 APPENDIX H-6: OBSERVATIONAL ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST: OTHER SERVICES Name of Center: _______________________________ Location: _______________________________ Researcher: ____________________________________ Date: _________________________________ Criteria Yes/No Comment – if necessary Overall impressions of center: Is center accessible? Is center safe? Is center friendly to women? Is center private – private space to discuss with survivor? Are there any IEC materials or documents on display that address gender equality/SGBV? Are men present? In what capacity? Is childcare available? Are services free? Overall impressions of staff: Are staff friendly and accessible? Are staff knowledgeable and well informed? Do female staff tend to females and male staff to males? Do staff recognize SGBV to be a serious and sensitive issue? Do their actions display this? Is there referral to other support services as needed? Do staff exhibit compassion and understanding? Do staff possess good listening skills? Data management: Is information kept confidential? Is there safe, private storage of data? Community awareness and engagement: Is the community engaged in the center? Is there advertising alerting the community to the center? Technical issues: Are there any visible efforts toward survivor social reintegration? Is there follow up on skills training? Is job creation/placement offered? Is there access to microfinance? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 42 APPENDIX H-7: COMMUNITY LEADERS INTERVIEW QUESTIONS • Introduce yourself • Introduce the study • Ask for advice on who to meet and what to visit [INTRO – from FG document] 1. Is SGBV a problem in your community? 2. What organizations are working to address this problem? What are they doing? 3. What are your experiences with and opinions of these organizations? 4. Is your community engaged in the organization’s activities? 5. What is working well? 6. What is NOT working? 7. What is missing in work to prevent SGBV? 8. What is missing in work to support survivors? Thank you very much for allowing us access to your community. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 43 APPENDIX H-8: FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION GUIDE FGDs to be conducted with: • Community members/Program Participants Who? • Ideal size: 6-10 individuals • Participants selected because they share characteristics that are relevant to the research issue • Homogenous members of population Why? • Designed to obtain information on participants’ beliefs about and perceptions of issue How? • Predetermined list of open-ended questions • Interaction among participants Our Role 1. Recruiters – to locate and invite participants 2. Moderators – to conduct the group discussions 3. Note-takers – who take notes and record reactions and dynamics of group For each site: • 2 male researchers conduct 4 FGDs of up to 10 men each = 40 men • 2 female researchers conduct 4 FGDs of up to 10 women each = 40 women • Additional male researcher conducts 2 semi-structured interviews/discussions with community leaders • = up to 82 people per site Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 44 APPENDIX H-9: FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION FORM Meeting Details: Date: ____________________________________________ Location: ____________________________________________ Start time: _________________ End time: _________________ Duration: _________________ Name of moderator: ____________________________________________ Name of note-taker: ____________________________________________ Participant information: Category: ____________________________________________ # of women or men: ___________________________________________ Age range: ____________________________________________ Other information: ____________________________________________ Introduction: My name is _________________________ and this is my colleague ___________________. [Brief introduction to interviewers – where they are from and who they work for.] We are here today because we would like your help in understanding what your experiences have been with organizations providing services for sexual violence in [XX] community. We want to understand your needs, concerns and perspectives so that we can better plan for the future of these programs. We are not asking for your specific stories - please do not use any names. We will not use your names either. We will treat everything that you say today with respect, and we will only share the answers you give as general answers combined with those from all the people who speak to us. We ask that you keep everything confidential, too. Please do not tell others what was said today. Participation in the discussion is completely voluntary and you do not have to answer any questions that you do not want to answer. If you feel uncomfortable at any time you can leave. Today we are only here to listen. We cannot help in any other ways today. With the information that we gather, we will be writing a report that will be used to improve programs. There are no right or wrong answers. Your opinions are important! _____________ is taking notes to make sure that we do not miss what you have to say. Is that is OK with you? This discussion should not last more than one hour. We are grateful for your time. Do you have any questions before we begin? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 45 Focus Group Questions Questions about community 1. How do women spend their time in this community? Are they working? What about girls? Are they in school? Are they working? 2. What about men and boys? How do they spend their time? 3. What are the problems/challenges that women and girls face when they move around in this community? Are there specific places or situations where they feel unsafe? 4. What about men and boys? Do they feel unsafe anywhere in this area? Questions about violence 5. Is violence against women and girls a problem in this community? What kind? Please remember to not use any names or reveal any details. 6. Is violence against men and boys a problem in this community? What kind? 7. Is this kind of violence different from last year and previous years? 8. What kind of people are usually the perpetrators of this violence? Example: people in authority, family members, etc. 9. What kind of people are usually more at risk for sexual violence? Example: young girls, women at home, etc. Why do you think these groups are more at risk? Now I want to ask you a few questions about what happens after violence takes place. 10. If a woman or girl suffers violence (use the different forms/types that were mentioned) is she likely to tell anyone about it? Who is she likely to talk to? Example: family members, other women, health workers, community leaders, police/security or other authorities or anyone else. 11. What about violence experienced by a man or boy? Would he tell anyone? Why or why not? 12. If your friend said s/he was raped, what would you advise her to do? 13. What is done in this community to help survivors of sexual violence? What do you think the community could do to help survivors and to prevent additional violence? Questions about services 14. If you were going to seek health services for cases of sexual violence in this area, where would you go? Example: health center, traditional healer. Are you comfortable going to this place? 15. If you wanted to speak to someone about sexual violence in this area, where would you go? Is there a counselor or someone who you are comfortable speaking with who can help you? 16. What is the role of the police in cases of sexual violence? Would you be comfortable seeking police support? 17. If a person from your community wanted the perpetrator punished, would they be able to do this? Please describe any barriers that they might face. Questions about the organization 18. Have you heard of organization [XX]? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 46 19. What kind of services does organization [XX] provide? Who accesses these services? 20. What do people think of the services? Are they able to use them? Do they feel comfortable using them? 21.Are community members engaged in the organization providing services? Do they feel that it is responsive to their concerns? 22. What should the organization do to better support survivors of sexual violence in the community? Closing Those are all of my questions for now. Do you have anything you would like to add? Do you have any questions for us? Do you have any questions that you think should be asked of other groups? Our discussion today is meant to help us learn about how we can better address sexual violence in your community. Your answers are very important. Please remember that you agreed to keep this discussion to yourself. If anyone would like to speak to me or __________ (person taking notes) in private we are happy to talk to you. THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 47 APPENDIX H-10: COMMUNITY SURVEY Researcher Information Name: ___________________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________ Participant Information Village: ___________________________________________ Territory: ___________________________________________ Province: ___________________________________________ Sex: ___________________________________________ Age: ___________________________________________ Do you think violence against women or men is a problem in your community? [YES] [NO] If yes, what kind? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Are you familiar with any work addressing violence against women or men in your community? [YES] [NO] What work? _____________________________________________________________________________________ What organization? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Did you attend any meetings of this organization about violence against women or men? [YES] [NO] If yes, what kind? _____________________________________________________________________________________ How many meetings did you attend over the last month? _____________________________________________________________________________________ What was the most important thing you learned from the meetings? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Did you receive any training on violence against women or men from this organization? [YES] [NO] If yes, what kind? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 48 How many trainings did you participate in over the last month? _____________________________________________________________________________________ What was the most important thing you learned from the trainings? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Have you heard any radio programs about violence against women or men? [YES] [NO] If yes, what kind? _____________________________________________________________________________________ How many did you listen to over the last month? _____________________________________________________________________________________ What was the most important thing you learned from the program? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Are there services for violence against women and men that exist in your community? [YES] [NO] If yes, what kind? _____________________________________________________________________________________ What is the quality of this service? [VERY GOOD] [GOOD] [NOT GOOD] [VERY BAD] [DON’T KNOW] If your friend told you she or he was raped, where would you tell them to go? _____________________________________________________________________________________ What is missing in your community to better address violence against women and men? _____________________________________________________________________________________ Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 49 APPENDIX I. GOOD PRACTICE IN MEDICAL SUPPORT1 For some survivors, health care is the only formal assistance they seek. For others, health care serves as an important entry point for getting access to additional services and support. Health clinics can provide a temporary safe haven for survivors, for example, while they are awaiting police or other security assistance. Health providers must be prepared to make referrals to appropriate protection resources, such as the police or safe shelter programs. They should also be trained in basic psychosocial support and know where to refer survivors for more holistic case management and psychosocial care. In emergency settings, clinical care tends to focus on sexual violence, but other forms of gender-based violence that are prevalent in a given setting also need to be addressed through health interventions. A small percentage of survivors may need specialized support to prevent or treat persistent psychological and emotional problems that impact their functioning and well-being. Depending on the context and resources, this may be available through specialized mental health services. “Access” involves a range of considerations, including: • Geographic location and safety in getting to and from the facility • Convenient opening times • Privacy • Availability of female staff • Sensitivity to age so that services are accessible to adolescents and children • Sensitivity to sex, so that both men and women can receive care • Not discriminating due to ethnicity • Ensuring availability of staff who can speak the same language(s) as the clients • Affordability The basic health response to a survivor of sexual violence involves: 1. Clinical care a Taking a detailed history of the incident b Performing and documenting a thorough physical examination c Providing treatment for injuries d Evaluating the patient for sexually transmitted infections and providing preventive care e Evaluating for risk of pregnancy and pregnancy prevention f Providing supportive counseling and psychosocial support g Following-up through subsequent visits 1 This text was adapted from the Gender-Based Violence Area of Responsibility and its key documents. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 50 2. Collecting evidence to support a criminal investigation, as appropriate to the context a The health sector response to sexual violence does not include determining whether rape has occurred. The role of the health care provider is to indicate all examination findings objectively and accurately and to provide treatment. 3. Referral for additional assistance and services a Providing good quality, compassionate care means providing survivors with information on possible additional services that they might want, such as psychosocial support, security or legal aid. It is up to the survivor whether she/he takes the referral. A number of key guidelines and practice documents are relevant to all actors engaged in SGBV prevention and emergency response. The key standard for health sector interventions that address sexual violence at the outset of an emergency is the Minimum Initial Service Package (MISP) for Reproductive Health. Health actors are uniquely positioned to support SGBV prevention due to their frontline contact with survivors. In order to treat gender-based violence survivors, health services must have the following in place: - Assessment for preexisting pregnancy - Emergency contraception – according to National Protocol - PEP - VCT - STI prophylaxis - STI treatment - Hepatitis B vaccination - Tetanus vaccination - Basic wound treatment - Supportive counseling - Medical evidence documentation - Ability to sign medical certificate - Examination for child survivors per WHO guidelines - Availability of free services - Availability of national medical certificate form The health sector contributes to prevention of SGBV in emergencies through targeted public health initiatives and programs, as well as by working with other actors on multi-sectoral prevention efforts. Strengthening care and support for survivors is another important prevention activity the sector undertakes. Accessing appropriate health care can facilitate access to justice for those who seek it. The health sector also has an important role in medico-legal response. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 51 Health service data collection and analysis facilitate greater understanding of the nature, consequences, prevalence and risks of SGBV in a particular setting, which helps minimize ongoing risks and supports longer-term prevention strategies. In settings where State institutions are functioning, health care providers must be familiar with the legal context, including legislation, medico-legal procedures and protocols, policing and court proceedings related to other gender-based violence. In some countries, health care providers may be required by law to report cases of child physical and sexual abuse and other forms of sexual violence such as rape. In some jurisdictions, it can be a crime not to report such cases. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 52 APPENDIX J. GOOD PRACTICE IN PSS The effects of SGBV vary from person to person and depend on a number of individual, community and socio-cultural factors. The Gender-Based Violence Area of Responsibility explains factors that have been shown to protect against the development of mental health problems in survivors of violence. These factors are: • Being able to exercise some control and choice in responding to the violence • Having access to material support and resources to meet basic needs • Accessing the psychological and emotional support available from family, friends or others. SGBVThe IASC developed guidelines on Mental Health and Psychosocial Support in Emergency Settings2 to support the work of humanitarian actors addressing the psychosocial and mental health needs of emergency￾affected populations. Individual survivors and groups at risk of gender-based violence require multiple types of support to promote their mental health and psychosocial well-being. These types, or levels, are represented below: BASIC SERVICES AND SECURITY To promote the mental health and psychosocial well-being of SGBV survivors and those at risk of violence, SGBV-specific interventions at this level focus on providing protection and services that meet the needs of a specific population. This includes: • Security and protection interventions for survivors and their dependents, such as safe shelters for women who are experiencing violence • Ensuring that all service delivery and humanitarian assistance is survivor-centered • Ensuring that humanitarian action does not increase risk of harm, for example, by increasing vulnerability to sexual exploitation and abuse • Promoting security and protection actions that identify and address environmental and situational SGBV risks. COMMUNITY AND FAMILY SUPPORT At this level, SGBV survivors and those at risk of violence are able to maintain their mental health and psychosocial well-being if they receive help in accessing key community and family support. This includes: Community awareness raising and education to help communities understand and reduce stigma attached to gender-based violence, and to promote community acceptance of SGBV survivors. • Community self-help and resilience strategies to support survivors and those vulnerable to SGBV, such as through women’s groups • Survivor-centered traditional healing and cleansing ceremonies • Survivor-centered restorative justice processes 2 http://www.gbv.ie/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/108-iasc-guidelines-on-mental-health-and-psychosocial-support-in-emergency￾settings.pdf. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 53 • Educational and livelihood activities. FOCUSED NON-SPECIALIZED SUPPORTS Interventions at this level are focused on SGBV survivors who come forward for help and require individual or group support. Survivor-centered, multi-sectoral response at this level delivers appropriate, accessible, high-quality services and assistance to support coping and recovery for individuals and survivor groups. This includes: • Case management for individualized service delivery and assistance • Appropriate post-incident healthcare, including psychological first aid and basic mental health care • Livelihood and other social or economic reintegration interventions • Culturally appropriate supportive counseling. SPECIALIZED SERVICES This level is focused on the additional support required for the small percentage of survivors whose suffering, despite the support already mentioned, is intolerable and who may have significant difficulties in basic functioning. Assistance should target survivors whose needs exceed the capacity of existing general health services, including through psychological or psychiatric evaluation, treatment and care by trained professionals. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 54 APPENDIX K. GOOD PRACTICE IN LEGAL SUPPORT3 AN EFFECTIVE SYSTEM OF LAW SHOULD HAVE THE FOLLOWING: • Law enforcement and judiciary personnel apply anti-SGBV laws • National law enforcement and judicial services are effective • General legal and practice of the law among the community • Community is aware of survivors’ legal rights and supports legal consequences for SGBV • Respect for the rule of law • Country has adopted national and international legislation outlawing SGBV • Procedures and evidence laws are sensitive to women’s needs, i.e. rape cases • Civil society associations can bring cases to court. SGBVLEGAL AID SHOULD BE COMPRISED OF THE FOLLOWING: • The legal aid clinic has appropriate staff • Complete legal aid services are offered • Legal aid services are easily accessible to survivors • Costs of legal aid – including transportation and accommodation near court – are covered • Collaboration and links with traditional, community-based governing bodies are established and function well • Legal aid services are integrated into the general SGBV referral system • Women have enough freedom and independence to access the legal aid services • Women trust and are confident in the legal aid services and staff • A mandate delineating scope and services of legal aid is developed. 3 Adapted from ARC International, Gender-Based Violence Legal Aid: A Participatory Toolkit, 2005. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 55 APPENDIX L. GOOD PRACTICE IN POLICE SUPPORT • Ensure a safe and private space for reporting cases • Receive the complaint and conduct investigations, following the legal and criminal procedures as laid out in the law • In accordance with the standard police procedures, arrest the accused person(s), conduct investigations, prepare charges, serve summons to and ensure that all potential witnesses appear in court • Advocate, when necessary, for the expeditious investigation and prosecution of cases of SGBV • Explain the legal and criminal process to the survivor • Be sensitive to the survivor’s needs for privacy, confidentiality and respect • Participate in legal and rights awareness education campaigns conducted by protection staff for the benefit of the refugee community • Protect the survivor from any repercussions from the perpetrator or community • Ensure that policies and protocols are in place for handling cases, referrals, etc. • Collect and manage data in a manner that is safe and confidential • Police have been trained in national SGBV laws and in working with survivors • Ensure the presence of female police officers • Police sign a code of conduct and zero tolerance for police violence • There is a standardized incident report and form • Procedures in place for receiving reports, conducting investigations, apprehending perpetrators • Community policing and prevention work is part of police prevention and response activities. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 56 APPENDIX M. GOOD PRACTICE IN BCC4 What is BCC?5 BCC is a strategy of communication that seeks to use information to promote individual change and broader community behavior. It includes an attempt to facilitate understanding of an issue, encouraging change by providing alternatives for unhealthy behavior. It is left to the individual to decide whether to change. For example, a BCC campaign around condom use could be: Condoms keep you and your partner safe! What will you do? Factual information is given about the use of condoms; the decision to use condoms is left to the individual. Phases of the Behavior Change 6 Stages of Individual Change: 1. Pre-Contemplation 2. Contemplation 3. Intention for Action 4. Preparation for Action 5. Trial Action 6. Sustained Behavior Change 4 Adapted from Family Health International, Behavior Change Communications (BCC) for HIV/AIDS: A Strategic Framework, 2002. And Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and USAID, Tools for Behavior Change Communication, 2008. 5 Raising Voices for the GBV Prevention Network, Developing effective communication materials for GBV prevention training, 2011, http://www.preventgbvafrica.org/2008-training-developing-effective-communication-materials. 6 The anagram is IRC material, although the content comes from Raising Voices. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 57 Stages of Community Mobilization/Community Assessment: 1. Raising Awareness 2. Building Networks 3. Integrating Actions 4. Consolidating Effort Guiding principles: • BCC should be integrated with program goals from the start – it is an essential element in SGBV prevention and response that provides critical linkages to other program components, including policy initiatives. • BCC assessments must be conducted to improve understanding of the needs of target populations, as well as of the barriers to and supports for behavior change that members face (along with other populations like stakeholders, service providers and community). • The target population should participate in all phases of BCC development and in much of the implementation. • Stakeholders must be involved from the design stage. • Having a variety of linked communication channels is more effective than relying on a single, specific channel. • Pre-testing is essential for developing effective BCC materials. • Planning for monitoring and evaluation should be part of any BCC program’s design. • BCC strategies should be positive and action-oriented. • Survivors should be involved in BCC planning and implementation. Analysis Understand Dynamics of the Issue • Determine severity and causes of the issue, noting differences by audience characteristics such as sex and ethnicity. • Identify possible related behaviors that could be encouraged or discouraged. • Identify social, economic and political factors blocking or facilitating desired behavior changes. • Develop problem statement that summarizes the above points to help identify what aspects of the issue can be addressed through communication. Understand Audience and Other Potential Participants in the Program (Formative Research) • Identify the primary audience (people who are at risk of or are suffering from the problem) and secondary audiences (people who influence behaviors of the primary audience). - Collect in-depth information about the audience: What are their knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about the issue? What factors affect their behaviors? What are their media habits? What access do they Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 58 have to information, services and other resources? Where do they currently stand in the stages of behavior change? - Are there different groups of people who have similar needs, preferences and characteristics (audience segments)? Will the BCC program need customized messages and materials to suit audience segments? - Develop a profile, or description, of each audience segment to help the creative team develop effective messages and materials later. • Conduct participant analysis. - What other people or groups can participate in the BCC program (partners, stakeholders, allies and gatekeepers)? These may include nongovernmental organizations, professional associations, schools, faith-based groups and the media. What skills or resources can they offer? What would motivate their participation? • Conduct channel analysis. - What communication channels are available? - What are the strengths and weaknesses of each channel? For example, how effective are the channels in reaching the audience? How many people can they reach? Engage community participation • Be open and public about the program’s objectives. Respond to the audience’s expressed needs. • Involve audience members and other key stakeholders in the analysis of their own concerns. Participatory techniques include scoring and preference ranking (community members weigh different problems or program options as to how well they meet various criteria) and community mapping and modeling. In this process community members draw a map of their community to identify what programs are available and where they may be most needed. Strategic design • Define communication, behavior change, and program objectives. - Communication objectives describe desired changes in indirect influences on behavior, such as knowledge, attitudes, and social norms. Behavior change objectives refer to intended changes in the audience’s actual behavior. Together, communication and behavior change objectives contribute to the overall program objective, which refers to anticipated results of the overarching program. - Are objectives SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-bound? • Specific – Objectives should specify what they want to achieve. • Measurable – Be able to measure whether you are meeting the objectives or not. • Achievable - Are the objectives you set achievable and attainable? • Realistic – Can you realistically achieve the objectives with the resources you have? • Time – When do you want to achieve the set objectives? • Develop a conceptual framework to show how program activities are expected to contribute to objectives. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 59 • Use the conceptual framework to help select monitoring and evaluation indicators. - Are indicators valid? Do they measure the topic or issue that they are meant to reflect? Are indicators reliable? Do they produce consistent results when repeated over time? Are they specific (measure a single topic or issue), sensitive (responsive to change), and operational (measurable)? • Select/target audiences. • Prioritize communication channels. - Use relevant behavioral theories and findings from formative research to guide the choice of channels. - To help maximize effect, can the program use a mix of the three major types of channels (mass media, interpersonal, and/or community channels)? • Develop a creative brief to share with people and organizations involved in developing messages and materials. - Does the brief include a profile of the intended audience, behavior change objectives, resulting benefits that the audience will appreciate, channels that will carry the messages, and key message points? • Draw up an implementation plan, including activities, partners’ roles and responsibilities, timeline, budget and management plan. • Develop a monitoring and evaluation plan. Engage community participation • Select participants who work with or represent those most directly affected by the issue; ensure fair representation of women and marginalized groups. • Facilitate their involvement in strategic design workshops by using appropriate exercises and “games.” • Hold workshops at locations in the community at times that are convenient for them. Development and pretesting Message development • Develop messages and materials: - Use findings from formative research and the strategic plan to guide development. - Tailor messages to the audience’s stage of behavior change. - Choose type of appeal, such as empowering or entertaining, and tone, such as humorous or authoritative. - Key message elements: • Content/Ideas: What ideas do you want to convey? What arguments will you use to persuade? • Language: What words will you choose to get your message across clearly and effectively? Are there words you should or should not use? • Source/Messenger: Who will the target group respond to and find credible? Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 60 • Format: How will you deliver your message for maximum impact? Examples include meeting, letter, brochure and radio ad. • Time and Place • Pre-test messages and materials with audience members. • Revise messages and materials based on pre-testers’ reactions. Engage community participation • Advisory groups can provide useful advice about developing appropriate messages and materials, and can help with revisions after pretesting. Form an advisory group of key stakeholders close to or representing the audience. • Invite audience members to suggest messages and materials. Implementation and monitoring • Develop and implement a dissemination plan. • Manage and monitor program progress: activities, staffing, budget and responses of the audience and other stakeholders. • Make mid-course adjustments to the program based on monitoring results. Engage community participation • Mobilize a large number of stakeholders to help implement activities and develop a broad sense of ownership. • Offer different means and levels of participation during implementation. For example, for a radio program, audience members can participate in listening groups, suggest questions for the program, or even start a community radio program. • Include audience members and other stakeholders in steering committees to oversee program implementation, make recommendations and ensure action to improve activities. Evaluation • Measure outcomes, assess impact. • Disseminate results to partners, key stakeholders, the news media and funding agencies. • Record lessons learned and archive research findings for use in future programs. • Revise or redesign program based on evaluation findings. Engage community participation • Involve audience members in evaluating the program against parameters they set themselves (participatory evaluation). Ask what they want to know and why, how they can help conduct the evaluation, and how they will use the results. • Encourage the involvement of audience members in experimental evaluations (designed to measure outcomes objectively). Share key findings of the experimental evaluation with audience members and of the participatory evaluation with other stakeholders. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 61 • Encourage participants from the audience to share evaluation findings with their communities, advocate further activities, and spread activities to other communities. Checklist: Ensuring Good-Quality Materials Are messages accurate? • Experts reviewed program messages to ensure they are scientifically accurate. Are messages and materials consistent? • All messages in all materials and activities reinforce each other and follow the communication strategy. • All campaign elements have the same graphic identity: print materials use the same or compatible colors, types of illustrations, and typefaces. All materials include the program’s logo or theme, if applicable. Are messages clear? • Messages are simple and contain as few scientific and technical terms as possible. • Messages state explicitly the action that audiences should take. • Visual aids such as photographs reinforce messages to help the audience understand and remember the message. Are messages and materials relevant to the audience? • Messages state benefits of the recommended behavior that the audience will value. For example, psychological benefit (“You will feel more in control”), altruistic (“Spacing pregnancies is healthier for your wife and children”), economic (“Have just a few children, and you can educate them all”), or social (“Condom users are cool”). • Presentation style of messages is appropriate to the audience’s preferences. For example, rational versus emotional approach, serious versus light tone. • Messages keep in mind regional differences, ranging from the language and dress of people portrayed in materials to the organization of service delivery. • Messages and materials speak to the experience of the audience. New and unfamiliar information is related to something familiar to help the audience learn the new information more easily. • Messages suit the readiness of the audience to make a change. Are communication channels credible? • The source of information is credible with the audience (for example, doctors or opinion leaders). • Celebrity spokespeople are carefully selected. Celebrities should be directly associated with the message and practice the desired habit (for example, an athlete promotes exercise). Are messages and materials appealing? • Messages stand out and draw the audience’s attention. • Materials are of high quality by local standards. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 62 • Mass media programming is both accurate and interesting. Are messages and materials sensitive to gender differences? • Messages do not reinforce inequitable gender roles or stereotypes. • Messages and materials include positive role models. • Messages, materials and activities are appropriate for the needs and circumstances of both women and men. In particular, they consider differences in workload, access to information and services, and mobility. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 63 APPENDIX N. ASSESSMENT TEAM BIOS Data Collection Team: All team members were trained by IMC in the appropriate methods of data collection for gender-based violence. The assessment team retrained them in qualitative and quantitative methods for collecting SGBV data. Kisubi Akobe Rocky is a Congolese educator, having taught throughout eastern Congo for over 7 years. He has a bachelor’s degree in Sociology from the University of Bukavu. He began consulting for IMC in 2011, as a data collector for Gender-Based Violence. Jean Baptiste Luthala Muee Kaseme is a Congolese educator, with a bachelor’s degree in International Relations from the University of Bukavu. He has taught Sociology at the University of Bukavu and worked for various NGOs in the areas of conflict resolution and SGBV. He began consulting for IMC in 2011, as a data collector for Gender-Based Violence. Ombeni Kikukama is a Congolese linguist with a bachelor’s degree in French and African Languages with distinction. He has published multiple articles on language application and pedagogy. His experience in SGBV began with a gender and conflict training in 2007 held in Bukavu by International Alert. He has consulted for various NGOs including International Alert, IMC and SFGC and with various UN agencies. He speaks English, French and Swahili. He also is a French language educator at ISP. He began consulting with IMC in 2011, as a data collector for Gender-Based Violence. Chantal Birahagazi Munguakonkwa is a development technician with a rural development degree that focuses on social organization. She has professional experience from various student associations focused on peace-building and rural development. She began consulting with IMC in 2011, as a data collector for Gender-Based Violence. Clarisse Awa N’imbamba is a journalist whose professional experience is complimented by a law degree from the University of Kindu. She has worked with various local NGOs and Search for Common ground. In her previous position she worked for ATS as an M&E officer. She began consulting with IMC in 2011, as a data collector for Gender-Based Violence. Sandra Sotelo Reyes has been engaged in combating Gender-Based Violence in the DRC since 2006. She has worked for lead INGOs as program coordinator, including The International Rescue Committee, and has extensively covered and traveled along the Eastern provinces of the country. Having worked in partnership with many different local women NGOs and with grassroots organizations, she has become deeply involved in the social dynamics and root causes of the country context. Sotelo has also worked as a senior representative of the Spanish Agency of International Cooperation in the Spanish Embassy in the DRC. With a Master’s degree in International Humanitarian Assistance, as postgraduate in Cultural Studies and a background in Economic Sciences, she is currently a candidate for the postgraduate in Women Rights in the frame of the international programs at the University of London. In Spain, Sandra is an external advisor to several networks and consortiums of INGOs, academic institutions and social platforms implementing projects and advocacy strategies in the Great Lakes area, and especially in the DRC. Alexandre Diouf is a Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist with over a decade of professional experience in Africa. At the time of this study, Alex was the Senior Monitoring and evaluation Advisor under the USAID DRC M&E Project, based in Kinshasa. He is currently consulting on Monitoring and Evaluation and has experience in designing and improving M&E systems, strategic leadership, project design, implementation and evaluation. He provides strategic support and technical assistance in M&E of UNHABITAT MTSIP Focus area 4, dealing with environment and infrastructure. His in-country professional experience in a dozen Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 64 countries includes Senegal, Gambia, DRC, Central Africa Republic, Rwanda, Burundi, Cameroon, Chad, Republic of Congo, Mozambique, Haiti, Nigeria and Equatorial Guinea. Alex has provided consulting services to various organizations, including UNHABITAT, Food for Peace, American Soybean Association, IFAD, FRAO, Catholic Relief Services, and Concern International. Lina Abirafeh, PhD is a gender and development practitioner focusing on gender-based violence in emergency settings. She has 14 years of experience in countries such as Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, Morocco, Papua New Guinea, Haiti, Lebanon, and the DRC in a variety of capacities including SGBV Coordinator and Country Director for an international NGO. Abirafeh has conducted research trips to Bangladesh, Fiji, Kenya, Singapore, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Tanzania and Uganda on various gender issues, and has published much of this work in books and journals. She completed her PhD in 2008 at the London School of Economics Department of International Development, researching the effects of gender-focused international aid in conflict and post-conflict contexts, with a specific focus on gender-based violence. Her book, “Gender and International Aid in Afghanistan: The Politics and Effects of Intervention”, published in 2009, is available at: http://www.mcfarlandpub.com/book-2.php?id=978-0-7864-4519-6. Abirafeh spent four years at the World Bank in Washington, DC and received her Master’s degree in international economics and development from Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 65 APPENDIX O. ASSESSMENT SCOPE OF WORK USAID/DRC MONITORING AND EVALUATION (M&E) PROJECT SGBV ASSESSMENT STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW): DRAFT 1. PURPOSE This statement of work presents a plan for an assessment of USAID/DRC SGBV programming to be conducted for the USAID/DRC Social Protection unit. This study seeks to assess the effectiveness, impact and sustainability of all SGBV projects funded in the Social Protection Unit by USAID in the DRC, over the past five years. It also seeks to identify gaps and lessons in USAID’s programs that respond to the needs of Congolese communities in fighting against SGBV. An additional outcome from this assessment is communications materials, including a videography of the achievements of USAID DRC SGBV programming and a brief results narrative. The assessment will look at both qualitative and quantitative outcomes of the Social protection SGBV programming. 2. BACKGROUND Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) continues to be ravaged by waves of conflict. In North and South Kivu alone, armed rebel and government forces currently exceed 20,000 persons. Since 2005, the UN Mission in Congo has documented 80,000 reported cases of sexual violence in South Kivu alone. These systematic acts of violence traumatize populations and have irrevocably harmful repercussions at every level for the survivors and their communities. The people, and especially the women, of eastern DRC increasingly feel powerless to protect themselves. The conflict in the DRC has claimed an estimated 5.4 million lives since 1998.7 This figure, however, does not take into account the countless more lives that have been destroyed in the DRC as a result of sexual violence. Sexual violence in the DRC is detrimentally affecting the health, psychological, social and economic well￾being of the survivors and their communities. The public health consequences of sexual violence include, but are not limited to, mistimed and unwanted pregnancies, obstetric complications, fistula, infertility and long￾lasting psychological trauma. Equally troubling is that survivors easily contract sexually transmitted infections (STI) including HIV. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 20% of rape survivors are HIV￾positive.8 Acts of sexual violence perpetrated in DRC include incest, sexual enslavement, sexual mutilation and rape – these all have repercussions beyond the physical and mental person of the survivors. Likewise, men that have witnessed or been subjected to such brutal acts frequently quit their families out of shame for not having been able to protect the family. Sexual violence in DRC is thus destroying the familial fabric of Congolese society. The stigma survivors and children born of rape experience and their subsequent 7 Moszynski P. 5.4 million people have died in Democratic Republic of Congo since 1998 because of conflict, report says. BMJ 2008, 336:235. 8 World Health Organization. Health Action in Crises: Great Lakes Region. Resource Mobilization for Health Action in Crises 2006, http://www.who.int/hac/donorinfo/cap/Great_Lakes_advocacy_Dec06.pdf . Accessed April 26, 2008. CONTRACT NAME AND NUMBER USAID/DRC M&E Project, AID-623-TO-10-00004 ASSIGNMENT DATES TBD Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 66 excommunication from the community also have devastating consequences at an economic level. In many of the affected households, women are the main providers, engaging in subsistence farming and small commerce. By attacking and paralyzing these women through fear, perpetrators threaten the livelihood of entire communities. 3. OBJECTIVES AND TIMELINE OF THE ASSESSMENT Purpose of the assessment This thematic assessment will assess the USAID/DRC SGBV programming under the social department. It will be a summative assessment focusing on four main aspects: 1. To document the results and potential impacts USAID SGBV prevention and response activities over the past five years. 2. To compare the strengths, weaknesses of the Social Protection Unit SGBV initiatives against the most common norms and standards in the area of SGBV. 3. To provide forward-looking recommendations to strengthen programming in the area of SGBV; and 4. To develop materials to communicate USAID/DRC’s accomplishments in SGBV. In addition, the assessment will identify areas where improved guidance and support are needed for USAID implementing partners in the country. The assessment will focus on all Implementing Partners (actual and past) whose SGBV programming has sufficiently matured to generate lessons that can be applied widely. It will examine processes and results related to all key components of SGBV prevention, care and support to survivors namely a) Community mobilization; b) Medical; c) Legal d) Psychosocial; and d) Socio-Economic support. The assessment will generate evidence on “what works well” and “what does not work” on all key components of the prevention and response to SGBV in the DRC. Specific assessment objectives SGBV and the fight against it are the center of international and USG concern. The high visibility of this issue compounds with the national context to bring high visibility to the DRC, and the question of what USAID programming has achieved in this area, over the past five years. This current assessment builds upon previous work done on this issue by the Mission, to develop a summative analysis of the current state of USAID SGBV programming, and results achieved to date. The pressing concerns of SGBV and the large audience involved in these issues requires a new analysis of the issue. The specific objectives of the assessment are as follow: • Analyze USAID DRC and its IPs’ SGBV programming objectives, and the quality of services, including from the perspective of beneficiaries and community members; • Assess strengths, limitations and lessons learned from the different IPs with respect to addressing the needs of communities in SGBV-prone zones in the DRC; • Assess the similarities and differences among USAID/DRC SGBV projects and opportunities for modifications and/or harmonization; • Identify any gaps in SGBV programs; • Utilize the gap analysis to recommend areas for improvement in USAID DRC SGBV programming; Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 67 • Document results achieved to date and indicate the extent that future programming efforts further this achievement; • Document the degree of coordination/harmonization of the monitoring and evaluation of USAID/DRC SGBV activities and how consistent it is with the national and international tools and efforts; and, • Assess the level of implementation of recommendations from the previous evaluations and assessments of USAID DRC SGBV programming. C. Potential Assessment Questions The assessment questions relate to the objectives and scope of the assessment and intend to measure the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of USAID DRC response to SGBV in DR Congo, through the lenses of the beneficiaries and other stakeholders. The following questions will be addressed during the assessment: 5. Is the USAID SGBV approach on the right course or should adjustment be made within the DRC context? 6. Are there any significant or critical gaps in the USAID SGBV projects that require adjustment? (What are the existing gaps in SGBV programming – areas requiring intervention that are not already being addressed by other USG agencies or international/bilateral development agencies?) 7. Are the projects working effectively in the area of economic opportunities, health, legal and psychosocial support for survivors of SGBV? 8. Are the projects working effectively in the area of raising community awareness? 9. What are the lessons learnt from pursuing SGBV in the target communities that may be applicable elsewhere in the DRC? 10. What have been the projects results in building the capacity of CBOS and local NGOs? 11.To what extent have USAID IPs collaborated with the GDRC services before and during the projects implementation? 12.How do USAID/DRC IPs work to ensure sustainability of SGBV programs both for the prevention and response? What can be done to increase the likelihood that outcomes are sustainable? 13.Have USAID/DRC SGBV projects sufficiently taken gender issues into account and properly addressed them? 14. What is the cumulative effect of USAID’s SGBV programs? How many survivors have benefitted from services provided by IPs? How successfully have survivors been reintegrated into their communities? Have Community awareness raising activities made a significant impact on non￾survivors in their attitudes and behavior toward the causes, prevention, and remedies for SGBV? Implementation Planning for the Assessment The pre-implementation schedule for this assessment is shown below, and an indicative timeline for implementation is shown in Appendix C. The DRC M&E Project will be conducting two other evaluations/assessments in Eastern DRC within the next three months. This assessment will build upon and be coordinated with the other initiatives in the field during this time. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 68 Activity Where When Who Finalize the SOW Kinshasa Feb. 25, 2011 USAID/DRC & DTS/DRC Identify funds for the USAID/IQC Expert Kinshasa March 11, 2011 USAID/DRC & DTS/DRC Identify funds for the USAID Purchase Order Expert Kinshasa March 11, 2011 USAID/DRC Identify appropriate IQC and contract International Expert Kinshasa & Washington DC March 25, 2011 USAID/DRC Contract Purchase Order Expert Kinshasa March 25, 2011 USAID/DRC Contract Field Surveyors and Data Entry Personnel with BEED and ISDA Kinshasa & Goma April 2, 2011 DTS/DRC Contract Congolese Expert under Partnership Agreement with CEPAS Kinshasa April 2,2011 DTS/DRC Commencement of Implementation Kinshasa April 4, 2011 USAID/DRC, DTS/DRC, CEPAS Important Note: DTS/DRC will initiate preliminary discussions with Partner Organizations when funds are secured for the International Expert under and IQC Contract and the USAID Purchase Order Consultant to assure that agreements with these organizations are in place and operational for the April 4th start date. Methodology, Deliverables And Planning & Logistics Methodology Methodologies for this assessment will include: 1. Review of project documentation: The project team will review, as necessary, archived material related to the overall SGBV program of USAID in the DRC, as well as other information available either in USAID DRC files or at the level of the IPs working in SGBV. This review has already begun. 2. Review previous SGBV assessments/evaluations and reports, their findings and recommendations, to assess changes over time, and relevance of past issues in current environment. 3. Data Collection: To facilitate the collection of quantitative and qualitative data, the following tools will be developed: a Beneficiary Survey to track and assess the range of services that are being offered to survivors. The beneficiary survey will also allow the team to measure the quality and effectiveness from a user perspective assess the relevance and the appropriateness of those services compared to the needs of the intended beneficiaries. b Focus group discussions to track and assess the needs and response provided to groups of “potential” victims: people in rebel controlled zones, women and children in all zones. c Semi-structured interviews to track and assess the quality of the work done by the IPs at the community level as perceived by the community leaders, the local governmental bodies and the health centers staff. d Community survey to have a quantitative estimation of the services rendered to communities in prevention and response to SGBV and assess their (potential) impact. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 69 e Videography to document highlights of USAID’s SGBV programming and results achieved. Sampling The survivors and members of the vulnerable groups to be interviewed will be randomly selected using statistical methods to determine the number and how many to be included from each of the 10 communities. There will be a specific focus on women, men, and children survivors. All known USAID SGBV IPs will be included in the assessment. A group of ten health centers that have provided support to SGBV survivors under USAID funding, will be visited during this evaluation. Twenty focus group discussions will be done in not less than 20 communities to be identified once all the IPs have provided the assessment team with information about their target areas. Deliverables Expected outputs of the assessment are: Output 1: Detailed documentation of USAID SGBV programming in the DRC. Output 2: One brief results summary of USAID/DRC SGBV efforts utilizing data collected through the assessment. Output 3: A SGBV Programming and Results information packet (DVD format) containing materials collected and analyzed in the assessment, and including a video graphed overview of USAID Programming Highlights and Results Achieved. Draft Assessment Report Outline The assessment report will include the following items: • Executive Summary • List of Acronyms • Methodology • Problem Statement • Overview of the GDRC response • Response of USAID DRC • Overview of the response from other players: NGOs/donors supporting SGBV • Findings • Conclusions • Recommendations • Recommendations for future USAID programming that highlights lessons learned from current programming, with consideration to linkages to the existing other funded programs. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 70 Planning & Logistics Assessment Team: COP of the DRC M&E project, Senior M&E Advisor of the DRC M&E project, Congolese Expert proved under Partner Agreement with CEPAS, USAID/DRC Expert procured under Purchase Order, International Expert obtained via IQC mechanism leadership of BEED and ISDA along with survey and data collection personnel. Budget for Assessment The total budget for the SGBV Assessment is $154,900. A summary of the budget disaggregated by implementation modes is provided in Appendix A. The five implementation modes correspond to those noted above under Pre-implementation Schedule, and their respective budgets are found as follows: 1. USAID/DRC Purchase Order (PO) Expert (Appendix B, Table I). 2. USAID/DRC Expert Secured under an IQC Contract (Appendix B, Table II). 3. DTS/DRC Congolese Expert Secured under a Local Partnership Agreement with the Centre d’Etudes pour Action Social (CEPAS). (Appendix B, Table III). 4. Costs to be administered and paid directly by DTS/DRC (Appendix B, Table IV). 5. Costs to be paid by DTS/DRC under Partnership Agreement with the Bureau d’Etude et Expertise pour le Development (BEED) and/or Innovation et Service pour un Developpement Alternatif (ISDA) Budget figures are based on best available information at this time and are subject to change on the basis of additional information. Implementation Schedule and Dates The implementation for the SGBV Assessment is scheduled to begin in Kinshasa on April 4, 2011. The indicative 45-day Implementation Schedule is provided as Appendix C to this document. Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 71 APPENDIX P. ASSESSMENT TIMELINE Date Location Activity Saturday August 13 - Thursday August 18 Home Lina starts : Bibliography review Design the data collection tools Questionnaires for staff in Psychosocial, medical, legal and Socio Economic recovery FGD questions for community members FGD questions for women Interview guide for NGO staff Interview guide for UN partners staff August 19- Lina travel to Kinshasa Sandra travels from Barcelona to Kinshasa Saturday, August 20 Lina Arrives in Kinshasa Sandra arrives in Kinshasa Monday, August 22 Kinshasa / dTS office Alex leaves for Goma Security Briefing Logistics Meeting with COP Finalization of the data collection/analysis tools Tuesday, August 23 Kinshasa Lina and Sandra leave Kinshasa for Goma Meeting with Social Protection Team leader (If she is available in the pm) Wednesday 24 Goma Training for Data collectors Logistics with IMA/Heal Africa Meeting with Catherine Poulton/ IRC Thursday 25 Goma Data collectors Training Meeting with Heal Africa/IMA staff in Goma Friday 26 Data collectors training Various other meeting with actors in the fight against SSGBV Saturday 27 Team travel to Bukavu Monday, August 29 South Kivu Site Visit IRC Tuesday, August 30 South Kivu Site Visit IRC Wednesday, August 31 South Kivu Panzi Hospital IMA/Heal Africa/Lina leaves Buk Thursday , Sept 1 In/around Bukavu Site Visit IMC Bunyakiri/ Lina leaves Goma Friday 2 In/around Bukavu Site Visit IMC/marcel leaves Bukavu Saturday, September 3 In around/Bukavu Site Visit IMC Monday 5 Goma- Bunia Travel To Bunia /Site Visit COOPI Tuesday 6 Bunia Site Visit COOPI Wednesday 7 Bunia -Komanda IMA/Heal Africa sites Thursday 8 Lubero IMA/Heal Africa sites Friday 9 Lubero-Beni IMA/Heal Africa sites Saturday 10 Travel Beni-Goma Assessment of USAID/DRC/Social Protection SGBV Programming 72 Date Location Activity Monday 12 Travel to Kinshasa. Kinshasa. Tuesday 13 Kinshasa Beni/Lubero komanda IMC site visit Wednesday 14 Kinshasa Travel to Goma Thursday 15 Kinshasa Travel to Kinshasa Friday 16 Data entry/Analysis/reporting Saturday 17 Monday 19 Kinshasa Meeting with IMA Kinshasa Tuesday 20 Kinshasa Meeting with COOPI in Kinshasa Wednesday 21 Kinshasa Meeting with IRC Kinshasa/Lina comes back Thursday 22 Kinshasa Meeting with USAID/SP Kinshasa/Sandra leaves Friday 23 Kinshasa Saturday 24 Kinshasa Monday 26 Kinshasa Report writing Tuesday 27 Kinshasa Sandra: report writing Wednesday 28 Kinshasa Sandra report writing Thursday 29 Kinshasa Sandra: sending report Friday 30 Kinshasa Report writing Saturday 1 October – October 20 Kinshasa - Beirut Report writing