Mid-Term Evaluation Report of the Project

“PROMOTING CHILD RIGHTS AND PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM THE WORST FORMS OF CHILD LABOUR IN CAMBODIA“

Implemented by Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defence of Human Rights (LICADHO) and

funded by Operation a Day’s Work (ODW) Finland

Evaluation team: Elina Tran-Nguyen, Consultant (team-leader) Phallyn, Senior Child Rights Advocate (team member) Key La, Youth CPG Member (team member) April 2013

  

Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.  INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................. 6 

2.  METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................. 6 2.1 Data collection and analysis methodology .......................................................................................... 7 2.2 Evaluation issues ................................................................................................................................ 8 

3.  PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND LOGIC ...................................................................................................... 9 4.  FINDINGS ...........................................................................................................................................12 

4.1 Relevance ..........................................................................................................................................12 4.2 Effectiveness .....................................................................................................................................16 4.3 Efficiency ..........................................................................................................................................21 4.4 Sustainability ....................................................................................................................................22 4.5 Impact ..............................................................................................................................................24 4.6 Youth participation ...........................................................................................................................25 4.7 Gender ..............................................................................................................................................27 4.8 Cooperation between partners ..........................................................................................................29 

5. CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................................30 5.1 Relevance ..........................................................................................................................................30 5.2 Effectiveness .....................................................................................................................................31 5.3 Efficiency ..........................................................................................................................................32 5.4 Sustainability ....................................................................................................................................32 5.5 Impact...............................................................................................................................................33 5.6 Youth participation ...........................................................................................................................33 5.7 Gender ..............................................................................................................................................34 5.8 Cooperation between partners ..........................................................................................................34 5.9 The cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish development policy programme .....................................35 

6.  RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................35 6.1 Relevance ..........................................................................................................................................35 6.2 Effectiveness .....................................................................................................................................36 6.3 Efficiency ..........................................................................................................................................36 6.4 Sustainability ....................................................................................................................................37 6.5 Impact ..............................................................................................................................................37 6.6 Youth participation ...........................................................................................................................37 6.7 Gender ..............................................................................................................................................38 6.8 Cooperation between partners ..........................................................................................................38 6.9 The cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish development policy programme .....................................38 

Annex 1: Terms of Reference of the Mid-Term Evaluation ...........................................................................39 Annex 2: Evaluation schedule .....................................................................................................................43 Annex 3: List of conducted interviews .........................................................................................................44 

1  

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Mid-Term Evaluation was commissioned by Operation a Day’s Work (ODW) Finland in partnership with Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defence and Human Rights (LICADHO) in order to make a learning oriented analysis and assessment of the on-going project ‘Promoting Child Rights and Protection Children from the Worst Forms of Child Labour in Cambodia’. As continuation to LICADHO’s and ODW’s earlier project collaboration in the area of child rights and prevention of child trafficking, this three-year project was started in 2011 to promote child rights and to advocate and act against the worst forms of child labour in Cambodia. It is funded by the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs (MFA) and with donations from Finnish youth.

The overall goal of the project is to contribute to the implementation of child rights and to protect children from the worst forms of child labour in Cambodia. This is done through increased community mobilization for monitoring of and awareness raising on child rights, child protection and specifically child labour, support to the protection and rehabilitation of victims of child labour and other child rights abuse as well as advocacy towards decision makers. A key strategy for strengthened community mobilization is the establishment of and support to child, youth and adult Child Protection Groups (CPGs) at the commune and community level and in schools.

The aim of the mid-term evaluation was to contribute through a participatory learning process to the planning of the next phase of the project for the period 2014-2015. It was conducted in March 2013 by a mixed evaluation team consisting of an external expert as team-leader, a Senior Child Rights Advocate of LICADHO as a team member representing the perspectives and expertise of staff involved in the implementation of the project and a youth CPG member as a team member representing the perspectives and expertise of beneficiaries.

The evaluation data was collected through review of existing records and data, semi-structured key informant interviews as well as focus group discussions with child, youth and adult CPGs conducted in the target areas of the project in Preah Sihanouk, Phnom Penh/Kandal and Siem Reap. Emphasis was given to qualitative analysis of the project implementation and achieved results using thematic and causal analysis. This was supported with some quantitative analysis of primary data collected during the evaluation and secondary data already available e.g. in project monitoring and review documents.

The Mid-Term evaluation studied the project implementation and results from the perspective of nine evaluation issues defined in the Terms of Reference (TOR): 1) relevance, 2) effectiveness, 3) efficiency, 4) sustainability, 5) impact, 6) youth participation, 7) cooperation between partners, 8) gender and 9) the cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish Development Policy Programme. During the evaluation process specific emphasis was given to relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and youth participation.

Key findings:

Relevance • Problems identified and addressed by CPGs vary between and within provinces as well as in time. Even though the

overall objective of the project gives strong emphasis on prevention of worst forms of child labour and protecting children involved in them, especially in domestic work, brick factories and the entertainment industry, in reality the child, youth and adult CPGs monitor and address also other child protection and child rights issues including sexual abuse and violence against children. In addition to child labour issues listed in the overall objective, also child labour e.g. in tourism, fishery, agriculture and rubbish picking are issues affecting children in the target areas of the project.

• Capacity development of CPGs to conduct monitoring, raise awareness and advocate on child rights and to make interventions is a key strategy of the project in preventing and addressing child labour and other forms of child rights abuse. However, awareness raising and monitoring are only one important aspect in preventing child labour. Extreme poverty and lack of family income are seen as main causes of child labour by CPGs.

2  

• The Finnish development policy programme approved in 2012 pursues human rights based approach to development. Prevention of child labour is specifically mentioned as part of its priority area of human development. The Cambodian legislation and government policies reflect the international commitments for child rights including elimination of the most harmful forms of child labour, but there are remarkable gaps both in the implementation of these policies and in the existing regulations.

Effectiveness • The project has focused specifically on the establishment of child CPGs and support to child and youth

participation in monitoring and promoting child rights with emphasis on child labour issues. As result the number of child CPGs has increased remarkably, but the number of both youth and adult CPGs has decreased.

• Child and youth CPGs conduct monitoring as part of their everyday lives and during dissemination events in communities. Issues requiring follow-up or reporting are discussed within the group, with village or commune authorities and in CPG network meetings. An increasing number of child CPGs participate in Commune Council meetings with positive experience both from adults and children.

• Child and youth CPGs have done awareness raising and advocacy on child rights and child labour through various channels. Forum theatre as an inter-active awareness raising method has been highly appreciated by child and youth CPGs as well as audience.

• Adult CPGs conduct monitoring less actively except some committed individuals and they have done awareness raising to some extent, but not regularly. Teacher CPG members generally don’t see having a role in monitoring, but in awareness raising only. Child protection interventions by local authorities (adult CPGs) vary remarkably case by case and also between different target areas. Cases of community level compromises were widely reported by adult CPGs. Child and youth CPGs reported more child rights abuse issues and cases than adults and the issue of local authorities’ slow response to reported child rights abuse cases was raised by children and youth in focus group discussions in all three target areas where focus group discussions were conducted.

• Other advocacy activities have been conducted at the national level. The project has not yet included direct advocacy towards political decision-makers. It is not known to what extent the national level campaign and mass media activities have reached the political decision-makers.

Efficiency • Systems and tools for project cycle management have been developed and are used. However, the logical

framework is only partly used and outcome level indicators have been only partially developed while impact level indicators are missing.

• High staff turn-over within LICADHO has caused remarkable delays in the project implementation. Province based staff find it difficult to provide support to all CPGs frequently due to time constraints and workload. They meet with CPGs in average once in 2-3 months.

• In many project areas there are many other organizations working on children’s rights and also child protection in same districts and communes with LICADHO.

Sustainability • Child and youth CPGs identify themselves close to and sometimes as part of LICADHO. At the same time they are

interested in continuing the CPG work even without LICADHO support.

• Most adult CPGs consist of same members as the Commune Council Sub-Committee for Women and Children and they see the work of adult CPGs as part of local government’s regular duties. As local level government structure the adult CPGs are directly affected by elections and other political developments in the country.

• CPGs have a limited number of permanent members and joining of new members especially in existing child and youth CPGs is difficult. CPGs are established and trained directly by LICADHO staff. Two teachers as advisors are currently the only external capacity building structure outside LICADHO.

3  

• Children and youth have already many fund-raising and saving activities to fund their activities. Adult CPGs report lack of funding and resources as an obstacle for their functioning. In all three provinces CPGs reported receiving support also from other NGOs working on child protection issues.

• LICADHO collaborates with various NGOs and these partnerships are based on mutual support and don’t involve transfer of funds.

• Child rights are seen as politically less sensitive and therefore easier to discuss and address compared to some other human rights issues in Cambodia. However, at the local level the project is to some extent affected by adults being concerned about their children’s participation in human rights NGO work. At the national level the political situation affected the project implementation directly in 2012 when CPG members’ participation in AGPA events had to be cancelled due to concerns for the safety of children and youth members.

Impact • LICADHO staff and CPG members have observed increased awareness and understanding on child rights in CPGs

and communities. It is suggested that the decrease in the number of cases reported to LICADHO is due to increased awareness in the target areas.

• There is no documentation on identified abuse cases and their follow-up by local authorities, except the records kept by police. LICADHO keeps records on cases referred to them.

• High commitment and motivation among child and youth CPGs can be observed. Youth participation • Child and youth CPGs conduct actively monitoring and awareness raising activities and have ideas on how to

further develop their work.

• Currently a big majority of child CPGs are based in lower secondary schools and high-schools. Participation of out-of-school children, working children, children with disabilities and children from other vulnerable groups is very low. There are more interested children than can be accepted in CPGs.

• Youth CPGs are formed by former child CPG members. Despite youth CPG members’ strong personal interest in child rights and the work of CPGs, there are real problems in the functioning of youth CPGs e.g. due to time constraints and youth moving to Phnom Penh for studies.

Gender • 55 % of Child CPG members are girls. In youth CPGs the representation of girls and boys is equal. In adult CPGs

the position of persons has been a decisive factor in their membership that has caused stronger participation of men (59%). There are some differences in gender balance in CPGs between provinces.

• Gender equality and equity is currently not reflected in the content of CPG training as a separate or a cross-cutting issue.

• In the focus group discussions with CPGs specific attention was paid to the vulnerability of girls. Cooperation between partners • The share of roles and responsibilities between ODW and LICADHO are clear for all concerned and the

communication, reporting and information sharing has overall worked well. In addition to project collaboration, there are continuous discussions on further expanding the collaboration between LICADHO and ODW, but no concrete plans have been made so far.

Main conclusions: • To what extent child labour is the highest priority in communities varies. Even though the overall objective of the

project focuses strongly on child labour, also other kind of child rights abuse cases have been and need to be addressed by the project at the local level.

• In addition to monitoring, awareness raising and advocacy on child labour, the actual decrease in child labour would require comprehensive measures in addressing its root causes e.g. through improved social and education

4  

services. LICADHO’s priority and strength is in mobilizing and building the capacity of communities and civil society groups in monitoring and advocating for their rights as well as in direct support in intervention.

• There is genuine ownership and motivation to do and develop further the CPG work in many child and youth CPGs. For the members the added value of participating in CPGs is not only related to knowledge and experience on child rights and child labour issues, but also to their personal growth and interaction with other children and youth.

• Focusing on child and youth CPGs has strengthened considerably the role of children and youth in monitoring and raising awareness on child rights. The new methods used by child and youth CPGs, especially forum theatre, have proved effective. Children and youth have many ideas on new methods that could be used worth of considering.

• Pilot on Child CPGs’ participation in Commune Council meetings has been a positive experience and besides promoting children’s right to participation as such it can be seen as a good strategy for increasing attention paid by Commune Councils on child rights. Children and youth are also interested in increased exchange of information and experiences with children and youth from other provinces.

• The limited number of CPGs and CPG members is leaving out many children and youth who would or could be interested in joining. These limitations can be seen as hindering factor for the effectiveness and sustainability of the project in the long run.

• Even though many youth and child CPGs identify themselves close to LICADHO, there is strong interest among CPGs in continuing working even without LICADHO support. Sustainability of youth CPGs is a challenge and new strategies for keeping youth involved in CPG work are needed.

• Training of CPGs is fully under the responsibility of LICADHO being a risk for the sustainability of capacity building efforts.

• The work of Adult CPGs slows down in the absence of close follow-up and monitoring by LICADHO, even though the structure is a permanent government structure. Adult CPGs lack systematic approaches and methods for ensuring intervention preparedness.

• Good progress has been made in the development of project management and monitoring. Since the logical framework is not fully used, the project lacks a meaningful holistic tool for planning and monitoring of the project at the level of outputs, outcomes and impact.

• It is not fully known to what extent the project is overlapping with similar projects implemented by other organizations in same geographical areas.

• Staff turn-over and workload of staff has been identified as a challenge. Lack of LICADHO’s presence was regularly reported by CPGs in focus group discussions.

• Gender aspects have been taken into consideration to some extent in the formation of CPGs and monitoring data on participation in project activities is gender disaggregated. However, gender equality and equity is not reflected in the training or other capacity development of CPGs. With regard to monitoring and analyzing child rights and specifically child protection related situation in target areas a systematic analysis from gender perspective is lacking.

• Both LICADHO and ODW are committed to their partnership and they share the same overall vision of the ongoing collaboration. There is a clear understanding on the share of roles and responsibilities between the partners and there is interest in both sides to expand the collaboration beyond the project especially in relation to linking advocacy efforts in Cambodia and Finland as well as developing meaningful dialogue and collaboration between youth in Cambodia and Finland.

Main recommendations: • To consider moving emphasis from strong child labour focus towards a more holistic child rights protection

approach. Project focus in each target area should be defined based on the local context and priorities. The priority issues identified at the local level should be reviewed and as necessary revised on a regular basis.

• Specific attention in all target areas should be paid to the situation of domestic immigrant children.

5  

• To be clear on the strategic focus on children and youth participation in the project and to clarify to what extent the project aims at building the capacity of local government service delivery.

• To pilot new methods for awareness raising and monitoring by child and youth CPGs (e.g. debating, videos, media) using a bottom-up approach and to link the work of child CPGs to LICADHO’s other work on social media.

• To continue expanding child participation in Commune Council meetings.

• To revise the selection process of CPGs in order to involve more children and youth, out-of-school children, working children, children with disabilities and children from other vulnerable and easily marginalized groups.

• To revise the logical framework of the project to better support project management and learning. Indicators for monitoring the progress towards specific objectives and overall objective should be defined.

• To conduct a systematic mapping of child rights related project activities implemented by other organizations in same geographical areas with LICADHO and make decision based on the results on how to best minimize overlapping.

• Staff turn-over needs to be addressed as part of the overall human resource management of LICADHO. If the project will expand its coverage or increase the number of children and youth involved, more province-based staff is needed. Efforts should be made already at this stage to make the support from LICADHO staff to CPGs more frequent. Staff capacity building should be integrated into the project plan.

• If the number of children and youth to be involved in CPG activities will be expanded, a training structure for child and youth CPGs outside LICADHO should be developed. In addition to teacher Advisors of child CPGs, also the role of youth CPG members as trainers should be considered.

• To consider the use of forum theatre or other participatory awareness raising methods for regular monitoring of changes of people’s behavior and awareness at the community level.

• To strengthen exchange and collaboration of youth CPGs with other provinces as well as with other youth movements and trade unions from local to national and international level.

• To make sure that child and youth CPGs understand their roles and responsibilities as well as the roles and responsibilities of adults and to monitor that they won’t take actions that include unnecessary risks for them.

• To provide gender training for LICADHO staff involved in the project and to consider conducting a more in-depth gender analysis of the project. Gender perspective should be integrated into the CPG training curriculum.

• To continue discussions on how to strengthen joint advocacy and connecting youth in Cambodia and Finland in a meaningful way. In order to ensure proper resourcing and follow-up it should be considered to integrate this collaboration into the new project plan.

• With regard to the cross-cutting objective on climate sustainability in the Finnish development policy programme, analysis of causal linkages between natural and man-made disasters and increased violations of child rights in the target areas should be taken into consideration when planning the next phase of the project. It is important to gradually strengthen this aspect in the monitoring, awareness raising and advocacy activities and as possible in the intervention preparedness of adult CPGs.

6  

1. INTRODUCTION

This Mid-Term Evaluation was commissioned by Operation a Day’s Work (ODW) Finland in partnership with Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defence and Human Rights (LICADHO) in order to make a participatory and learning oriented analysis and assessment of the on-going project ‘Promoting Child Rights and Protection Children from the Worst Forms of Child Labour in Cambodia’.

The three-year project was started in 2011, to promote child rights and to advocate and act against the worst forms of child labour in Cambodia. It is funded by the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs (MFA) and with donations from the Finnish youth and it is continuation to LICADHO’s and ODW’s earlier project collaboration in the area of child rights and specifically on prevention of child trafficking. The aim of this mid-term evaluation has been to contribute to the planning of the next phase of the project for the period 2014-2015 through a participatory learning process.

The specific objectives of the Mid-Term Evaluation were as follows1: • Provide an insight into the activities carried out within the project and to evaluate their results in order to

make an analysis about the project performance and to gain deeper understanding on the usefulness of the approaches and methods used.

• Give an opinion and make recommendations on how to further strengthen child and youth participation. • Provide information and recommendations for the planned second phase of the project (2014-2015). • To look at the cooperation between LICADHO and ODW for its further development.

In order to specifically support its learning purpose, the Mid-Term Evaluation was conducted by a mixed evaluation team consisting of an external expert as a team-leader, a Senior Child Rights Advocate of LICADHO representing the experience and expertise of project implementers as well as a youth CPG member representing the experience and expertise of beneficiaries. The evaluation team members were Ms. Elina Tran-Nguyen, consultant (team-leader), Ms. Phallyn, Senior Child Rights Advocate, LICADHO (team member) and Mr. Key La, Youth CSP Member (team member). In addition, the evaluation team had a valuable support team consisting of interpreters Mr. Mao Sophanha (LICADHO staff) and Ms. Sokphalin (external interpreter) as well as drivers Mr. Yien and Mr. Rottanak from LICADHO office.

This evaluation report presents the participatory evaluation methodology and process (chapter 2), gives a brief overview on the project objectives and logic (chapter 3 and annex 4), presents the evaluation findings for each evaluation issue identified in the terms of reference (chapter 4) as well as conclusions (chapter 5) and recommendations (chapter 6) made by the evaluation team. In addition, the report includes an executive summary in English and a summary in Khmer language.

2. METHODOLOGY

As noted in the Mid-Term Evaluation Terms of Reference (TOR) the evaluation aimed at joint learning from the project experience so far and contributing to the planning of the second phase of the project in 2014-2015. Using a participatory approach the mid-term evaluation focused on learning from on-going processes and achieved results in project areas. Taking into consideration the learning purpose and also the available resources for conducting the evaluation, the evaluation did not compare the project to other geographical areas where the project has not been implemented, but through a participatory approach it studied the project implementation process and achievements from the perspective of beneficiaries, project implementers and partners.

                                                             1 Terms of reference of the Mid‐Term Evaluation can be found in annex 1 of this report. 

7  

2.1 Data collection and analysis methodology In the data collection and analysis emphasis was given to qualitative analysis of the project implementation and achieved results against the project theory using a thematic and causal analysis. The qualitative analysis was supported with some quantitative analysis of primary data collected during the evaluation and secondary data already available e.g. in projects monitoring and review documents.

Following methods were used for collecting data:

1. Reviewing existing records and data The evaluation report reviewed the project documents, including project plan and budget, semi-annual annual progress reports, trip reports and relevant Finnish and Cambodian government policy documents and reports.

2. Semi-structured key informant interviews2 were conducted with LICADHO and ODW staff as well as

selected partners in Phnom Penh and visited provinces (for details see annex 3): LICADHO: Director, CRO Coordinator, Senior CR Advocate responsible for Kandal/Phnom Penh, three CR

Advocates based in Preah Sihanouk, Siem Reap and Koh Kong. ODW: Programme Officer responsible for the project Partners in Phnom Penh and provinces: ASPECA and Fountain of Life Centre in Preah Sihanouk, Friends and

Cambodian Women’s Crisis Centre CWCC in Siem Reap as well as NGOCRC and CCWMCR in Phnom Penh (national level partners).

3. Focus group discussions with child, youth and adult CPGs:

Four focus group discussions with 8-13 participants were conducted in project areas in Preah Sihanouk, Phnom Penh / Kandal and in Siem Reap. Two different sets of questions were prepared for children and youth and for adults. Each group discussed five open-ended questions with supporting questions and each group discussion lasted about two hours.

The following criteria were used for selecting participants for focus group discussions:

- Equal representation by girls & boys, women & men in each FGD as much as possible. - Representation of communities with different child rights and child labour issues. - Representation of well and not so well functioning CPGs. - Not only leaders, but ordinary members should participate in each FGD.

The focus group discussions were conducted in the project target areas in Preah Sihanouk, Kandal/Phnom Penh and Siem Reap, in two locations in each province3. Due to time limitations it was not possible for the evaluation team to conduct focus group discussions in Koh Kong province. This gap was tried to be addressed to some extent with the interview of the LICADHO Child Rights Advocate from Koh Kong.

Focus group discussions involved about 20 % of all child CPG members, 45 % of all youth CPG members and 8 % of adult CPG members (year 2012 statistics). The above percentages as well as the percentages in the below table are only indicative since there have been changes in the number of active CPGs since the end of year 2012, especially youth CPGs being merged to other groups and new child CPGs being established.

                                                             2 Semi‐structured interviews  center around a mixed framework of general themes and pre‐established questions, which can be adapted in the context of individual sessions. The interviewers is thus free to leave certain questions out, mix the order of questions, or ask certain standard questions in different ways depending on context. Semi‐structured interviews also rely on a combination of both open and closed questions. 3 Phnom Penh and Kandal are considered as one target area. 

8  

Table 1: Focus group discussions in Preah Sihanouk, Phnom Penh/Kandal and Siem Reap

Province CPG types

Districts and communes covered # of participants % of total # of CPG members

(2012)

F M Total

Preah Sihanouk (PS)

2 child 1 youth 1 adult

Krong Sihanouk (youth and children): Sangkat 2, 3, 4 and Sakura school Steng Haov (adults and children): Tomnob Rolork, Kampenh, O’tres

25 24 49 21 %

Phnom Penh / Kandal (PNP/KD)

1 child 1 youth 2 adults

Muk Kampul (adults, children): Prek Anchanh Kieng Svay (adults) : Korki, Cheu Teal, Phum Thom Mean Chey (adults, youth): Prek Eng, Kbal Koh Russey Keo (youth, children): Bak Kheng

18 19 37 16 %

Siem Reap (SR) 1 child 2 youth 1 adult

Bantey Srey (children, youth and adults): Pradak Soth Nikum (children): Kein Sangke Krong Siem Reap (youth): Slarkam, Kork Chak

18 22 40 16 %

Total 61 65 126 19 %

In addition to the review of existing data and records, interviews and focus group discussions, it was originally considered to make a questionnaire for LICADHO Child Rights Office (CRO) staff on the component 3 of the project on staff capacity development. However, the implementation of this component had not so far been based on any capacity development plan against which the progress made could be assessed, but reported activities had only consisted of various meetings and workshops where LICADHO staff had participated. In addition, an advocacy capacity assessment is being prepared including elements on staff capacity. For these reasons it was decided not to include a questionnaire on staff capacity development in this mid-term evaluation and rather focus on the two other main components of the project on community mobilization and awareness raising & advocacy.

2.2 Evaluation issues The TOR included a set of questions for the following nine evaluation issues: 1) Relevance, 2) Effectiveness, 3) Efficiency, 4) Sustainability, 5) Impact, 6) Youth participation, 7) Cooperation between partners, 8) Gender and 9) The cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish Development Policy Programme.

The evaluation looked into all evaluation issues to some extent, but specific focus was given to relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability and youth participation. Youth participation was analysed both as an integral element in all parts of the evaluation as well as a separate evaluation issue.

Taking into consideration the scope, timing and resources of this mid-term evaluation the assessment and analysis of actual and expected positive and negative impact of the project remained still on a general level. Also further assessment and analysis of the project from gender perspective would be required. Since the cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish Development Policy Programme were not in place when the project was planned and the implementation started, as noted in the TOR, this mid-term evaluation did not assess in detail how these objectives are promoted in the current project, but made conclusions and recommendations on how they should be taken into consideration in the planning of the second phase of the project. At the same time it can be noted that these cross-cutting objectives overlap to some extent with the other evaluation issues.

9  

3. PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND LOGIC

This three-year project was started in 2011, to promote child rights and to advocate and act against the worst forms of child labour in Cambodia. Project activities are being implemented by LICADHO in Phnom Penh and the provinces of Kandal, Koh Kong, Preah Sihanouk and Siem Reap. The plan has been to later on expand the project to two new provinces, namely Kampong Cham and Kampot, but this expansion will not take place before the next phase of the project. Total project budget in Cambodia has been appr. 407 790 euros for years 2011–2013.

The overall goal of the project is to contribute to the implementation of child rights and to protect children from the worst forms of child labour in Cambodia. This is done through 1) increased mobilization of communities and especially children and youth for monitoring of and awareness raising on child rights, child protection and specifically child labour, 2) support to the protection and rehabilitation of victims of child labour and other child rights abuse as well as 3) advocacy towards decision makers.

A key strategy for strengthened community mobilization is the establishment of and support to child, youth and adult Child Protection Groups (CPGs) at the commune and community level and in schools. Child CPGs are mostly functioning in connection with lower secondary schools and high-schools, except some community based child CPGs in Phnom Penh/Kandal and Koh Kong. Youth CPGs are formed by former child CPG members. Adult CPGs consist of a Commune Council representative (most often the Commune Council Focal Point for Women and Children), village chiefs, teachers and police. Teachers form normally their own CPGs separate from local authorities, but are involved in district level network meetings. There are also some cases in Koh Kong, Preah Sihanouk and Siem Reap where Adult CPGs have been formed by parents with the aim of solving a specific problem related to school drop-out, domestic violence or child labour.

The six roles of CPGs are as follows: - Monitor violations of child rights in their community. - Inform local authorities of actual or suspected violations of child rights. - Organize events about child rights and child labour within their community. - Organize informal information sharing about child rights and child labour within their community. - Attend regular CPG meetings to share and discuss ideas around child rights and child labour. - Join campaign activities as needed.

The below diagrams prepared as part of the mid-term evaluation based on the project documents illustrate the project logic and key activities.

10  

11  

12  

4. FINDINGS

4.1 Relevance  

4.1.1 Relevance of the project objectives and results to the local context and needs of beneficiaries In the overall objective of the project it is defined that the project will contribute to the implementation of the general human rights framework of UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UN CRC) in Cambodia. Specific emphasis is given to prevention of worst forms of child labour as well as protection of children involved in them, especially in domestic work, brick factories and the entertainment industry. With regard to results, the project has established new child protection groups (CPGs) with specific focus on establishment and strengthening of child CPGs. New child CPGs have been established in all target areas and provided with introductory training on child rights and child labour. Also the existing CPGs have received training on these topics. In addition, selected child and youth CPGs from all four provinces have received training on Forum Theatre as a participatory and interactive method for raising awareness, stimulating discussion with and among audience and thereby promoting behavior change. Forum Theatre sessions have been conducted by CPGs specifically on child labour issues but also on issues of violence against children both in work and in general in communities and within families. The stories told through forum theatre are developed by CPGs themselves based on their personal experiences and the situation in their communities. The awareness raising and advocacy activities targeting wider public, including tuk tuk campaign, radio talk shows, radio rebroadcasting, celebration of World Day Against Child Labour, International Children’s Day and International Human Rights Day as well as billboard Campaign aimed at raising public awareness specifically on child labour and more widely on child rights in general. With regard to intervention, there is no recorded data available on the child protection interventions made by local authorities, but according to the issues reported by adult CPGs during focus group discussions, interventions were partly related to child labour (especially to the protection of children working in brick factories, as domestic workers, in fishery or in tourism), but in addition, many interventions were related to sexual abuse and rapes and also to some other child protection issues including domestic violence. Besides child labour also other child protection and child rights issues were widely raised in focus group discussions as issues being monitored by CPGs in all three target areas. Especially domestic violence and violence against and among children in communities were repeatedly raised in these discussions. Also sexual abuse and rapes were issues affecting children and addressed by CPGs in all three target areas. Sexual abuse being a major child rights issue in Cambodia is also reflected in LICADHO’s case statistics. Out of the 229 cases of child rights violations documented in 2012, 184 cases (about 80 %) were related to child sexual abuse. Majority of these victims (65 %) were girls under the age of 14. In year 2011, 81 % of the 311 child rights violation cases reported to LICADHO were related to child sexual abuse.4 Child labour issues were often seen to be linked to the issue of violence and problems of alcoholism, drug abuse and gambling among parents and other adults in communities. Also the issue of drug abuse among children and youth contributing to increased violence and sexual abuse of girls in communities was raised as a problem during focus group discussions by adults, youth and children. In addition to child labour issues listed in the overall objective of the project, child labour in tourism, fishery, agriculture and rubbish picking are also issues affecting children in the target areas of the project. It was also reported that while some problems were solved some new problems rose in the project target areas. In Koh Kong, in some

                                                             4 LICADHO Children’s Rights Office Activity Report 2012, page 19 

13  

target communities the number of children working in fishery had decreased considerably after intensive awareness raising and discussions with communities while the number of children going to work in garment factories with fake birth certificates had in turn increased in same communities. In all target areas the situation of domestic and to some extent international immigrant children was discussed in focus group discussions. In all cases CPGs had very little information and knowledge about their situation: to what extent they were going to school, how much they were involved in child labour and what forms of child labour, what were the main child protection issues affecting them etc. It was generally noted especially by the adult CPGs that the immigrant children were outside the reach of CPGs. Problems identified and addressed by CPGs vary considerably between and within provinces. Table 2: Child rights issues in target areas of project raised in the focus group discussions

# Child protection issues in target areas mentioned in focus group discussions:

Provinces

PS PNP/KD SR

A. Directly related to child labour

1. Drop out from schools in order to go to work and health and safety of working children:

1.1 Fishery x

1.2 Agriculture x

1.3 Factories (brick, garment, shoe) x x

1.4 Child Domestic Work x x x

1.5 Tourism (souvenir selling) x x

1.6 Begging x

1.7 Rubbish picking x x

1.8 Entertainment industry (sex work, restaurants, karaoke bars) x x

2. Sexual abuse and rapes in work (especially domestic work, tourism) x x x

3. Child trafficking x x

B. Other issues (having causal linkages to child labour and other children’s rights)

1. Domestic violence, other violence against children and among adults. x x x

2. Rapes and other sexual abuse x x x

3. Drug and alcohol abuse, gambling (parents, boys, other workers) x x x

4. Extreme poverty (lack of income, debt) x x x

5. Attitudes towards education and child labour (Adults in communities, parents and teachers)

x x x

6. HIV&AIDS x

14  

# Child protection issues in target areas mentioned in focus group discussions:

Provinces

PS PNP/KD SR

7. Children in conflict with the law (stealing) x

8. Traffic accidents x

9. General: Vulnerability of immigrant children coming from other provinces x x x

Note: The above table reflects only issues raised CPG members in the focus group discussions. However, this does not mean that the same issues would not be present in the areas where they were not mentioned in focus group discussions. Inputs from Koh Kong are missing because focus group discussions were conducted only in Preah Sihanouk, Phnom Penh/Kandal and Siem Reap.

4.1.2 Relevance of project activities to problems described in the project plan

The project has identified the establishment and capacity development of local level child protection structures, namely CPGs as a key strategy for prevention of child labour and other forms of child rights abuse as well as protection of children affected by the most harmful forms of child labour. The main duties of CPGs and at the same time activities supported by the project are as follows:

o raise awareness on child labour, other child rights issues and child rights in general.

o monitor the child labour and child rights situation in their community.

o make child protection interventions (adult CPGs only). The issue of adults’ negative attitudes towards children and lack of awareness on child rights was raised in focus group discussions. It was repeatedly noted that adults ‘don’t care about their children’ and they don’t give value to children’s education. At the same time especially with adult CPGs in all three target areas it was noted that extreme poverty and lack of family income are main causes of child labour that the local authorities find very difficult to address due to lack of financial resources and lack of required knowledge and skills. In Siem Reap province, Banteay Srey district also the issue of alcoholism, drug abuse and gambling by parents was repeatedly raised by local authorities as a so far unsolvable root cause of child labour.

4.1.3 Relevance of the project in the context of Finnish and Cambodian development policy

Finnish development policy5 The current Finnish Development Policy Programme guiding the overall development policy and specifically the development cooperation of the Finnish government was approved in February 2012, over one year after the beginning of the project and almost two years after the planning of the project. It pursues human rights-based approach to development where on one hand focus is on everyone, including the poorest people, knowing their rights and being able to act for them and on the other hand authorities knowing their human rights obligations and being capable of implementing them. (p. 7)

The development policy has four priority areas: 1) A democratic and accountable society that promotes human rights, 2) an inclusive green economy that promotes employment, 3) sustainable management of natural resources and environmental protection and 4) human development.

                                                             5 The Finnish Developmen Policy Programme document is available in the following internet address: http://www.formin.fi/public/default.aspx?contentid=251855&nodeid=15457&contentlan=2&culture=en‐US 

15  

The first priority on human rights, democracy and an accountable society is promoted e.g. by supporting human rights defenders and other human rights actors, good governance and the rule of law as well as by supporting the duty-bearing authorities in monitoring and implementation of their human rights obligations, paying particular attention to the realization of the rights of the most vulnerable as well as the implications of poverty reduction to such groups. (p. 31)

In the second priority on green economy promoting employment the development policy programme aims e.g. at promoting the rules of working life based on social dialogue and collective bargaining as well as occupational safety supporting workers’ right of association and the realization of the basic rights at work. (p. 35)

The actions for promoting fourth priority on human development, closely related to protection of children from child labour, include:

supporting the attainment of global education and health goals in cooperation with other like-minded countries at various fora.

advancing the rights of children and young people, particularly the girls, to education from early childhood development all the way up to higher education.

promoting employment especially of young people building the capacity of educational institutions promoting children’s right to childhood and education, in particular by combating the worst forms of child labour and child labour that prevents education. (p. 41)

Cambodian development policy The Constitution of Kingdom of Cambodia, Article 48, enshrines child rights as per the Convention of the Rights of the Child. The Labour Law of Cambodia, Section 8 on Women and Child Labour, further provides a legal framework for the protection of child workers. The provisions of this legislation are tightened with Ministerial Orders (Prakas) specifically on different types of work that are hazardous and prohibited to children, special conditions for apprenticeship, special dispensations for work of children and allowable light work. So far 11 Prakas on Working Conditions for Children in Brick Making, Fishery, Foot-Wear industry, Rubber Plantation, Salt Production, Light Work (12-15 year old children), heavy loads by children and workers and employees at the age of 15 to 18 years have been issued.

The National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP) 2009-2013, includes aims to enhance occupational safety for children aged 15 to 18 and to eliminate the most severe forms of child labour by 2016 as well as the Cambodian Millennium Development Goals (CMDG) targets to reduce the child labour from 16,5 % in 2000 to 8 % by 2015.

The National Plan of Action on the Elimination of Worst Forms of Child Labour was adopted by the Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) in June 2008 for 2008-2012. The second phase of the National Plan of Action has been in process of being prepared, but was not yet available during conducting this Mid-Term Evaluation.

The National Social Protection Strategy (NSPS) indicates that the Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training works on creating decent work opportunities for vulnerable groups and taking proactive steps to reduce all forms of child labour to 8 % by 2015 and to eliminate the worst forms of child labour by 2016 through education.

With regard to the international human rights instruments relevant to child labour, in addition to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the RGC has ratified the ILO Convention No. 138 (Minimum Age for Admission to Employment) in 1999 and the Convention No. 182 (Worst Forms of Child Laobr) in 2005. It has also approved for implementation an ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Organization Resolution to prevent and eradicate the worst forms of child labour in 2004 and established a Department of Child Labour, which exclusively works towards eliminating child labour. All Provincial and Municipal Departments of Labour and Vocational Training have been given the role to pay special attention and actively work towards eliminating child labour in collaboration with other relevant agencies.

16  

4.2 Effectiveness 4.2.1 Effectiveness of results in relation to the specific objective 1: Increased mobilization of local communities and especially children, students and youth on child rights and child protection issues. The project has continued working with adult, youth and child CPGs established as part of a project on prevention of child trafficking implemented in 2006-2009. However, during this project the focus has been specifically in establishment of new child CPGs and strengthening of existing child and youth CPGs e.g. through training on child rights and child labour, introducing new methods including forum theatre and piloting child participation in Commune Council meetings. Even though in the original project plan it was planned to expand the project to two new provinces, namely Kampot and Kampong Cham, it has been decided not to expand the project geographically but to focus on the existing target areas and the quality of project work. The below tables reflect the changes in number of CPG members during the project implementation (table 3) and the number of new and old CPGs as well as their level of activeness (table 4). The level of activeness of CPGs have been defined based on information received both from LICADHO staff responsible for the project implementation in provinces as well as directly from CPGs during focus group discussions. These figures are intended to give some indication on the level of the activeness of CPGs, but are not based on a systematic direct assessment. Table 3: Number of CPGs and increase in the number of CPG members in all four provinces.

All 4 provinces # of CPGs (2012)

Total # of members (2012)

Total # of members (2011)

Difference

Child CPGs 15 230 84 +174 %

Youth CPGs 9 85 97 -12 %

Adult CPGs 33 478 623 -23 %

Total 57 807 804 0,4 %

Table 4: Number of old and new CPGs per province and the level of activeness.

Province Old

New (established in 2011-2013)

Total Number of active CPGs

C Y A C Y A

PNP/KD 0 1 8 2 0 0 11

• 2 Child CPGs • Level of activeness of adult CPGs

varies • Youth CPG currently less active

17  

Province Old

New (established in 2011-2013)

Total Number of active CPGs

C Y A C Y A

SR 0 2 6 4 0 0 12

• 4 Child CPGs • 3 Adult CPGs • 1 Youth CPG

PS 0 1 7 6 0 0 14

• 4 Child CPGs • 3 Adult CPGs • Youth CPG merged to one Child

CPG

KK 0 2 6 3 0 3 14 • 3 Child CPGs • 5 Adult CPGs

Total 0 6 27 15 0 3 51

C = children, Y = youth, A = adults

Monitoring Child and youth CPGs conduct monitoring as part of their everyday lives in families, communities, and schools. All child and youth CPGs in focus group discussions reported also that monitoring is done during dissemination events in communities. Issues requiring follow-up or reporting are normally discussed within the group and reported either directly to village or commune authorities or shared in CPG network meetings. The network meetings are conducted at the district level with representation from all child, youth and adult CPGs once in two or three months.

In all focus group discussions with child and youth CPGs it was noted that sometimes monitoring includes immediate intervention. For example in the cases of domestic violence or other violence against children in communities, child and youth CPG members have often taken an active role in intervening and asking the parties to stop violence and explained the harmfulness of violence for children. Adults concerned have often at least first reacted negatively to this intervention and asked the child or youth CPG not to interfere in other people’s private business. However, there are cases where a child or youth CPG member has managed to make the adult start questioning the violence.

In 2012 a study tour of adult, child and youth CPGs from all target areas was conducted in Takeo province on child participation in Commune Council meetings. As follow up an increasing number of child CPGs has started participating in Commune Council meetings in all provinces with positive experience both from adults and children. Child CPG participation in Commune Council meetings is gradually being expanded in the project areas.

All four adult CPGs involved in focus group discussions reported that monitoring is conducted to some extent, but not actively except by some committed individuals. A main channel for monitoring was mentioned to be reporting on cases from communities. Also observing child rights abuse in everyday life and during public events, such as Commune Council public fora was reported. Even though overall the monitoring by adult CPGs, namely Commune Council Sub-Committees for Women and Children, is not frequent or regular, there are individual cases of more systematic monitoring at the village level and for example in Kandal in some communes in brick factories.

Teacher CPGs generally did not see having a role in monitoring, but rather on awareness raising only. However, there were some examples where teachers had collaborated with local authorities to reintegrated drop-out children back to school. In Kandal a teacher had reported through school director to commune authorities about children’s drop-out from school related to child labour and the local authorities had followed up the case with village authorities and

18  

families. In Preah Sihanouk a teacher had worked with commune and village authorities to get children who had dropped out from school in order to work back to school.

Child and youth CPGs raised in the focus group discussions systematically more child rights abuse issues than adults and the issue of adults slow response to reported cases was raised by children and youth in all three target areas. Focus group discussions in Kandal can be given as an example where according to adult CPGs there had been two death cases of children working in or visiting brick factories, while in the child CPG focus group discussion this number was said to be 10 death cases. The eight cases have probably been solved between the employer and families without involvement of local authorities that seemed to be a general practice.

Interventions There is recorded data available on interventions where LICADHO has been involved. In addition, police keeps records on rape cases reported to them. However, no written records on child rights monitoring or protection interventions are kept by commune authorities that would give more comprehensive information on the types, volume and frequency of child labour and other child rights violation cases and interventions by CPGs.

Based on the focus group discussions with adult CPGs child protection interventions by local authorities vary remarkably case by case and also between different target areas. In some cases follow up is done thoroughly, while in other child protection cases LICADHO is contacted immediately and given the responsibility to follow up the case. In some cases there is no follow-up. Compromises in solving child rights abuse cases at the community level seem to be frequent. Cases of community level compromises were reported in all four focus group discussions conducted with adult CPGs in three provinces. For example in Kandal brick factory owners were reported to have compensated with money working children’s injuries or death cases to children’s families in order to avoid formal investigation and intervention processes. Close linkages between factory owners and high-ranking people were also raised as an issue. In all provinces especially cases of rape or sexual abuse of children were reported to be often solved with money within communities and without involvement of judicial system.

Planning of the adult CPGs’ work was not seen necessary by any adult CPGs in focus group discussions. It was repeatedly noted that ’We don’t know the future” and that it is impossible to foresee what kind of cases will happen. Solutions for problems are sought and interventions are made as new cases appear.

As noted above child CPGs in all target areas told about delays in adults’ response to the cases they had reported to local authorities, teachers or in CPG network meetings. In some cases they reported complete lack of action by adults. For example there was one case in Siem Reap province where a youth CPG had reported to local authorities about a sexual abuse case of a girl child and according to them no follow up action was taken by adults. When raising this issue in the focus group discussion with the concerned adult CPG it was noted that the girl child had in the end denied that sexual abuse had ever happened and therefore no further action had been taken. This information had not been shared with youth CPGs.

Some individual cases were raised in the focus group discussions with child and youth CPGs where children or youth had been or were willing to be directly involved also in intervention even though their primary role is related to monitoring, awareness raising and advocacy. Example 1: Two child CPG members intervened in a domestic violence case in their community in Preah Sihanouk and they brought a victim to a private clinic to get medical care. Doctors in the private clinic had asked children to pay money, since they were seen to represent an NGO and they had contacted LICADHO for help. Example 2: In Siem Reap the child CPGs told that they had informed the audience during a forum theatre session that they can help in case of child rights abuse problems. Example 3: Some child CPG members in Siem Reap had started investigations on drug abuse among youth in community since police had requested them to have evidence before reporting to police. In addition, as noted above, child and youth CPGs have regularly made small-scale interventions when monitoring especially domestic violence or other violence against children in their communities in all project target areas e.g. by asking adults to stop beating their children.

19  

4.2.2 Effectiveness of results in relation to the specific objective 2: Increased knowledge, understanding and action amongst local and national policy decision makers and the general public on child labour and other child rights violations issues. Child and youth CPGs in all target areas have conducted awareness raising and advocacy activities on child rights and child labour through community based dissemination events, dissemination sessions in schools, special events (Human Rights Day, World Day Against Child Labour, AGPA etc.) and sharing their knowledge and experience in everyday life within their families, neighborhood and communities as well as with their friends. The main target group for awareness raising has been children and their families in communities as well as wider audience through media activities. There were also cases in Preah Sihanouk and Phnom Penh/Kandal were targeted awareness raising and advocacy have been conducted for employers and employees e.g. in brick factories. In 2012 the project invested in training on forum theatre as an interactive awareness raising method actively involving the audience in discussions and problem solving during the sessions. This method has been highly appreciated both by child & youth CPGs as well as audience in all target areas of the project.

20  

In addition to the awareness raising and advocacy methods developed and shared by LICADHO, children and youth have themselves developed various methods for awareness raising including songs, videos, social media, dancing etc. and in the focus group discussions they expressed their interest in learning more about these methods. Adult CPGs reported in focus group discussions having conducted awareness raising activities to some extent, but not regularly. In some target areas in Kandal/Phnom Penh the Commune Council public fora have been used for child rights dissemination. Other advocacy campaign activities at the national level have included e.g. radio talk shows, radio programme rebroadcasting and Tuk tuk campaign and billboards. These activities have primarily targeted the wide audience. However, their effectiveness was not possible to assess as part of this evaluation. Radio talk shows have had active participation by people calling to the show. It is not possible to estimate to what extent the conducted awareness raising and advocacy activities have reached the political decision-makers as noted in the project objective. The project has not yet included direct advocacy towards political decision-makers. Possibilities for joint advocacy with other NGOs on the rights of child domestic workers are being considered. 4.2.3 Effectiveness of results in relation to the specific objective 3: Capacity of the LICADHO Staff to implement, manage, influence and evaluate child rights projects is strengthened The reported activities under the third component of the project have been mainly related to staff participation in various meetings and workshops. No specific plans for building the capacity of LICADHO staff have been developed so far. However, an advocacy assessment including elements on capacity of staff is currently being prepared. Youth exchange has consisted of participation of youth especially from Preah Sihanouk and Koh Kong and to some extent from Kandal in various national level training, workshops and meetings in Phnom Penh through collaboration with CCYMCR and NGOCRC. In year 2012 there were in total 11 national level meetings where 1-2 children participated. It is not recorded how many children in total have participated in these activities. In addition, one child CPG representative has participated in an international workshop in Sri Lanka and in a regional conference on ASEAN children in Singapore. The issue of selection of youth participants for national level events has been raised as an issue during the evaluation and the wish of having different children participating in different meetings has been expressed. With regard to child and youth CPG participation in international events overseas, the necessity of the selected participant to have a passport ready, has strongly affected the selection process, since only few child and youth CPG members possess a passport and the selection of participants for these events takes often place in such a short notice that processing of a new passport is not possible. Youth CPGs expressed very strong interest in learning from and exchange with CPGs and youth in other provinces e.g. through joint camps. 4.2.4 Factors affecting effectiveness

Internal factors The shift in the focus from adult CPGs during the previous projects to child and youth CPGs in this project have made child CPGs more active. Adult CPGs reported having decreased their level of activeness due to decreased presence of and support from LICADHO. LICADHO cooperation with the Adult CPGs has mainly focused on coordination meetings (once in 2 or 3 months) and support to child protection interventions.

21  

Formation and training of child CPGs was reported by LICADHO staff to have taken time that has reduced their possibility to collaborate with adult CPGs.

High staff turn-over within LICADHO and difficulties in recruiting new staff have caused serious delays in the project implementation. Three out of four project staff in Phnom Penh, including the CRO Coordinator responsible for the overall coordination of the project, have started their work in LICADHO after the start of the project and have therefore not been involved in the planning of the project. The Child Rights Advocate’s position in Phnom Penh /Kandal is currently vacant and the work is being done by the Senior Child Rights Advocate in the Phnom Penh office responsible for Phnom Penh/Kandal and Siem Reap. External factor The project implementation and thereby its effectiveness have also been affected by the political situation in the country. Commune elections in 2012 caused delays in the project implementation and it is expected that again in 2013 the project will be affected by the parliamentary elections.

Another external factor affecting the effectiveness of the project is related to LICADHO being seen as a political actor supporting the opposition by local authorities and some parents and other adults in communities. In focus group discussions children and youth reported that their parents and other people in communities have opposed to their involvement in CPGs because of the NGO, meaning LICADHO. 4.3 Efficiency When the mid-term evaluation was conducted it was still early and therefore difficult to fully evaluate the cost efficiency of the project taking into consideration the remarkable delays in the project implementation during the first and second year. However, the following findings were identified in relation to project management, human resources and partnership: Project management Systems for managing and monitoring of project implementation have been developed and are used. The LICADHO CRO team prepares annual plans at the national and provincial levels and report about the project implementation internally on a monthly basis. Financial reports are shared with ODW Finland on a quarterly basis and narrative reports twice a year. A comprehensive monitoring tool e.g. for monitoring project activities and number of people reached in different target areas was developed in 2012 and has started being used by LICADHO province based staff. The objectives of the logical framework are used as a basis for annual activity planning. However, the logical framework as such is not being used as a supporting tool in project management, monitoring and learning. One reason for this is that the project staff both in LICADHO and ODW Finland has not been involved in preparing it. At the same time it includes gaps that hinder its use as a meaningful tool in planning and monitoring, since indicators at the level of specific objectives and progress towards overall objective are missing. However, a comprehensive set of output level indicators as well as some quantitative outcome level indicators have been included in the monitoring tool developed in 2012. Human resources High staff turn-over within LICADHO and difficulties in recruiting new staff has cased remarkable delays in project implementation and affected also the efficiency of the project. For further details see section 4.2.4 Factors affecting effectiveness of this report on page 27.

At the same time province based staff of LICADHO find it difficult to provide support to all CPGs frequently due to time constraints and workload. This is reflected in the low frequency of their support to CPGs. In average the Child Rights Advocates meet with CPGs once in 2-3 months.

22  

Partnerships LICADHO collaborates with various partners at the provincial and local levels. These partnerships are based on mutual support and don’t have financial implications to the project. For example in Preah Sihanouk the project has close collaboration with the Fountain of Life Centre providing support to poor women and children including education, life skills training and counseling and human rights education. LICADHO has provided once a month human rights training and organized e.g. a forum theatre session in the centre, while the centre has extended their support to children living with their mothers in prisons based on LICADHO’s request. In a similar way in Siem Reap LICADHO has established a collaborative relationship with Friends that provides support to children affected by child violence, child labour, children in conflict with the law and other vulnerable children. There are still only few concrete cases of collaboration, but there are possibilities that Friends will provide referral services and support to vulnerable children identified in LICADHO project areas while LICADHO has the capacity to provide legal advice to Friends. In most project areas and especially in Siem Reap there are many other organizations working on children’s rights and also child protection in same districts and communes with LICADHO. In Kandal it was reported that in the same commune same members of Commune Council Sub-Committee for Women and Children are both members of adult CPGs supported by LICADHO and other child protection related groups formed by another NGO. In Siem Reap Bantey Srey District child and youth CPGs reported about easy access to financial support from various NGOs when organizing activities. If LICADHO will not support, there are other NGOs willing to support. In the schools where child CPGs had been established, also Plan was implementing its ‘Learn Without Fear’ child protection activities. One provincial level partner expressed willingness to coordinate with other NGOs including LICADHO on the level of per diems, transportation and meal fees that NGOs provide for people participating in project activities. In this connection a general concern for competition between NGOs over people’s participation was raised as a frequent problem in development cooperation. However, no negative remarks were made on LICADHO’s practices with this regard. 4.4 Sustainability 4.4.1 Institutional sustainability

When the first CPGs were established as part of the LICADHO-ODW project on the prevention of child trafficking, CPGs were regarded as part of LICADHO structure. However, in the current project they are seen as local community structures that receive technical, facilitation as well as some financial and material support from LICADHO. Despite this separation of CPGs from LICADHO structure the close linkage to LICADHO was emphasized by child and youth CPGs in the focus group discussions. Especially in Preah Sihanouk children and youth regarded themselves as LICADHO. At the same time children and youth in all provinces expressed their interested in continuing the work even in the absence of LICADHO and the idea of forming their own associations was raised in all three provinces. Most adult CPGs consist of same members as the Commune Council Sub-Committee for Women and Children: Commune Council Focal Point for Women and Children, teachers, village representatives and police. In the focus group discussions it was clear that in most cases the Adult CPG members don’t make a difference between these two structures. Adult CPG work is seen as part of local government’s regular duties even though the fulfillment of these duties is very poorly resourced. Parents’ participation in adult CPGs is limited to one CPG in Siem Reap, one CPG in Preah Sihanouk and two CPGs in Koh Kong province. All parent CPGs have been established to solve a specific problem in their community. In Siem Reap the parent CPG was established to solve problems related to child labour in tourism in a specific place in the temple area. In Preah Sihanouk the parent CPG had been established to reduce domestic violence in some communities through participation of parents having problems with domestic violence. In Koh Kong the newest parent

23  

CPG has recently been established on an island in order to solve problems related to children’s access to secondary school that has caused high drop-out and child labour. All CPGs have a limited number of permanent members. Especially in the case of child and youth CPGs the membership is primarily based on people’s personal interest in participating CPG activities. The limited number of members helps making these groups more dynamic and makes their capacity development easier and more effective. However, joining CPGs is difficult for new members. For adults this is less a problem since the members are in most cases members of the group because of their position in community or their job position. CPGs are established and trained directly by LICADHO staff. Two teachers as advisors, one in Preah Sihanouk and one in Siem Reap, are currently the only external capacity building structure outside LICADHO. As noted above there have been also some limited opportunities for child and youth CPGs to participate in national level workshops and meetings in Phnom Penh and also overseas that can be seen as capacity building. However, during the evaluation it was raised that learning through participation in these events has not yet been institutionalized and more widely spread within CPGs among those who have not themselves participated in the events. With regard to LICADHO’s role, as independent human rights NGO its focus has been and is on monitoring, raising awareness and doing advocacy on human rights issues towards the general public and political decision makers. Also for this reason it has had a very limited role in building the capacity of government authorities so far. 4.4.2 Financial sustainability

Children and youth have already many fund-raising and saving activities ongoing to fund their activities. They have for examples had saving boxes and raised funds with entry fees in their events. They have also requested and received support from other organizations for organizing awareness raising events. At the same time the need to receive capacity building on management and resource mobilization in order to create their own associations was raised in the focus group discussions. While child and youth CPGs reported about successful resource mobilization and their related future plans and ideas, all adult CPGs reported of lack of funding and resources. Commune Sub-Committees for Women and Children were reported to receive 1000 USD funding per year that should cover all meeting and activity costs including monitoring and intervention. This money is requested separately from the provincial treasury. However, in all three provinces the CPGs reported receiving support also from other NGOs working on child protection issues. LICADHO has formed partnerships with various NGOs in all three provinces and at the national level. These partnerships don’t involve transfer of funds, but they are based on mutual support and collaboration. For further details see the section 4.3 Efficiency on page 28. 4.4.3 Political sustainability

The Commune Council for Women and Children are local level government structures under the ruling party. They are directly affected by the political developments in the country. The Commune Councils and Commune Sub-Committee for Women and Children and especially the Focal Point for Women and Children being a member of the Commune Council in most cases change after commune elections. Child rights as such are seen as politically less sensitive human rights issues and therefore easier to discuss and address compared to some other human rights issues in Cambodia. However, concerns have been raised in the target areas whether the child rights and child labour related awareness raising activities are demonstrations. Also the concerns of some parents related to NGO have been related to the political sensitivity of human rights work in Cambodia.

24  

Even though the Cambodian law requires organizers of events just to notify the local authorities about events being organized, there is a general practice of not notifying but asking permission from them. In this way the local authorities have control over activities organized at the local level. At the national level the tense political situation affected the project directly in November 2012 when CPG members prepared to participate in two AGPA events and these events were disrupted by authorities with participants barred from some guesthouses, electricity cut off at event venues and high level of policy surveillance. Participation of CPGs was cancelled due to concerns for the safety of children and youth members. 4.4.4 Socio-cultural sustainability

Child participation and seeing children’s experience and views as something that should be taken into consideration in decision-making is a relatively new phenomenon in Cambodia. Changes in attitudes and behaviour, in the way how parents and other adults see and treat children, can be seen as an important element in the prevention of child labour and other child rights abuses. It is generally known that changes in attitudes and behaviour take time and in addition to increased level of awareness, personal internalization of needed changes in one’s behaviour is necessary. Forum Theatre is a method that not only shares information about child rights but provides the audience with an opportunity to reflect their own personal experiences and feelings. The difficulty in getting communities to participate in awareness raising events was raised in the focus group discussions in all target areas. It was generally noted that people want to get some concrete benefit of their participation, such as small gifts. This issue have been solved by having quizzes as part of the programme and giving small gifts to those who participate. It was considered that the content issues alone would not attract people enough to participate. 4.4.5 Environmental sustainability

Environmental issues are not as such addressed by the project and in the project plan the project has been considered having very limited impact to the environment. No analysis of the project activities from the perspective of environmental sustainability or the linkages between child labour and environmental problems have been made so far. However, within LICADHO measures have been taken to make office practices environment friendly. 4.5 Impact It was not possible to make a proper assessment on the impact of the project to children and their families as part of this mid-term evaluation. This was on one hand due to time and other resource limitations in conducting it. On the other hand, the project is still on an early phase for evaluating the project impact. In addition, more ground work is required for developing outcome and impact level indicators for the project that are currently lacking. However, the following findings related to the project impact and issues related to its assessment were made: There is no documentation on identified abuse cases and their follow-up at the level of communes by local authorities, except the records kept by the police. LICADHO keeps records on the intervention cases referred to them and a decrease in the number of child rights violation cases can be observed in 2012 compared to the previous years. LICADHO staff and CPG members have observed increased awareness and understanding on child rights among CPG members and in communities. It is suggested that the decrease e.g. in the number of rapes reported to LICADHO is due to increased awareness. All adult CPGs that participated in focus group discussions in three provinces reported themselves not being so active and lacking resources for doing frequent monitoring and awareness raising.

25  

High commitment and motivation among child and youth CPGs could be observed in majority of focus group discussions with children and youth in all three provinces. At the same time lack of time and need to focus on studies, work and home duties were mentioned as obstacles for fully participating in CPGs. The below table reflects reactions and changes in communities observed by child and youth CPGs during awareness raising activities, especially in connection with forum theatre sessions. These reactions can also be seen as signs of some short-term impact of the project. Table 5: Reactions and changes in communities observed by child and youth CPGs

# Examples of reactions and changes observed by child and youth CPGs

Positive

1. Admiration from people.

2. Forum theatre and songs gets positive feedback, sometimes reactions come afterwards.

3. People have realized what they have done e.g. in relation to domestic violence.

4. People making statements not to commit violence anymore.

5. Discussion starts spreading in community, especially among women and girls.

6. Children are increasingly interested in CPG activities.

7. Even small children tell that they don’t want domestic violence.

Negative

1. People want to get benefit from CPG activities (e.g. gifts).

2. Some people find this useless.

3. Aggressive reactions towards youth and child CPGs during dissemination events (SR).

4.6 Youth participation During the ongoing project specific focus has been given to establishment of new child CPGs and strengthening of child and youth CPGs. As shown in the above table 3 (p. 22 of this report) the number of child CPG members has increased considerably while the number of youth CPG members has decreased. Currently big majority of child CPGs are based in lower secondary schools and high-schools and their membership consists of students who have shown specific interest in child rights and child labour issues and who have been elected by their peers to become members. The number of CPG members is limited to 12-15 persons and new members can be accepted only if an old member resigns. Child and youth CPGs have involved other children and youth in CPG activities to some extent, e.g. in dissemination events and forum theatre, but they have not been able to accept new members.

26  

In all focus group discussions with child and youth CPGs it was noted that there are much more interested children than can be accepted in CPGs. There is only one community based child CPG in Phnom Penh and one in Koh Kong province involving both children in schools and out-of-school children. Overall, the representation of out-of-school children, working children, children with disabilities and children from other vulnerable groups is very low. Youth CPGs are former child CPGs. However, there are problems in the functioning of youth CPGs in all target areas:

In Phnom Penh 3 youth CPGs have been merged to one group due to reduced number of members and according to the youth who participated in the focus group discussion the CPG is currently less active compared to the past.

In Koh Kong the two youth CPGs are reported not to be active at the moment. In Siem Reap two youth CPGs in Krong Siem Reap have been merged to one group and during the focus group

discussion they reported themselves not being active at the moment. The youth CPG in Banteay Srey district is active.

In Preah Sihanouk the youth CPG has currently only two active members and therefore the youth CPG has been merged to an active child CPG in high school in Sangkat 3 in Krong Sihanouk.

The following obstacles for children’s and youth participation in CPGs were raised in focus group discussions: Time-constraints: studies, work and household tasks take time Communication problems in reaching all members Distances and transportation problems hindering participation in meetings and events Safety: traffic and violence in communities Lack of support from parents: NGO is not good, CPG takes time from studies and work, useless activities Adults’ attitudes towards children and youth: looking down at them, saying that NGO is not good for

children and youth Youth moving to Phnom Penh for university studies Youth busy with their work and their own family

It was repeatedly noted by youth CPGs that even though they are not so active in participating in CPGs as such, they keep on observing and bringing up child rights issues in their daily lives. The below table reflects the reasons for children and youth to join CPGs. The main reasons were on one hand related to willingness to improve the situation of children in their communities and society in general and on the other hand to learn new skills and gain self-confidence. Table 6: Reasons for joining CPGs raised by child and youth CPGs in focus group discussions

# Children and youth: reasons for joining CPG PS PNP/KD SR

1. Gaining experience and knowledge about social issues, children’s rights, child protection.

x x x

2. Strengthened capacity to help in protecting children and youth themselves. Being able to contribute to the society.

x x x

3. Personal growth: increased self-confidence x x x

4. New skills to express oneself, making speeches x x

27  

# Children and youth: reasons for joining CPG PS PNP/KD SR

5. Forum theatre x x

6. Group work and cooperation between different CPGs: sharing knowledge and information and solving problems together.

x

7. Helping in finding job, some extra income x

At the same time both child and youth CPGs in all provinces reported interest in continuing their work even if LICADHO stops supporting them. Their future visions with regard to CPGs are reflected in the below table. Table 7: Issues raised in focus group discussions by child and youth CPG members on their future visions for CPGs

# Future vision of child and youth CPGs ProvincePS PNP/KD SR

1. Continuing monitoring and awareness raising in communities, but aiming at wider audience.

x x x

2. Learning new skills and using new methodologies: flash mob, traditional dance, forum theatre, music video, mass media, social media, computer skills

x x x

3. Raise funds for children and their own activities x x x4. Make the group independent x x x5. Collaboration with commune authorities x x 6. Networking and exchange among youth in different provinces x x7. Identity: identity card, uniform, hat or other. x x x8. Have a meeting space x 9. To become famous, recognized in communities, in the province and elsewhere x x x10. Building the capacity of new CPGs, the new generation x x x

The UNDP initiative of Loy9 was raised as a model for children’s and youth’s participation e.g. in media work by most child and youth CPGs in three target areas and the children and youth expressed strong interest in doing similar things. 4.7 Gender 4.7.1 Gender sensitivity in project implementation

In the monitoring of participation in project activities data has been gender disaggregated. Monitoring of people’s, women’s and men’s participation in bigger events is based on estimates. 55 % of Child CPG members are girls. In youth CPGs the representation of girls and boys is equal. In adult CPGs the position of persons (commune authority, teacher, and police) has been a decisive factor in their selection as CPG a member that has caused stronger participation of men (59%). There are some differences in gender balance in CPGs between provinces as shown in the below table.

28  

Table 8: Share (%) of males and females in CPGs based on membership statistics in the annual progress report 2012.

Province /CPG type %

M F

Phnom Penh Youth 43 57

Adults 60 40

Kandal Children 58 42

Adults 59 41

Koh Kong Children 41 59

Youth 67 33 Adults 62 38

Siem Reap

Children 42 58 Youth 54 46

Adults 66 34

Preah Sihanouk Children 67 53

Youth 25 75 Adults 66 44

All provinces

Children 45 55 Youth 49 51

Adults 56 44 All CPG members 53 47

Note: The number of youth CPG members is much lower than the number of members in adult and child CPGs (PNP – 30 members, KK – 21 members, SR – 26 members, PS – 8 members) For this reason relatively small differences in the number of female and male members may cause remarkable differences the percentages on gender balance.

Gender equality and equity is currently not reflected in the content of training of CPGs as a separate issue or as a cross-cutting issue. The CPGs are formed in seminars where an equal number of women and men or girls and boys are invited. The seminar includes an introductory training on child rights and child labour after which CPG members are selected among volunteers through voting. Gender equality is not reflected in the criteria for becoming a candidate or in the voting of CPGs.

29  

4.7.2 Gender and child protection issues

The evaluation did not collect systematically data on gender in child protection issues in target areas, but some issues were repeatedly raised in focus group discussions:

In the focus group discussions the vulnerability of girls was raised in all target areas. In all provinces it was

noted that parents often prefer educating their sons rather than daughters if the family can’t afford sending all children to school.

Girls being victims of rape, other sexual abuse or trafficking was repeatedly raised in focus group discussions. Also the vulnerability of girl domestic workers for sexual abuse and violence was raised in all target areas.

The role of boys as victims was given less attention than girls in focus group discussions. While the issue of

girls being victims of rape and sexual abuse was raised repeatedly in all focus group discussions, the issue of boys being victims of sexual abuse or trafficking was not raised in any focus group discussions.

The issue of boys using drugs was repeatedly raised in all target areas. 4.8 Cooperation between partners The following findings are based on the interviews of ODW and LICADHO staff: The current project is continuation to a longer-term cooperation started in 2004. During almost one decade of cooperation LICADHO and ODW have learnt to know each other’s visions and views. Share of roles and responsibilities: The share of roles and responsibilities between ODW and LICADHO are clear for both parties. LICADHO is responsible for planning and implementing the project as well as systematic monitoring of activities and results of the project. In the planning ODWs role has been mainly to raise questions for consideration and it has paid specific attention to risk analysis. ODW Finland’s role is mainly to mobilize funding and do monitoring at the project level on the project implementation and use of funds in order to ensure that it is in line with the donor requirements of the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs. ODW staff visits Cambodia and project areas on an annual basis. In the planning and organizing the Mid-term Evaluation ODW had the lead. In addition, ODW uses information from the project in its communication and development education work in Finland. Reporting: LICADHO prepares quarterly financial reports and bi-annual and annual progress reports and shares them with ODW. The reports are discussed, further developed and finalized in collaboration between the two partners. The reporting formats are LICHADO’s standard formats and ODW ensures through dialogue with LICADHO that the reports include all information required by the donor. In some cases ODW has faced difficulties in identifying the activities that have been funded by the project from the progress reports since the reports have included also other CRO activities funded by other donors. However, this issue seems to have been solved. The reporting schedule has so far not been included in the partnership agreement between LICADHO and ODW, but it has been agreed upon separately. Financial management: According to ODW the financial management and monitoring of the project works very well. There are no delays and additional information is provided promptly when requested. Also the inventory list is very detailed. Communication between partners: Overall the communication, reporting and information sharing has worked well according to both parties. In all interviews changes in staff both in LICADHO and ODW have been identified as a

30  

constraint affecting the project and the collaboration between partners. For example both the CRO Coordinator in LICADHO office responsible for the overall management of the project and the project officer responsible for the project in ODW Finland have been recruited after the start of the project and therefore they have not been involved in the planning of the project. Communication through e-mail is felt to be more difficult than face-to-face discussions and face-to-face discussions are possible only once a year when the ODW project officer visits Cambodia. It was also noted that it would be important that with time ODW staff will gain better understanding on the project and the local context. Also getting to know each other helps the collaboration. Other areas of collaboration: In addition to the project collaboration, there is general sharing of information on the human rights situation in Cambodia from LICADHO to ODW. Information and material from the project has also been used by ODW in development education activities in Finland. There have been continuous discussions on further expanding the collaboration between LICADHO and ODW beyond the project, but no concrete plans have been made so far. Especially in LICADHO the interest of creating direct exchange between the youth in Cambodia and Finland has been expressed.

5. CONCLUSIONS

5.1 Relevance Relevance of the project objectives and results to the local context and needs of beneficiaries To what extent child labour is the highest priority in communities varies. Even though child labour is an important child rights issue in all target areas of the project, there are also many other child protection issues, e.g. related to domestic violence and other violence against children including rapes and other sexual abuse, that are monitored by CPGs and that require immediate attention and action by local authorities and communities. Even though the overall objective of the project focuses strongly on child labour, in reality also other kind of child rights abuse cases have been monitored and addressed by the project at the local level. At the same time it is important to note that with regard to child protection priorities the situation in all local contexts evolves on a continuous basis and issues requiring attention and action may change. This could be observed in the example from Koh Kong province where the problem of children dropping out from school in order to work in fishery was reduced through active discussions and problem solving with concerned communities while at the same time children started going to work in garment factories with fake birth certificates. In all target areas the situation of domestic and in the case of Koh Kong also international immigrant children is beyond the reach of CPGs and local authorities. CPGs are currently not able to monitor the situation of immigrant children or take action to ensure their protection from harmful forms of child labour or other child rights abuse. There is no clear information or analysis about the child rights situation of immigrant children in the target areas. Relevance of project activities to problems described in the project plan The project is focusing on mobilizing children, youth and adults (especially local authorities) in communities to monitor, raise awareness on and advocate for child rights, specifically in relation to child labour. In addition to monitoring, awareness raising and advocacy, the actual decrease in child labour would require comprehensive measures in addressing its root causes related to extreme poverty and lack of income in families e.g. through improved social and education services including strengthening of good governance. LICADHO’s strength is in mobilizing and building the capacity of communities and civil society groups in monitoring and advocating for their rights as well as providing direct support to victims through interventions. So far it has had

31  

limited involvement in the development or strengthening of government service delivery that is e.g. due to its main role as an independent human rights organization in Cambodia. The activities and results of the project can’t alone lead to prevention of child labour and its possibilities to protect children involved in child labour are limited. However, the improved monitoring and increased awareness raising and advocacy on these issues are important strategies for stimulating changes in people’s attitudes and behaviors as well as gradually creating pressure for political decision makers and also employers to take more systematic action for protecting children from abuse and especially harmful forms of child labour. Relevance in the context of Finnish and Cambodian development policy The project is fully in line with the Finnish Development Policy Programme approved in February 2012. It is also in line with the national legislation of Cambodia and policies of the Royal Government of Cambodia. At the same time the project is addressing at the local level the concrete gaps in the implementation of the national legislation and policies. At the national level the project has not yet included direct advocacy towards political decision-makers, but the wide local level experience and mobilization of communities can and is planned to be used increasingly in the future for advocating the political decision makers for improved implementation of existing laws, ministerial orders and policies. As part of the project it is also planned to conduct advocacy towards political decision makers for improved national policies and regulations for example in relation to the rights of child domestic workers whose working conditions are currently not regulated by any Ministerial Orders (Prakas). 5.2 Effectiveness Focusing on child and youth CPGs has strengthened considerably the role of children and youth in monitoring and raising awareness on child rights in project areas, even though the problem of youth moving to Phnom Penh for studies and starting their work and family life is a challenge for the effective functioning of youth CPGs.

The new methods used by child and youth CPGs, especially forum theatre, have proved effective in reaching the attention and interest and touching the feelings of wider pubic in communities and creating a channel for open discussion and interaction between CPGs and people in communities. At the same time children and youth have many ideas on new methods that they would like to use and further develop for raising awareness and advocating for child rights.

Piloting on child CPGs participation in Commune Council meetings is a new channel for strengthening the dialogue between children and adults on issues affecting children as well as for ensuring the presence of child rights issues in the agenda of Commune Councils. The pilot has received positive feed-back both from adults and children and child participation in Commune Council meetings is being gradually expanded in the project target areas. At the same time children and youth report about challenges related to negative attitudes of adults towards children, that reflects the long-term nature of and the need for continued support for this kind of attitudinal and behavior change processes.

The limited number of CPGs and CPG members is leaving out many children and youth who would be interested in joining the groups, a factor limiting the effectiveness of the project. At the same time strong focus on children and youth in lower secondary schools and high-schools excludes out-of-school children, working children, children with disabilities and children from other vulnerable or easily marginalized groups who could be interested in participating and who would have different kind of experience and potential to share with CPGs. This limitation is on one hand understandable from the perspective of human resources available for building the capacity of CPGs and the idea of investing in quality rather than quantity when mobilizing children and youth to take action for child rights. However, excluding children and youth who would or could potentially be interested in participating limits the effectiveness and sustainability of the project.

32  

Adult CPGs, namely Commune Council Committees for Women and Children, lack systematic approaches and methods for ensuring intervention preparedness. Except some active individuals these groups are not functioning actively and they take intervention action as child protection new cases are reported to them.

5.3 Efficiency Taking into consideration the delays in the project implementation during the first two years it is still difficult to fully assess the cost efficiency of the project at this stage as such. However, the following conclusions can be made:

Good progress is made in the development of project management and monitoring tools, processes and practices. However, the logical framework included in the project plan is only partly used and the project lacks a meaningful tool that would support the planning and monitoring of the project at the level of outputs, outcomes and impact as well as the linkages between these different levels. At the same time the project lacks a tool for systematically monitoring and assessing the external factors affecting the project.

There are many other organizations working on child rights and child protection in the same geographical areas with LICADHO. Good partnerships and mutual collaboration with other organizations have been developed in most target areas. However, it is not fully known to what extent the project is overlapping with similar projects implemented by other organizations in same areas. Overlapping may in some cases affect negatively the efficiency of the project if similar kinds of investments are made with same communities and people or if similar coordination structures are parallelly established by several NGOs.

Staff turn-over in LICADHO CRO team has caused delays in project implementation and affected negatively the efficiency of the project. At the same time province based staff of LICADHO expresses their concerns on work load and their capacity to regularly meet with CPGs. Repeated feed-back was received also from CPGs during focus group discussions on lack of LICADHO’s presence. The current pace of meeting with CPGs once in two or three months is low for ensuring continuous development of CPGs’ capacities.

5.4 Sustainability The forming of new CPGs is a process lead by LICADHO. As noted above the number of CPG members is limited and accepting new members to CPGs is possible only if an old member resigns. This kind of stability in the membership of a group has its strengths related to the functioning and quality of CPGs work, but at the same time it is a risk for the continuity of the CPG work taking into consideration that especially in high-schools it may happen that almost all CPG members will graduate the same year and leave the group because of studies in Phnom Penh.

Even though CPGs are not considered as part of LICADHO structure, many youth and child CPGs identify themselves being close to LICADHO and sometimes even as part of LICADHO. At the same time there is strong interest among them to continue working independently even without LICADHO’s support and also in forming their own clubs and associations. Many of the CPGs involved in focus group discussions conduct already their own fund-raising and saving activities and expressed their interest in further develop their resource mobilization.

The sustainability of youth CPGs is a challenge. As noted above, many CPG members move to Phnom Penh from provinces for university studies after graduating from high-school or start focusing on work and family life. This is reflected in decrease of youth CPG members compared to the increase in children’s participation. At the same time one element of sustainability can be seen in individuals who have participated in CPGs and continue using the knowledge and skills gained in CPGs in their private and work lives.

The functioning of Adult CPGs slows down in the absence of close follow-up and monitoring by LICADHO staff, even though in most cases (except parent CPGs) the structure is a permanent government structure, namely the Commune Council Sub-Committee for Women and Children. Regular changes in the membership of the Commune Council Sub-

33  

Committee for Women and Children in connection with elections cause a risk for the sustainability of the capacity development of adult CPGs.

The training and other capacity development work is currently fully under the responsibility of LICADHO except two teachers, one in Preah Sihanouk and one in Siem Reap, working as CPG advisors providing support to child CPGs. No training of trainers structures have been established and this has been so far feasible taking into consideration the limited geographical coverage of the project. Even though child rights are seen as politically less sensitive and therefore easier to discuss and address compared to some other human rights issues in Cambodia, the project is affected by the tense political situation with regard to human rights in the country. This is reflected in adults’ concerns in communities related to children’s and youth participation in the work of a human rights NGO and it is also reflected in the practice of requesting permission from local authorities for awareness raising events in communities instead of only notifying them as required by the law. At the national level the political situation has directly affected the project when CPG participation in AGPA events had to be cancelled due to concerns for the safety of children and youth members. However, it can be seen that the project plays an important role in promoting community action and public discussion on child rights and in particular on child labour in this political context. An important element in the prevention of child labour and other child rights abuses is related to changes in attitudes and behaviour, how parents and other adults see and treat children. Even though the project has been able to stimulate discussions and perhaps some changes especially through Forum Theatre it is important to acknowledge the long-term nature of this kind of attitudinal and behaviour change processes and take this into account in the planning of future projects and activities. 5.5 Impact Even though it is still early to assess the actual impact of the project at this stage, some positive impact can be observed in the strong motivation and ownership of child and youth CPGs as well as the positive feed-back from communities to Child and Youth CPGs. The project lacks currently outcome and impact level indicators for measuring progress towards objectives and longer-term impact. The project also includes strong emphasis on attitudinal and behavior change that would require specific attention when developing strategies for assessing impact. 5.6 Youth participation There is genuine ownership and motivation to do and develop further the CPG work in many child and youth CPGs. For children and youth the added value of participating in CPGs is not only related to knowledge and experience on child rights and child labour issues and related monitoring, awareness raising and advocacy, but to large extent also to their personal growth and interaction with other children and youth. The latter aspects are also very important from the perspective of sustainability of CPG work. It is also evident that children and youth have a lot of ideas on how to further develop the work of CPGs and how to make them less dependent of LICADHO. The functioning of child and youth CPGs is currently very dependent on individuals due to limited number of members. In addition, child and youth CPGs involve currently almost only children and youth who study in or have graduated from lower secondary schools or high schools. Participation of working children or children from other vulnerable groups is very limited. These limitations in children’s and youth’s participation in CPGs can be seen as hindering factor for the effectiveness and sustainability of the project in the long run even though it is understandable that the aim in

34  

limiting the membership and the number of children involved has been related to efforts in ensuring the quality of work as well as limited human resources within LICADHO. The sustainability of specifically youth CPGs is a challenge. On one hand specific measures are required to engage youth in activities e.g. in advocacy and capacity building of younger CPGs that they find interesting and useful also for their professional development. On the other hand even though the youth stop participating in CPG activities, it is probable that they will continue paying attention to child rights and child protection in their private and professional lives that can be seen as one important aspect of sustainability. Child and youth CPGs are interested in increasing exchange of information and experiences with children and youth from other provinces. However, so far the possibilities for this kind of exchange have been limited. There have been individual cases where child CPG members have been directly involved in child protection interventions. This kind of involvement includes sometimes child protection risks for CPG members themselves that should be prevented in the future. For this reason it is important that there is a clear understanding among CPGs, local authorities and in communities on children’s and adults’ different roles and responsibilities with regard to child protection. 5.7 Gender This mid-term evaluation could not include a more systematic analysis of the project from gender perspective. However, the following conclusions can be made:

Gender aspects have been taken into consideration to some extent in the formation of CPGs through equal

participation of women and men, girls and boys in the seminars where CPG members have been elected. Also monitoring data on participation in project activities is gender disaggregated. However, gender equality and equity is not reflected in the training or other capacity development of CPGs, even though some staff members have raised gender related issues in their discussions with communities.

With regard to monitoring and analyzing the child rights and specifically child protection related situation in target areas a systematic gender analysis is lacking.

5.8 Cooperation between partners

Both LICADHO and ODW are committed to their partnership and they share the same overall vision of the ongoing collaboration. There is a clear understanding on the share of roles and responsibilities between the partners. Staff changes both in LICADHO and ODW, lack of familiarity with the local context and culture by ODW staff, language issues as well as limited possibilities to have face-to-face discussions have to some extent affected the communication between LICADHO and ODW. However, no clear gaps as such could be identified. There is interest in both sides to expand the collaboration beyond the project especially in relation to linking advocacy efforts in Cambodia and Finland as well as developing meaningful dialogue and collaboration between youth in Cambodia and Finland.

35  

5.9 The cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish development policy programme In order to support the planning of the next phase of the project for which ODW Finland will apply funding from the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs, the mid-term evaluation included analysis on to what extent the project is in line with the three following cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish development policy programme: 1) gender equality, 2) reduction of inequality and 3) climate sustainability. It is important to note that the Finnish development policy programme was approved only after the start of the project and therefore it is not a criteria in evaluating this phase of the project, but the aim of this analysis is to support the planning of the second phase of the project.

1) Gender equality: see conclusions above.

2) Reduction of inequality: • This cross-cutting objective is as such integrated in the human rights work and approach of LICADHO. In

relation to child rights and child protection LICADHO aims at addressing inequalities in the realization of children’s rights in Cambodia through mobilization of communities, monitoring, awareness raising and activities as well as to some extent through direct intervention and support to victims.

• From the perspective of inclusion and involvement of the most vulnerable and easily marginalized groups in the project implementation, new efforts are needed taking into consideration that especially children in CPGs are mostly lower secondary or secondary school students and the youth in CPGs have a similar background.

• As noted above the situation of domestic and international immigrant children in the target areas is not fully known and they are beyond the reach of CPGs.

3) Climate sustainability: • Climate sustainability is not as such a focus area of the project, but some efforts have been made to make for

example the office practices in LICADHO more environment-friendly. • It seems that the causal linkages between natural disasters (mainly floods and drought) and increased

violations of child rights (drop-out from school, child labour, immigration, increased risk of child trafficking etc.) have not been systematically taken into consideration in the situational analysis and monitoring of child rights abuses in the target areas.

6. RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 Relevance

To consider shifting emphasis from child labour towards a more holistic child rights protection approach. Project focus in each target area should be defined based on the local context and priorities. These priorities should be reviewed and as necessary revised on a regular basis. However, it still may be that child labour remains the main focus of activities in many target areas, but the focusing would be made based on the local context.

Specific attention should be paid to the situation of domestic immigrant children and how they could be reached by CPGs in their monitoring, awareness raising, advocacy and intervention activities. Some further study on this issue could be helpful when planning the next phase of the project.

To be clear on the strategic focus of the project on children and youth participation and to clarify to what extent the project aims at building the capacity of local government service delivery.

- Capacity building of youth and child CPGs to monitor and advocate for child rights and child protection effectively should remain in the focus of the project. Collaboration between child and youth CPGs and local authorities should continue to be strengthened.

36  

- The collaboration with adult CPGs, in most cases Commune Council Sub-Committees for Women and Children, needs to be continued. Emphasis should be in strengthening their collaboration with children and youth and providing some focused capacity development e.g. in relation to child protection related legislation. The collaboration with local authorities should focus on commune level and not on the district and provincial level.

6.2 Effectiveness To pilot new methods for awareness raising, advocacy and monitoring with child and youth CPGs (e.g.

debating, videos, mass media, social media). Also in this area a bottom-up approach is recommended and CPGs should be supported in implementing and further developing their own ideas.

To link child and youth CPGs to LICADHO’s new projects on social media. It is good to take advantage of the increased investment in social media in LICADHO and linking this work to child and youth CPGs who are already increasingly using social media in raising awareness on child rights and child labour as well as mobilizing children and youth in this work.

To continue the ongoing expansion of child CPGs’ participation in Commune Council meetings.

To revise the selection process of child CPGs in order to involve more children and youth, also outside secondary schools including drop-out children, working children, children with disabilities and from other vulnerable groups. In this way the project should make possible the participation of children youth already or potentially interested in CPGs but currently left out.

To continue providing targeted capacity building for adult CPGs in project areas, however, priority being on strengthened children’s and youth participation.

6.3 Efficiency The logical framework should be revised to better serve the project as a comprehensive planning, monitoring

and learning tool. Indicators for monitoring the progress towards specific objectives (outcome) and overall objective (impact) should be defined. If logical framework is considered as a too complicated tool, application of a new tool could be considered when planning the next phase of the project.

To conduct a systematic mapping of child rights and child protection related project activities implemented by other organizations in same geographical areas with LICADHO. Based on the results of this mapping decisions should be made how to best minimize unnecessary overlapping and also take advantage of possible synergies.

Staff capacity building should be integrated in the project plan during the current and new phase of the project.

Staff turn-over is to be addressed as part of the overall human resource management of LICADHO.

Efforts should be made to make the support from LICADHO staff to CPGs more frequent. If the project will expand its geographical coverage or the number of children and youth involved will increase, more staff is needed in provinces.

37  

6.4 Sustainability

To provide capacity building for interested child and youth CPGs on how they could manage and mobilize resources for their own work.

Strengthening of the linkages and collaboration of child and youth CPGs with Commune Council and Commune Council Sub-Committee for Women and Children is recommended also from the perspective of sustainability.

If the number of children and youth to be involved in CPG activities will be expanded, a training structure for child and youth CPGs outside LICADHO should be developed. LICADHO’s role should gradually become to provide training for trainers and technical support for trainers and CPGs. In addition to Advisors of child CPGs, also the role of youth CPG members as trainers should be considered. This could be at the same time a strategy for strengthening and lengthening their participation in CPG work and a way to provide them with useful experience also for their personal professional development.

To take into consideration the long-term nature of attitudinal and behavior change processes when planning project activities and the next phase of the project. Community level monitoring that is intended to become a permanent mechanism in target areas is already addressing this need for continued attention on child rights issues. Actual changes in people’s attitudes and behaviors require also continuity and regularity in participatory awareness raising and reflection processes, such as forum theatre.

6.5 Impact

To develop further the project indicators to support measuring progress at the level of outcome and impact (see the above recommendation on the revision of the logical framework).

To consider the use of forum theatre or other participatory and inter-active awareness raising methods for regular monitoring of changes in people’s behavior and attitudes at the community level. Documenting the reactions and feed-back received in this kind of forum could give some useful data for continuous monitoring and analysis on the project impact related to changes in attitudes and behavior in communities.

In the next phase of the project, the overall objective of the project should be made more specific so that the links between the project outcome and the longer-term impact become more clear and easier to monitor and assess. At the same time it is noted that the actual changes in society, community as well as children’s and their families’ lives result from numerous different internal and external factors and the impact of a development project can’t be assessed in isolation, but only within the context of these various factors.

6.6 Youth participation See above noted recommendations on youth participation including:

Revision of the process for electing CPGs and involving more school and out-of-school children and youth as well as children and youth from different vulnerable groups in the work of CPGs.

Strengthening the capacity of interested child and youth CPGs to manage and mobilize resources for CPGs. Piloting new methodologies for awareness raising, advocacy and monitoring using a bottom-up approach. Linking child and youth CPGs to LICADHO’s new projects on social media. Strengthening collaboration of children and youth with local authorities. Considering youth CPG members‘ role as trainers of child CPGs.

38  

In addition: To strengthen exchange and collaboration of youth CPGs with CPGs from other provinces as well as with

other youth movements and trade unions from local to national and international level.

To ensure that there is a clear understanding among child, youth and adult CPGs on their different roles and responsibilities and to monitor that children and youth won’t take actions that include unnecessary risks for them.

If child and youth CPGs involvement in social media will be further developed and expanded, specific child protection guidelines for internet and social media use should be considered in order to protect CPG members and possibly other children in communities including victims of child right abuse from unnecessary child protection related risks.

6.7 Gender

To provide gender training for LICADHO staff involved in the project.

To integrate gender perspective in the training curriculum of CPGs.

To consider conducting a more in depth analysis of the project from the gender perspective.

6.8 Cooperation between partners

Both ODW and LICADHO to continue making efforts in smooth communication and sharing of information and thereby joint learning throughout the project cycle.

To continue discussions on how to strengthen joint advocacy and connecting youth in Cambodia and Finland in a meaningful way. In order to ensure proper resourcing and follow-up it should be considered to integrate this collaboration into the new project plan.

6.9 The cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish development policy programme

1) Gender equality: see gender related recommendations above.

2) Reduction of inequality: See the above recommendation on revision of the process for electing CPGs and involving more school and

out-of-school children and youth as well as children and youth from different vulnerable groups in the work of CPGs.

See the above recommendation on increased attention to the situation of domestic and international immigrant children.

3) Climate sustainability: To strengthen the analysis on and monitoring of causal linkages between natural disasters and increased

violations of child rights in target areas and strengthen this aspect in the awareness raising and advocacy activities and as possible in the intervention preparedness of adult CPGs.

39  

Annex 1: Terms of Reference of the Mid-Term Evaluation  

TERMS OF REFERENCE

MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT “PROMOTING CHILD RIGHTS AND PROTECTING CHILDREN FROM THE WORST FORMS OF CHILD LABOUR IN CAMBODIA“, IMPLEMENTED BY CAMBODIAN LEAGUE FOR THE

PROMOTION AND DEFENCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS (LICADHO) AND FUNDED BY OPERATION A DAY´S WORK (ODW) FINLAND

1. SUBJECT OF THE EVALUATION Operation a Day’s Work Finland (ODW) is a Finnish middle-sized development NGO which finances youth projects in different countries. The operations are based on the 'from youth to youth' concept. In Finland, an important part of the funds are raised by school pupils and students who work for one day and donate their payment to ODW’s projects. At the same time they gain experience, understanding and knowledge about the lives of their peers in the developing world. The aim is to provide young people in Finland with tools for growth towards collective responsibility, tolerance, internationalism and respect for human rights while at the same time promoting the opportunities of youth in developing countries for a more equitable future. ’From youth to youth’ concept continues also in the development cooperation projects in which peer education and active participation of young people is a central approach. ODW and its Cambodian partner organization LICADHO have been working together since 2004 promoting Child Rights. The previous cooperation project carried out during 2004-2009 concentrated in prevention of child trafficking. The present development co-operation project was started in 2011, to promote child rights and to advocate and act against the worst forms of Child Labour in Cambodia. Project activities are being implemented by LICADHO in Phnom Penh and the provinces of Kandal, Koh Kong, Preah Sihanouk and Siam Reap. The activities are planned to be later extended to Kompong Cham and Kompot provinces. Funding for the project comes from the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland (MFA) and Finnish school children through the fundraising campaign “Operation a Day´s Work Finland”. Total project budget in Cambodia has been appr. 407 790 euros for years 2011–2013. The overall goal of the project is to contribute to the implementation of child rights and to protect children from the worst forms of child labour in Cambodia. This is done through:

- promoting awareness of child rights, - mobilising and training local communities: authorities, village leaders, parents and children, - increasing youth participation to act against the worst forms of child labour - contributing to the protection and rehabilitation of victims of the worst forms of child labour, - increasing knowledge, understanding and action among national and local decision-makers, employers and the

general public on child labour and other child rights violations - advocacy and lobbying to create public debate and changes at the political level - enhancing the capacity of LICADHO staff on child rights and child labour issues.

Project partners are currently planning continuation for the cooperation and preparing a second project phase which would begin in 2014. The evaluation is expected to provide valuable information and lessons learnt for the planning of the second phase of the project. 2. PURPOSE OF THE EVALUATION The purpose of this mid-term evaluation is to give an analysis about the project implementation during the first two years, and give recommendations on how to improve or redirect the activities to better further the objectives of the project. The evaluation will be carried out as a facilitated analysis and learning process, facilitated by an external consultant as team leader, but other team members coming from inside LICADHO. The present year is the third and final year of current MFA funding. There is a possibility of applying further funding from the Ministry for a second phase of the project. Deadline for submitting the funding application for MFA is in the end of May 2013. In order to make decisions on a possible extension of the project, more and deeper information on the results, achievements and foreseen impact is needed.

40  

Specific objectives for this mid-term evaluation: 1) Provide an insight into the activities carried out within the project and to evaluate their results in order to

make an analysis about the project performance and to gain deeper understanding on the usefulness of the approaches and methods used in the project.

2) Give an opinion and make recommendations on how to further strengthen child and youth participation in the next phase of the project.

3) Provide information and recommendations for the planned second phase of the project (2014-2015) 4) To look at the cooperation between LICADHO and ODW, in order to give recommendations on how to

further develop and deepen the cooperation within the project monitoring and administration, but also concerning other goals and values shared by LICADHO and ODW.

3. EVALUATION ISSUES The evaluators should take into consideration the evaluation guidelines provided by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland (can be downloaded from: http://www.formin.fi/public/default.aspx?contentid=105900&nodeid=34606&contentlan=1&culture=fi-FI). The evaluation should give an opinion on how successful the project strategy has been and how could it be improved. The evaluation should also give opinion if there are aspects that need to be strengthened in project administration and capacity of LICADHO. The evaluation issues include: 3.1 Relevance: - Are the objectives and results of the project in line with the needs of the beneficiaries and stakeholders? - Are the activities relevant in regard to the development problems described in the project plan? - Is the project relevant in the context of Finnish and Cambodian development policy? 3.2 Effectiveness: - Have the results of the project furthered the overall objective of the project? - Are there any factors that have hindered the objectives to be reached? - Are there objectives and activities that are not achieved or realized and why? - Are there other non-planned activities which have been carried out within the project and have they been relevant to the project purpose? 3.3 Efficiency: - How “cost-efficient” has the project been? - Are the resources used justified by the quality and quantity of the results? - What is the development management performance of the project? 3.4 Sustainability: - How sustainable do the results and impact achieved seem at this phase? Different aspects of sustainability (economic, financial, technical, socio-cultural, institutional, political, ecological) should be taken into consideration. 3.5 Impact: - What has happened or is likely to happen because of the project? - Are there any visible changes that are likely to lead to the overall objective after having reached the project objectives? - What kind of changes has already been brought about by the project, intended and unintended, short term and long term, positive and negative? - What is the impact/significance of the project on the participant youth (girls and boys)? 3.6. The youth participation: - How the project has activated and mobilised children and young people to promote the child rights? - How to further promote their activism and genuine participation in the future stages of the project? 3.7. Cooperation between partners - How has the collaboration between LICADHO and ODW worked out? - Do the project partners share common views on project objectives and methods? - Are there notable gaps or weaknesses in communication, reporting and information sharing? - How to strengthen the cooperation and further other goals and values shared by LICADHO and ODW (Human Rights work in a wider sense), besides the project objectives?

41  

3.8 Gender: - How gender-sensitive the project has been? - How well has gender been taken into consideration in the planning and implementation of the activities? - Have the project activities and implementation structures promoted gender equality? 3.9. The cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish Development Policy Programme: - How to consider the cross-cutting objectives of the Finnish Development Policy Programme in planning the second phase of the project? - The cross-cutting objectives of the current programme are: 1) Gender equality 2) Reduction of inequality 3) Climate sustainability In addition to the evaluation issues listed below, the evaluators are free to evaluate any other issues which they consider relevant for the evaluation of the project. The evaluation issues and both organizations’ expectations can be discussed more clearly with both ODW and LICADHO before starting the process. 4. METHODOLOGY The evaluation includes desk study of project documents, reports and background materials as well as field work. Before the field work evaluators should present a methodological plan (informal) and discuss about it with LICADHO CRO staff and the Programme Officer of ODW. Participatory methods should be used in the evaluation process to maximize the involvement and ownership of the young people who participate in LICADHO’s youth and child protection groups (YPGs and CPGs). 5. EVALUATION TEAM The evaluation team consists of the team leader and two team members, out of which at least one is from Cambodia or has been living there for long time. The team leader will be chosen by ODW and LICADHO. The team members are chosen by LICADHO. The division of duties between the evaluators will be defined in an evaluation / methodological plan before beginning the field work. The team leader acts as a facilitator for the process and carries the final responsibility of planning the methodology and writing the evaluation report. A written agreement will be made separately between the team leader and ODW. Requirements for the team leader:

- Experience in evaluating development projects - Experience/knowledge in the following areas: working with CSO, human rights and rights based approach,

community mobilization, child labour issues, child rights and youth participation - Work experience with foreign donor organizations in Cambodia - Understanding of the Finnish development policy and MFA requirements for NGO projects - Good communication and writing skills - Able to work in Khmer (at least understanding and basic speaking) and English (written and spoken) languages - Experience working with local organizations in Cambodia, including field work

Requirements for team members:

- Experience in NGO/CSO work in Cambodia - Involvement in LICADHO by work or volunteering - Experience of working with children/youth - Knowledge about child rights and child labour issues - knowledge of the principles of implementation of NGO development projects - Good communication and writing skills in English and Khmeer languages

The contact person and coordinator of the evaluation in ODW Finland will be Programme Officer Veera Blomster, veera.blomster@taksvarkki.fi (tel: +358 50 4953 778). 6. TIMETABLE AND REPORTING The field work (approximately 15 days) will be carried out in March 2013. In addition, there will be a few days of desk work both before and after the field trip. A wrap-up meeting after the field work should be carried out in Phnom Penh due 26th of March, in order to discuss the preliminary findings and recommendations with LICADHO project staff and a

42  

representative of Taksvarkki ry. Total number of working days of each evaluator for the evaluation assignment will be appr. 20-25 days. The draft report should be sent to ODW and LICADHO as soon as possible after the field work. Project partners will give their comments during the wrap-up meeting, and after receiving the draft version of the evaluation report, after which a final report will be written. Final evaluation report should be ready 22th of April 2013. The report shall contain, at least, the following parts: summary, introduction, methodology, findings, conclusions and recommendations. The report will be written in English, but a briefing especially about the findings, conclusions and recommendations should also been written in Khmer. The report will be sent to ODW and to LICADHO electronically.

43  

Annex 2: Evaluation schedule

Time Task

11 March Start-up meeting at LICADHO office

12 March Preparation in PNP and interview of CRO Coordinator

13 - 15 March Preah Sihanouk: 4 focus group discussions and interviews of CR Advocate and two partners

16-17 March Phnom Penh / Kandal: 4 focus group discussions and interview of Senior CR Advocate

18-21 March Siem Reap: 4 focus group discussions and interviews of CR Advocate and two partners

22 March Interviews of LICADHO Director and two partners in Phnom Penh

23 March Evaluation team works on draf conclusions and recommendations in LICADHO office

24 March Interview of CR Advocate from Koh Kong

25 March Mid-Term Evaluation Workshop in LICADHO Office

26 March Evaluation team reviewed and revised conclusions and recommendations based on feed-back from workshop participants.

1 April Submission of the draft mid-term evaluation report for comments

44  

Annex 3: List of conducted interviews

Time Task

12 March Mr. Kong Socheat, CRO Coordinator, LICADHO

13 March Mr. Bull Porn, CR Advocate, Preah Sihanouk, LICADHO

15 March Ms. Heng Som Eun, Deputy Director of Provincial Department of Social Affairs and ASPECA (Enfants d’Asie) staff

Director and Staff of Fountain of Life Centre, Krong Sihanouk

16 March Ms. Reth Channeav, Senior CR Advocate, LICADHO

18 March Mr. Men Kimsour, CR Advocate, Siem Reap, LICADHO

21 March Mr. Ream Saroth, project vice-director, Friends, Siem Reap

Ms. Chhum Sarany, Siem Reap Regional Manager, Cambodian Women’s Crisis Center, Siem Reap

22 March Ms. Naly Pilorge, Director, LICADHO

Mr. Ou Rey, Advocacy Facilitator, CCYMCR

Ms. Kong Angkeavoleak, Senior Child Participation Officer, NGOCRC

Mr. Meas Samnang, Secretary General, NGOCRC

23 March Ms. Meng Ly, CR Advocate, Koh Kong, LICADHO