Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Welcome to the PSEA mini wiki at Scratchpad!
You can use the box below to create new pages for this mini-wiki. Make sure you type
[[Category:PSEA]] on the page before you save it to make it part of the PSEA wiki (preload can be enabled to automate this task, by clicking this link and saving that page. Afterwards, you may need to purge this page, if you still see this message).
[TO CONSORTIUM: (1) The call is for protection training for humanitarian professionals including government. (2) Below is the format we need to fill in. For now we can leave the instructions for our reference while drafting. Jane will remove the instructions when we're done. (3) Also see the previous proposal which is at the end of this doc.]
1. Executive Summary
International Rescue Committee Kenya (IRC) The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Kenya (UNHCR) FilmAid International (FAI) CARE Kenya (CARE)
PREVENTING SEXUAL EXPLOITATION AND ABUSE IN UGANDA, TANZANIA, ETHIOPIA AND SOUTHERN SUDAN
Presented to: Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (BPRM) Date of Submission: 13 APRIL 2007
Lead Implementing Agency International Rescue Committee Jumuia Place Lenana Road P.O. Box 62727, Nairobi, KENYA Contact: Kellie Leeson, Country Director Telephone: (254-20) 271-9237 Fax: (254-20) 271-7763 Email: Kellie.Leeson@kenya.theirc.org
Agency Headquarters International Rescue Committee 122 E. 42nd Street New York, NY 10168-1289 Contact:
Project Goal: To prevent the sexual exploitation and abuse of beneficiaries in Uganda, Tanzania, Ethiopia and Southern Sudan.
Project Expected Results:
Increased Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse awareness among humanitarian agencies and Government Ministries/Departments in the target countries.
Strengthened capacity of humanitarian agencies and Governments in the target countries to come up with a strong and coordinated Sexual Exploitation and Abuse prevention and response strategy.
Project Beneficiaries Project Locations Project Duration:01 August 2007 – 31st July 2008 (12 months)
Number and description of beneficiaries Proposed period of activity: 01 August 2007 - 31st July 2008
Total dollar amount of project – include a breakdown of the dollar amount requested from PRM, the dollar amount provided through other sources, and the dollar amount of any in-kind contributions Budget summary
Brief project description – in one succinct paragraph, describe the problem and how it will be addressed. Also state the goal, expected results and intended impact of the project
2. Problem Analysis This section should provide the rationale and justification for the proposal as follows: A. Background Describe the anticipated and/or known elements of the humanitarian emergency and/or problem, but only as they relate to the proposed project. Do not provide a general description of the humanitarian situation.
Sexual exploitation and abuse can occur in any refugee setting where beneficiaries are vulnerable and rely on external parties to provide assistance and protection. A UNHCR/Save the Children-UK assessment mission to West Africa in 2001 clearly demonstrated that those who have been mandated to provide this assistance and protection can themselves become the perpetrators of exploitation and abuse of those they have been entrusted to serve. For the last two and a half years, the Kenya PSEA Consortium, comprising of the International Rescue Committee (IRC), CARE Kenya, FilmAid International (FAI) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), has been implementing the Prevention of Sexual Exploitation and Abuse Program with funding from the BPRM. The project also involves other agencies implementing programmes with refugees in Kenya under the auspices of UNHCR and the Government of Kenya. The project’s collaborative approach within Kenya has been complemented by global initiatives, such as the PRM funded Building Safer Organizations (BSO) project formerly managed by International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA), but now under HAP International. The program has also drawn on materials and tools developed in other country missions. For example, the standards of accountability to the community and beneficiaries developed in Sierra Leone for all humanitarian and development workers were field tested and adapted in Kenya. The first phase of the PSEA project in Kenya largely targeted humanitarian workers and focused on response mechanisms. The second phase continued to reinforce these interventions in Kenya, but also focused on how to engage and empower the beneficiaries to be agents in their own protection. The third and final phase, which ends in July 2007, has taken a three pronged approach. The first is continued awareness-raising amongst Kenyan refugee populations and aid workers. The second is expansion of the program to other countries in the region by providing PSEA training and support. The third is Kenyan police advocacy, which the consortium has been implementing with a local NGO. The expansion to the regional level was first conceived out of a need to train those who will be dealing with repatriation and reintegration of refugees. However, the reality on the ground has been that, in the countries in which the consortium has conducted trainings, the agencies involved in humanitarian assistance to refugees also work with returnees, internally displaced persons (IDPs) and the local community. To successfully mainstream PSEA in these agencies it is necessary to adapt our tools to address the needs of humanitarian aid beneficiaries in general. The Kenya PSEA consortium has conducted trainings in Uganda, Tanzania, Somalia and South Sudan, with the final training scheduled to take place in Ethiopia at the end of April, 2007. Due to limited or lack of PSEA awareness among non-specialists, the trainings have focused on general protection issues based on the materials developed under the Kenya PSEA program, to enable agencies outside Kenya to create and implement their own PSEA programs. During the trainings, the lessons learnt in the course of implementation of the Kenya Program have been shared with the trainees as have the CDs containing the Kenya materials and three short PSEA movies which have proven relevant outside the Kenyan setting. The consortium has also undertaken to offer technical support to the trainees as they come up with their own country-specific initiatives. The regional trainings have brought to light the dire need for further PSEA training in the region. Whether Sexual Exploitation and Abuse is a serious concern in the four countries in which the consortium has carried out trainings is not in question. Feedback received from the trainees has pointed to the need for technical support in the development of inter-agency initiatives similar to those of Kenya. It has also become clearly evident that, although refugees will be the majority of the beneficiaries of this project, the regional trainings need to recognize that agencies working with refugees also have departments and programs for non-refugees who should equally be protected from SEA.
B. Analysis Provide a synthesis of assessments or other descriptive and analytical efforts that have been conducted to determine the nature of the problem. Indicate dates, sources of information, and describe the most critical needs, vulnerabilities, or capacities that were identified.
In September 2006, the Kenya PSEA consortium conducted two Training of Trainers (TOT) sessions in Uganda, bringing together a total of 45 participants. The trainings were carried out in two locations, Ikafe, a Refugee Settlement, and Lira, an IDP setting. The participants were very enthusiastic about the effort by the Kenya PSEA consortium, saying that it corresponded well with the need to address the potentially fertile ground for Sexual Exploitation and Abuse during an impending repatriation of IDPs. Participants strongly recommended more training within the IRC IDP/Refugee Program as well as facilitation to create an interagency initiative in order to involve more agencies, since the participants for the two trainings were mainly drawn from IRC. The Tanzania TOT was conducted in November, 2006 in two locations, Kibondo and Kasulu areas, of the Tanzania Refugee Program. The two locations host four refugee camps each, with the former having a population of 59,771 and the latter, 124,049 refugees. The two trainings brought together a total of 43 participants drawn from various agencies working within the Tanzania Refugee Program. The recommendations from the two locations called for more trainings to be conducted, allocation of more time for the trainings in order to have comprehensive coverage, support on development of training materials, refresher courses, and access to tools that can be adapted to benefit a wider audience. The third country to benefit from a PSEA TOT was Somaliland in February, 2007. This training was requested for and funded by the Danish Refugee Council. The population of Somaliland is mainly composed of people from Somaliland who have returned from various parts of Somalia when war broke out, as well as others who have returned from the Diaspora. The training brought together 28 participants drawn from five different agencies. PSEA was a relatively new concept to most of the participants. At the end of the training, agencies that had not already adopted a code of conduct committed to prioritizing the development of one, while those that had already adopted a code undertook to carry out PSEA awareness-raising among their staff. All the trainees emphasized the need for techical support as they try to develop complaint and reporting mechanisms/procedures for their respective agencies. The participants also appealed to the consortium to bring heads of agencies on board as the only way of forging an inter-agency collaboration. The fourth regional TOT was held in Southern Sudan in March, 2007.The training brought together 17 participants, drawn from a variety of sectors within different agencies and Government Ministries/Departments. The sectors from which participants were drawn included community services, protection, gender, education, monitoring and evaluation, human rights, rule of law, human resources, capacity building, youth affairs, indigenous culture and administration. The trainees expressed the hope that more trainings could be carried out in other locations in Southern Sudan. They have also requested for the Kenya PSEA consortium to offer technical support in the development of tools like the Code of Conduct and Inter-Agency Protocols. The Ethiopia training will take place in Addis Ababa in April, 2007. The training will be targeting 25 participants, drawn mainly from the agencies which are working with refugees. Similar to the other regional trainings, the participants will be at the manager or coordinator level so that they can pass on what they will learn to their staff and other stakeholders. In all the countries that the Kenya PSEA consortium has conducted trainings to date, one of the requests for support in has been on the development of an inter-agency initiative. There was general consensus that no single agency would be sufficient by itself in developing comprehensive prevention and response mechanisms on issues of PSEA. There is need for a synergistic approach with interagency liaisons and collaboration--thus the need for technical support from the Kenya PSEA Consortium. The participants expressed a desire to develop their own country-specific Codes of Conduct, Inter Agency Protocols and complaint and reporting mechanisms in addition to other PSEA IEC materials. While the current program has made a commendable start in this direction, our experience indicates that, in addition to targeting program managers and human resource managers, there is a need to generate political will among the most senior agency representatives.
Challenges & Constraints
The consortium has encountered a number of challenges in the process of expanding the program to the regional level. One challenge has been the different base-levels of familiarity with concepts of PSEA in the various locations. In Uganda and Tanzania, the IRC staff members were relatively well versed with basic PSEA concepts while those from other agencies had very limited or no awareness at all. This made it necessary to include some very basic concepts in the training to bring everybody to the same knowledge level. However, this also meant that two days did not provide enough time to cover all the topics comprehensively. In South Sudan, 90% of the participants had no PSEA awareness, which again made it necessary to start the training from the basics. Given the limited knowledge of PSEA, tt was not possible to begin discussing the issue of mainstreaming PSEA into agencies’ programs and operations or talk about inter-agency initiatives in concrete terms. At the end of all the trainings, the participants cited time constraint as a major challenge. To address this issue of varying levels of base-knowledge about PSEA concepts, a comprehensive selection criteria will be developed to ensure that the participants are more or less at the same level. For the TOTs, it is proposed that the target be middle level staff, preferably program managers. These are the people who will then be able to pass on what they have learnt to other staff members as well as other stakeholders. The Heads of Agencies and Government Ministries/Departments will then then be brought together in a one-day strategic workshop to be given an overview of PSEA and discuss the development of inter-agency initiatives. The trainings already carried out have demonstrated that it is not possible to comprehensively cover the PSEA curriculum in a few days. At least a week is required in each location to equip the trainees with skills to conduct PSEA trainings. It is therefore proposed that a five day TOT be conducted in each of the four countries.
C. Profile of the Target Population At-risk populations should be qualified by number, current location, health status, length of time in country of first asylum, percentage of beneficiaries who are refugees, IDPs, returnees, etc., demographic characteristics including gender, age, and ethnicity (where political circumstances allow), and any other unique or germane factors distinguishing the population. Please explain, where appropriate, the relationships between direct and indirect beneficiaries. If possible, please use the most recent data and cite sources.
PRM understands that many NGO projects will focus on mixed communities composed of refugees (or returnees), IDPs and members of the local populations. Nevertheless, PRM funding must demonstrate that refugees, returnees and/or displaced persons (the latter in areas where PRM’s IO partners play a lead role) constitute at least 50% of their beneficiary population.
This project targets four countries, namely Uganda, Tanzania, Ethiopia and Southern Sudan. These are countries that have suffered the effects of civil war either within their own boundaries or by being home to refugees fleeing war from their home countries.
Uganda, particularly in the north, has witnessed many years of civil war with intermittent ceasefires. This has resulted in thousands of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs). Lira, one of the locations where the Kenya PSEA consortium carried out a regional training, is a pre-dominantly IDP setting. In addition, Uganda houses many refugees from Sudan, especially in the Ikafe area, the other location where a PSEA training was conducted in that country.
Tanzania has offered solace to refugees from Rwanda, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of Congo for many years, while Ethiopia has been home to refugees from Sudan and Somalia. In addition, Ethiopia itself has witnessed years of civil war, mainly between the government and the Oromo Liberation Front, giving rise to many refugees and IDPs.
The main beneficiaries of this project will therefore be refugees, returnees and IDPs. However, since these groups of people do not live in isolation, local communities will also benefit from the program, indirectly. The PSEA consortium will not directly train the refugees, returnees and local communities but it is envisaged that the trainees who will benefit from the TOTs will train these categories of people. Through replication, it is hoped that those trained by the consortium will be able to increase the pool of people who have PSEA awareness, including, but not limited to, law enforcement agents, government officers, teachers, religious leaders, the beneficiaries themselves and the general community.
In each of the four countries, there will be three sets of main activities. The first will be a five day training of trainers, which will target middle level program staff in humanitarian settings, drawn from sectors such as gender, protection, children's rights and women's rights among others. The workshop will be on general protection issues and the nuts and bolts of protocols, mainstreaming, and interagency network building.
The second activity will be a one day (?) strategic workshop, bringing together the Heads of Agencies and government Ministries/Departments to sensitize them on PSEA. The conference will aim to generate political will and build consensus that PSEA is an issue of great concern that requires concerted efforts of all stakeholders in order to be to addressed. It is hoped that, among other results, the conference will facilitate strategic discussions on the development of inter-agency collaborations and initiatives.
For purposes of the TOTs and the strategic workshops, particularly the former, it would help to have support on the ground in each target country. The consortium therefore proposes hiring a consultant who will be overseeing the implementation of the program activities in each of the countries under the supervision of the consortium.
The third activity will be an information dissemination strategy in the target countries and beyond. A mapping exercise will be carried out to establish what tools and materials are in existence in the various countries. This strategy will aim at creating sharing mechanisms to widely disseminate existing tools and materials. Tools and materials from other countries, such as Sierra Leone and Liberia, will also be collected and disseminated. An interactive website will be created where these materials will be posted and those interested can access them. At the same time, an online discussion on PSEA will be facilitated. The website will facilitate response to questions on PSEA through a Frequently Asked Questions section. In addition, the Kenya consortium will also be responding directly to questions from the target countries and possibly other regions.
At the end of the project, a lessons learnt workshop will be held in Nairobi, bringing together Regional Heads of Agency. This will facilitate a sharing of experiences, successes, challenges and lessons learnt in all the countries as well as a mapping of the way forward.
D. Need Show how this proposal fills a gap in UNHCR or another IO’s coverage of the beneficiary population.
The regional trainings that the Kenya PSEA consortium has carried out so far have revealed that there is a major lack of PSEA awareness. In all the targeted countries, just like in Kenya, gender contructs and stereotyping, religion as well as culture are the main factors which perpetuate SEA specifically and gender based violence generally. Although men and boys are in some cases subjected to SEA, women and girls bear a disproportionate brunt. Most African communities have accepted most forms of SEA as a normal way of life since they are condoned and even encouraged by their traditional beliefs and practices. The patriarchal nature of most African communities, with the attendant power imbalances between men and women, also reinforces this status quo.
If SEA is condoned and even accepted in times of “peace”, the situation gets worse in emergency situations. When dealing with people who have been uprooted from their normal lives and who depend on external sources for their every need, the level of vulnerability to SEA increase significantly. The power to determine where the next meal comes from, whether there is a roof over one's head or to give access to medical services lies in the hands of others, usually men. Women and girls who feel there is no other option will therefore give their bodies or even offer their daughters in return for these basic needs.
The trainees from all the four countries in which the regional trainings have been conducted have expressed the need for such trainings to reach wider populations and more locations. Since the consortium is not able to reach all the areas and people who need awareness, the only way to ensure that as many people are reached as possible is to train trainers. The two-day trainings conducted thus far have only managed to raise awareness. Training of trainders workshops of a minimum duration of five days are necessary in each country to enable the trainees take the training to other relevant parties. It is also necessary that political will is generated to support PSEA issues. It has been apparent from the Kenyan experience that without support from the heads of agencies very little can be achieved. It will, for example, be impossible for the trainees to implement what they have learnt or for any form of inter-agency initiative to be developed without the involvement of heads of agencies. It is therefore important to lobby for their support through a strategic workshop.
3. Program Goals and Objectives A. Program Goal: To prevent Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in the target countries.
Objective 1: To raise awareness among Heads of Agencies and senior government officials in the target countries on the need for an inter-agency PSEA initiative.
Objective 2: To build the capacity of middle level management in UN agencies, NGOs and government in the target countries to come up with a strong and coordinated SEA prevention strategy.
Objective 3: To develop an information dissemination strategy for the target countries and beyond.
Objective 1: To raise awareness among Heads of Agencies and senior government officials in the target countries on the need for an inter-agency PSEA initiative.
Input indicator - One strategic workshop for 10 Heads of Agencies/Senior officials held in each country Output indicator - Existing tools shared with 100% participants in Heads/Senior workshop in each country. Impact indicator - Awareness raised among 10 participants
Objective 2: To build the capacity on PSEA of program and human resource managers in UN agencies, NGOs and government in the target countries.
Input indicator - 4 TOTs target 80 managers in the target countries. Output indicator - Existing tools and information dessimination materials distributed to 100% of trainees. Impact indicator - Capacity increased among 80 participants and materials disseminated in target countries.
Objective 3: To develop a public online management information system in for the target countries and beyond.
Input indicator - public online management information system established Output indicators - Existing tools and other dissemination materials from Kenya posted on the web site. Online discussion forum started. Mapping exercise carried out in 4 target countries. Tools from other countries/regions collected and posted on the web site. Impact indicator - Increase in use of online discussion forum. Tools and materials accessed by online beneficiaries.
4. Program Description This is the core of a proposal. It should clearly and concisely outline the implementation plan for each objective including those elements described below, as appropriate. It should reflect a thorough understanding of the problem described in Section 2.
A. Implementation Plan. For each objective, provide a detailed implementation plan. Identify the targeted population. Describe any goods and services to be provided, and the standard of delivery used (i.e. Sphere). If the standard of delivery differs from an accepted international standard, provide justification for the variance.
Objective 1: To raise awareness on PSEA, generate political will and build consensus among senior officials (Heads of Agencies) in the target countries on the need for an inter-agency PSEA initiative.
For any form of inter-agency initiative to take place, the heads of agencies must be brought on board. One strategic workshop, bringing the heads of agencies together, will be held in each of the target countries. For the heads of agencies to agree to attend such a workshop, it might be necessary for fellow heads of agencies from the consortium members to engage their counterparts. Once they agree to attend the workshop, the tools developed in the Kenyan Program, especially the inter agency protocols will be shared with them in order to encourage a discussion about developing their own inter-agency initiative.
Objective 2: To build the capacity of middle level management in the agencies in the target countries in order to develop a strong and coordinated SEA prevention strategy.
The consortium will conduct one TOT in each of the four target countries, targeting 20 mid-level management staff per workshop. The TOTs will cover concepts such as protection, gender, power and violence, enabling participants to understand the dynamics involved in the sexual exploitation and abuse of beneficiaries perpetrated by aid workers and other service providers. The TOTs will also have a facilitation skill-building session to equip the trainees with expertise to conduct PSEA trainings. In the course of the workshop, materials and tools developed by the Kenya Program and those adopted from other countries, such as Sierra Leone, will be shared for the trainees to utilize or provide a model from which they can develop their own.
According to the settings and the population distributions of the specific localities, materials, including the PSEA films and facilitation manual, will be translated into the relevant local languages. These will include Amharic (Ethiopia), Acholi (Uganda), Arabic (Sudan) and French/Kinyarwanda (Tanzania). These materials will then be distributed to all of the trainees in the four countries.
Objective 3 - To develop an information dissemination strategy for the target countries and beyond.
An interactive website will be set up. It will be an open website, available to anyone with an internet connection. The general public will have "read only" rights, while the consortium members will have a password enabling them to add, remove or edit the material on the website. All the existing informational materials and training tools will be posted on the website. In addition, in order to share best practices, tools and materials will be collected from other countries and also posted on the site. To facilitate this, a mapping exercise will be carried out to establish what tools are in place elsewhere. An online discussion forum and a Frequently Asked Questions section will also be developed and included.
B. Suggested Elements 1. Context-Specific Programming Ensure that the proposal reflects an understanding of the characteristics of a particular humanitarian emergency.
2. Beneficiary Interaction and Capacity Building Explain how the activity enhances the existing capacities of the beneficiary population. Indicate how the program supports traditional coping mechanisms and involves the targeted population in its design and implementation.
3. Coordination Efforts Indicate if this program is part of a larger country program or if it will stand alone. Describe how the program fits into the broader country program, if applicable. Explain efforts to coordinate with UNHCR and other international organizations or NGOs to prevent overlap and duplication. Explain how the program will interface with and complement these programs, as applicable.
Describe what other NGOs and international organizations are doing in the same region. Identify any links between their programs and yours, and explain how your activities are coordinated.
Describe the proposed program’s possible regional (cross-border) implications.
In Kenya, UNHCR is a part of the PSEA Consortium, and it is desirable to build on this good practice of bringing UN agencies and NGOs together in developing a common agenda to prevent and respond to sexual exploitation and abuse. The UNHCR Branch Office for Kenya will continue to support the regional project by participating in the Consortium's elaboration of the project, giving technical support, and providing qualified trainers who can share the experience of UN/NGO collaboration in PSEA. Furthermore, the UNHCR Regional Services Hub based in Nairobi will also engage in this project, helping in the proper identification of persons for training in the region and in providing technical support to strengthen the adaptation of the PSEA work to conditions prevailing in other countries in the region.
4. Local Awareness List the precise locations – including camps, provinces, districts, and villages – in which you are proposing to provide assistance. If the locations are not yet known, please explain how the sites will be chosen.
The proposal should also explain how the NGO will draw upon and support traditional coping mechanisms and involve the targeted population in its design and implementation. Why is the program appropriate to the target population? What efforts are being made to ensure buy-in from the beneficiary population and the host community? Are there some appropriate types of assistance that can be provided to host populations in addition to refugees?
There are about 250,300 refugees in Uganda, from Sudan (213,000), Congo (20,900), Somalia (16,400). In addition, there are about 1,784,500 IDPs. The refugees are mainly in Ikafe …camps while the IDPs are mainly concentrated in Lira…..
There are numerous refugee camps in Tanzania most of which are located in UN camps in the Kigoma and Kagera regions in the western part of Tanzania. These camps hold about 545,900 refugees mostly from Burundi (393,000), Congo (150,100) and Somalia (2,800). There are also about 5,400 IDPs mainly located in …..
Ethiopia is home to about 240,100 refugees from Sudan (213,000), Eritrea (10,700) and Somalia (16,400). There are also about 150,000-200,000 IDPs mainly located in…..
Source: U.S committee for Refugees and Immigrants 2006
(Looking for more info on the locations of the camps, IDP settlements, agencies on the ground as well as returnees.He is also loking for information on Southern Sudan. Abby also said she was working on this section)
5. Transition Strategy Since PRM provides grants for a maximum of one year, where appropriate (e.g. return and reintegration situations), NGOs should explain how their projects will be concluded, handed over to another organization, or financed by other means after PRM funding ends.
PRM will prioritize NGO proposals that show evidence of coordination with development organizations and that demonstrate transition strategy.
5. Codes of Conduct Proposals must include a copy of the NGO’s Codes of Conduct (which should be consistent with the IASC’s six core principles), and a discussion of how the codes of conduct will be reflected in project implementation.
PRM encourages NGO partners to attach a separate document or include a narrative with the organization's procedures for responding to allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse of beneficiaries by staff. If you do not yet have a plan or procedures in place, please to contact the Bureau for information on contacts and resources.
6. Management and Security A. Program Management Provide details on the following areas of the program’s management:
Describe the organization’s management structure and how it will be used to achieve the stated objectives. Provide examples of past performance that demonstrate the organization’s success in implementing similar programs. B. Security Describe the current security situation in the region of the program’s operation.
Provide details on the organization’s ability to achieve program objectives given the current level of insecurity (if applicable). Describe how the program would respond to a deterioration of the security situation. Identify indicators that will be used to assess when program objectives cannot be met, and when the program would be suspended, due to security concerns. State whether your organization and its Board of Directors have adopted the InterAction Security Planning Guidelines. If not, explain.
7. Monitoring and Performance Measurement A. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan Describe your monitoring and evaluation plan. Include, at a minimum, the following elements in the description:
A timeline to help PRM track the program’s progress. Indicators and details on how they will be measured, including frequency of the measurements, units of measure, dates when indicators will be met, etc. Monitoring and evaluation tools such as clinic records, rapid assessment surveys, site visits, key stakeholder interviews, focus group discussions, interview logs, timelines, progress reports, etc. Organizations that recently received PRM funding should also include an assessment of their programs’ success in meeting their goals and objectives with an up-to-date, cumulative progress report against indicators as outlined in the cooperative agreement. Organizations should describe problems they encountered and explain how they were addressed. B. Performance Measurement Establish, where possible, performance baseline data and expected performance targets for each objective, by which indicators are used to measure progress and assess impact.
8. Budget A budget summary should include major categories, such as personnel, fringe benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual, other direct costs, and indirect cost. Also, include a detailed budget that is broken down by each objective of the proposed program. Where possible, indicate budget lines by sector of activity. Staffing and office needs often cannot be easily allotted to specific objectives/sectors and can be given for the whole program, if more appropriate. Be sure the budget also includes a breakdown of the dollar amount requested from PRM, the dollar amount(s) anticipated or received from other sources (including your own organization and other donors) and the dollar amount of any in-kind contributions. Indicate clearly the funding source for each activity. The proposal must include a budget narrative with sufficient details by sector and activity. Identify subgrantees, if applicable, and in the case of health/family planning activities, indicate whether those subgrantees are foreign-based.
9. Administrative Requirements All submissions must include the following:
Original proposal Copy of the organization’s U.S. Government Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (NICRA), if applicable Completed SF-424 Version 02 (Application for Federal Assistance) Completed budget summary and detail along with a budget narrative Information in support of any cost-sharing/cost-matching arrangements Information detailing the source of any in-kind contributions Details on any sub-agreements associated with the program (should be part of the budget submission as noted above) Copy of the organization’s Code of Conduct, which should be consistent with the IASC’s six core principles
[BELOW IS PREVIOUS PROPOSAL FOR CURRENT PROGRAM YEAR]
2. PROBLEM ANALYSIS A. Background Sexual exploitation and abuse can occur in any refugee setting where beneficiaries are vulnerable and rely on external parties to provide assistance and protection. As the UNHCR/Save the Children-UK assessment mission to West Africa in 2001 clearly demonstrated, those who have been mandated to provide this assistance and protection can themselves become the perpetrators of exploitation and abuse of those they have been entrusted to serve.
For over one year, from 2002-2003, all UNHCR Implementing and Operational Partners (IP/OP) in Kenya collaborated to develop a joint Code of Conduct for Humanitarian Workers in the Kenya Refugee Program (Kenya Code) establishing a shared set of ethical standards of employee conduct as a first inter-agency step towards preventing the sexual exploitation and abuse of refugees in Kenya. In October 2003, 15 UN, Intergovernmental, international and national humanitarian agencies, in the presence of the Government of Kenya (GOK), agreed to adopt and implement the Kenya Code. In November 2003, the IRC’s Prevention of Exploitation and Abuse Advisor visited Kenya and assisted all signatory partners to the Kenya Code in the development of a Joint Action Plan for Preventing Exploitation and Abuse (Joint Plan).
A second inter-agency step towards preventing sexual exploitation and abuse of refugees in Kenya was the development of the project: Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse in the Kenya Refugee Program (SPRMCO04CA102). This Project was funded for the period August 1, 2004 – July 31, 2005 and then from August 1, 2005 – July 31, 2006 by the Bureau for Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM) to support implementation of the Kenya Code and to strengthen complementary programmatic and operational initiatives to prevent and respond to cases of sexual exploitation and abuse of beneficiaries perpetrated by agency staff members in Kenya.
The project is a formal collaboration between International Rescue Committee (IRC), CARE Kenya, FilmAid International (FAI) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The project also directly involves other agencies implementing programmes with refugees in Kenya under the auspices of UNHCR and the Government of Kenya, namely African Rehabilitation and Education Program (AREP), African Refugee Training and Employment Services (ARTES), Don Bosco, Deutsche Geselleschaft fur Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Handicap International, HIAS Refugee Trust of Kenya, International Organization for Migration (IOM), Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS), Joint Voluntary Agency (JVA), Kenya Red Cross Society, Lutheran World Federation (LWF), Nairobi Archdiocese Refugee Assistance Program (NARAP), National Christian Council of Kenya (NCCK), Refugee Consortium of Kenya (RCK), United Nations Children Education Fund (UNICEF), Windle Trust Kenya, World Food Program (WFP) and World Vision International. The project’s collaborative approach within Kenya is complemented by global initiatives, such as the International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA) PRM-funded “Building Safer Organizations” project and draws on materials and tools developed in other country missions (e.g. Sierra Leone), with a view to testing them in the Kenya context.
This proposal is designed to be the third phase of the current PRM funded project, and will build on the current project’s achievements. The first phase of the project largely targeted humanitarian workers and focused on response mechanisms. The second phase continued to reinforce these interventions, but also had a greater focus on how to engage and empower the beneficiaries to be agents in their own protection. Activities included: drafting and signing the Inter-agency protocols on investigation procedures for cases of sexual exploitation and abuse within the signatory humanitarian organizations; additional training; implementation of mainstreaming plans; and capacity building to effectively disseminate information.
The third phase of the project has three objectives. (1) First, based on the materials and lessons learned so far, the project aims to enable agencies outside of Kenya to create and implement their own SEA programs. We will specifically target Ethiopia, Uganda, South Sudan & Tanzania for training and sharing of materials at the regional level. (2) Second, it seeks to raise awareness and among refugees and aid workers, especially by disseminating FilmAid materials in Dadaab (where CARE leads PSEA activities) and Kakuma (where IRC is the lead agency on PSEA). Related to this, IRC will also strengthen coordination mechanisms among the agencies that have signed the protocol this year, thus encouraging that the protocols will be put into practice and that agencies support PSEA at the management level as well as in the field. (3) Third, the project seeks to institute mechanisms within the police force to create awareness and advocate against SEA, in partnership with the Refugee Consortium of Kenya (RCK) and UNHCR. This is particularly important, as the police have been one of the main perpetrators of sexual abuse and exploitation in the camps. It is anticipated that the police training can be further developed and supported by the IRC urban protection program, which has been funded by the Dutch government.
B. Analysis Progress to date Phase I In Phase I of the project there were three key elements identified as necessary for preventing exploitation and abuse in the Kenya refugee program: 1) building institutional capacity to investigate and respond to cases of SEA; 2) disseminating information to all beneficiaries of the Kenya refugee program; and, 3) establishing preventative measures to minimize opportunities for SEA to occur. While there was progress towards meeting these goals, these areas continued to be a priority during Phase 2 of the project, and are still a focus.
Phase II IRC and its partners CARE, FilmAid, and UNHCR have continued to create and implement mechanisms to protect refugees from sexual exploitation and abuse. These efforts have ranged from improving responsiveness to cases to awareness-raising to encouraging/assisting humanitarian aid organizations to mainstream protection.
Responsiveness In cooperation with CARE and UNHCR, IRC scheduled a series of focus group discussions in Kakuma, Dadaab and Nairobi on complaints mechanisms to assess their accessibility, effectiveness and efficiency, which were used to develop and refine the process. IRC continues to work with staff in both camps and Nairobi to raise awareness and understanding of the current mechanism.
Also during phase II, a new training of trainer’s curriculum was developed and in total reached 6,572 people in both camps and in Nairobi. Concepts covered during the training included protection, gender, power, and violence, in addition to protection against sexual exploitation and abuse perpetrated by aid workers. The training utilized exercises that helped aid workers better understand the Code of Conduct, complaints mechanisms and case intake. In addition to teachers, the training assisted aid workers and police to understand the complaints process, and their roles within the process ensuring that complaints are dealt with accurately and sensitively. Staff training was also conducted for 25 IRC managers and counterpart managers, this training resulted in a number of new and innovative ideas being developed and helped to build momentum for the mainstreaming process. CARE in Dadaab has also developed a PSEA module for teachers. The model was tested at 2-day training in Nairobi attended by 25 teachers from urban schools that have a high number of refugee children, and feedback was very positive. The module was also rolled out in Dadaab and will be refined for 83 teachers in Kakuma before the end of phase II. The education module will be included in the materials for regional dissemination. School-based activities were carried out in Kakuma by both NCCK and LWF reaching an estimated 7,000 youth.
The drafting of the inter-agency protocols on PSEA was completed in March with 14 heads of agencies becoming signatories. The official signing too place on the 13th of March to great acclaim with 52 people representing various international and national NGO’s in attendance.
Awareness Raising During phase II, PSEA awareness and visibility were raised amongst target groups through a wide range of activities, including: distributing 850 t-shirts with PSEA messages in Kakuma, Dadaab and Nairobi to police officers, minority groups, children, unaccompanied minors, new PSEA agency focal points, the winners of PSEA sports tournaments, PSEA youth teams, host community members, and the provincial administration: issuing 4,500 bicycle bumper stickers in the camps; and distributing 250 PSEA mugs to heads of agencies, focal points and agency partners. Additionally, a one-page document for refugees on how to file a complaint has been translated into 15 languages, tested in various refugee communities, and is now being utilized at camp level.
Film Aid completed the filming and editing of four different films on topics related to PSEA, and which were officially launched in Nairobi and in the camps in February 2006. During each screening, a trained PSEA facilitator assisted in engaging the refugees in dialogue and discussing the issues raised in the films. It is estimated the screenings have reached 89,494 people, and reactions to the videos and the accompanying dialogue have been extremely positive. At all screenings the messages and dialogue are translated into a number of languages to ensure that all the target audience understands the messages.
Mainstreaming All agencies have prepared mainstreaming plans that are consistent with the mission and spirit of their organizations. However, it is essential that rigorous monitoring takes place to ensure implementation. Some have instituted quarterly reviews of codes of conduct and PSEA awareness raising activities for staff. Others have ensured that refugees are made aware of their codes of conduct by posting them in waiting areas of hospitals, therapy rooms and in schools. All who have participated in the trainings have undertaken exercises in which staff identify areas of vulnerability and program responses to assist in making beneficiaries safe. IRC also incorporated a mainstreaming exercise into its training of trainers program that has been delivered to 42 new agency focal points in Dadaab, Kakuma and in Nairobi. A 1-day conference is to be held on the 28th of June to disseminate and discuss all PSEA materials to regional heads of agencies.
A police training curriculum on PSEA is also currently being developed, which is to be finalized during the third phase and trainings are to be conducted in partnership with UNHCR and RCK. In collaboration with UNHCR PSEA training was held in Kakuma over a month long period for 150 camp security staff.
Challenges & Constraints While tremendous gains have been made during the first 2 phases of the program, the consortium partners – IRC, FilmAid, CARE and UNHCR feel that the outcome of the initial program planning process was overly ambitious, given the time and the budget available for this program.
As the consortium partners have explored Nairobi area programming, a number of challenges and opportunities have arisen. The differences in the contexts between urban refugee programs and the camp settings result in a different set of program needs being required by urban refugees. This need cannot be met within the current program or phase III without having a detrimental effect on the camp-based programs. The urban refugees live in an extremely challenging and unprotected environment, thus, they face different risks from camp-based refugees. Most urban refugees rarely interact with aid workers. Perpetrators of sexual exploitation and abuse are much more likely to be teachers or police in Nairobi. As a result of these differences phase III will only be focusing on camp-based activities. With this in mind however, the police training that occurs in phase III will provide linkages to the IRC Urban Protection Program sponsored by the Dutch government and commencing in May 2006.
The turnover of agency focal points has also been an obstacle to effective implementation of the PSEA program particularly in Dadaab. It is still often the focal points that have the depth of knowledge and expertise needed to ensure the mainstreaming and awareness raising continues. When the focal points are transferred or change positions, agencies are often left with no one to lead the mainstreaming process and training on PSEA issues. To address this problem the program trained greater numbers of agency staff to produce more focal points that can assist with mainstreaming processes and staff trainings within their own agencies.
All agencies have provided input into and shown commitment to the PSEA program. The second phase of the program brought about a new sense of enthusiasm and learning on many issues relating to protection from sexual exploitation and abuse. With the new round of training and increased number of staff with extensive knowledge of PSEA, we feel that a certain momentum has been established. Agencies have continued to find new and creative means to carry out regular awareness raising activities, and have already developed mainstreaming plans on protection from sexual exploitation and abuse, which now need to be closely monitored to ensure follow up and compliance.
The program remains ambitious. All partners are committed to maximizing impact and finding creative ways to achieve our goals. The program continues to advance, growing, evolving and improving each month.
Third Phase Strategy The lessons learned in phases I and II of implementation of PSEA show an overall need to increase coordination efforts, engaging key stakeholders in regular discussions where they are put to task, to act to prevent SEA. By securing the commitment of a broad coalition of humanitarian actors, we seek to ensure sustainability of the program. This will also help fill the need for a variety of multi-sectoral and multi-dimensional approaches to PSEA. Moreover, in the case of signatories, enhanced coordination efforts will provide the follow-up necessary to ensure that agencies live up to the protocols they have signed and make the project their own.
This proposal therefore also seeks to address the gaps in preparedness for an exit strategy and community ownership of the program, including sustainability. In the next phase, PSEA implementation will seize the opportunity to enhance inter-agency synergistic partnerships and ultimately improve overall coordination. This phase will seek active participation of all stakeholders towards mainstreaming PSEA in all programmatic and operational areas within the respective agencies. The proposal also aims to facilitate the development of stronger links and partnerships with national organizations involved in PSEA programming particularly in response and advocacy.
Due to high staff turn over and the long duration to replace members of the different agencies refresher training and capacity building will be required to ensure effective coordination of the PSEA mainstreaming process.
Other than capacity building, the next level of the PSEA programming will not only embark on facilitating joint and collective review of PSEA, but will also assess impact, identify lessons learnt and best practices as well as lay critical steps on way forward for the PSEA agenda. This will involve bringing together all stakeholders in forums at different levels in the form of organized workshops. The forums will also be a ground for sharing humanitarian/aid workers experiences from the different agencies in PSEA programming and not sidelining the community members.
As part of the monitoring and evaluation process, agencies will be required to develop appropriate and standard measurement tools. Through collaboration and technical advice organizations will in the long run have user friendly tools of identifying gaps and informing key actors on the future of PSEA programming in the refugee camps. As the new interventions seek to fill the gaps, the development and use of the tools will ensure that agencies engage in independent monitoring and implementation levels.
Ultimately, Phase III of PSEA implementation will capitalize on the unique opportunity to analyze the cycles through which the refugees go through in regards to SEA in the country of asylum, during repatriation and during reintegration. As IRC is involved in repatriation regionally, it is vital the all the materials developed by the PSEA Kenya program are shared at a regional level and that follow up training is carried out to ensure that all those involved in repatriation and reintegration are fully conversant with PSEA.
Overall, this project seeks to facilitate the creation of an enabling environment and also the space for inter-agency lobbying and advocacy on PSEA issues, particular those related to safety and security. For instance, advocating the PSEA message directly to the police commissioner, as police have been cited as major perpetrators within the camps. It further seeks to give further technical support to agencies in collectively building their expertise in managing investigations in view of the high staff turn over in the region.
To exit in July 2007, the third phase of the project seeks to institutionalize the interventions currently being implemented under the second phase, coordinate the implementation of interagency protocols which have been signed by senior management of all agencies, and share materials widely so that PSEA may continue when the project ends. Already, IRC Kenya and its partners have been working to ensure the mainstreaming of PSEA in all agencies’ programs in the camps, as well as training focal points for each agency. This coming year, IRC will ensure that at completion, agencies have tools and trained staffs equipped to carry on PSEA from their own agencies’ initiatives. To achieve this, in the first quarter of the third phase, IRC will carry out discussions with partners in both camps on exit strategies and plans for how to continue preventing SEA after the program ends. A fully documented exit strategy will be created and finalized by the end of the first quarter, and be shared with all partners in the camps.
C. Profile of Target population 1. Refugees Kakuma – 95,855 Dadaab – 127,733 2. Kenyan Host Community in Kakuma and Dadaab: 65,000 3. Employees: 10,000
D. Need While substantial progress has already been made to prevent SEA of refugees in Kenya both at inter-agency and individual organizational levels, there is still much more to be done to ensure lasting results and sustainability.
The need to continue the program in Dadaab and Kakuma is heightened by the fact that both camps are continuing to receive refugees (predominately from Somalia and Sudan). The combination of continued insecurity in Somalia and Sudan and the ongoing problems with repatriation has lead to Dadaab and Kakuma currently holding more refugees than ever before, this is unlikely to alter in the foreseeable future.
3. PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
A. Program Goal: To prevent the sexual exploitation and abuse of refugees in Kenya
Objective 1 - To strengthen knowledge among refugees and other beneficiaries of PSEA and to further develop information tools while monitoring and assisting with mainstreaming Objective 2 - To take the program to a regional level by providing follow up ToT’s and support to assist and train those who will be dealing with repatriation and reintegration of refugees. Objective 3 - To advocate for PSEA awareness within the police force and conduct trainings on PSEA to police stationed in the camps
Objective 1 To strengthen knowledge among refugees and other beneficiaries of PSEA and to further develop information tools while monitoring and assisting with mainstreaming · 20% increase in awareness of PSEA amongst refugee and aid workers in the camps, from the initial KAP survey. · One steering group meeting per month in both Kakuma and Dadaab. · 100% of all steering group members and focal points receive at least one refresher training. · 100% of teachers trained on PSEA education module. · 1 program evaluation will take place to assess the effectiveness of the program. · PSEA program completed and exited.
Objective 2 To take the program to a regional level by providing follow up ToT’s and support to assist and train those who will be dealing with repatriation and reintegration of refugees. · IRC programs in Uganda, Ethiopia, South Sudan and Tanzania have each received at least one PSEA training of trainers. · The Kenya PSEA program responds to 100 % of all questions/enquiries regarding PSEA. · 100% of IRC staff and their implementing partners will be provided with PSEA materials and training. · 1 copy of the police training module will be distributed to all agencies regionally.
Objective 3 To advocate for PSEA awareness within the police force and conduct trainings on PSEA to police stationed in the camps. · One police training module is developed. · 90 law enforcement offers trained on PSEA. · One report will be produced after training. · Awareness raising of all police will take place at a camp level in conjunction with UNHCR, FilmAid and RCK.
4. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION A. Implementation plan Objective 1 To strengthen knowledge among refugees and other beneficiaries of PSEA and to further develop information tools while monitoring and assisting with mainstreaming.
Key activities planned to implement objective 1: · Work with the refugee communities in Kakuma and Dadaab, host communities and humanitarian workers and police to disseminate basic video messages on PSEA and the Kenya Code Dissemination through facilitated daytime and mass evening video screenings (Kakuma and Dadaab-security permitting). Mass screenings will be deployed as key dissemination media in the camps (Kakuma and Dadaab), security permitting. Daytime screenings in Kakuma and Dadaab will be done at sites of service delivery with 80% of the daytime screenings accompanied by facilitated discussions. · Hold monthly steering group meetings throughout the implementation period to ensure improved and effective coordination of PSEA activities. Further to this, inter-agency partnerships will be enhanced thus strengthening coordination. This will ensure that all actors at all levels will fully participate in the mainstreaming of PSEA in all programmatic and operational areas within the respective agencies. · Organize steering group and focal point refresher training to ensure all new members are fully conversant on PSEA. · Post complaints boxes at strategic places throughout Dadaab and Kakuma. Continue discussion and refining of the PSEA complaints boxes to ensure the reporting procedure becomes more accessible to beneficiaries. · Strengthen and continue school-based activities at the camp level. This will form part of the exit strategy as agencies responsible for education in the camps implement their mainstreaming plans. · Hold six consultative meetings with Community leaders in the Camps. The meetings will in effect be feedback sessions for the leaders to show their role in prevention of SEA as well as present the different ways and mechanisms in which the community is using to solve the problem of SEA. From these forums the community will map the way forward with regard to protection mechanisms in preparedness for their eventual return. · Develop a community information checklist (similar to the NGO checklist) as a tool to establishing communities’ awareness of their entitlements and human rights. This will further provide and opportunity for the refugees to be more involved; actively playing their role to ensure their protection through community based initiatives; not withstanding the fact that the PSEA project has been running for the last two years. This will in return ensure greater ownership of the program by the community. · Extend PSEA awareness to the host community through ToTs of community leaders. · Perform a rigorous follow up with individual agencies within the camps to ensure PSEA mainstreaming plans developed by these agencies are being implemented. This will involve agency visits with PSEA focal points, regular implementation status meetings, providing technical support to those agencies that need it and holding interagency staff consultative meetings to review mainstreaming progress. · Work with at least 50 youth (25 Kakuma and 25 Dadaab) in already existing youth groups. This initiative will build on the effect of the video messages on the community and aims at further instilling the knowledge of PSEA among the youth and community in general. Some of the activities envisaged within this context include drawing and story writing competitions, music and drama/skits festivals with PSEA messages, based on the understanding of PSEA by the youth/community. Focus here is to encourage youth to become PSEA ambassadors in their communities. · Translate two PSEA videos into Dinka and four into French. Training will be provided to the agencies on how to use the Films together with the video facilitation manual and the feedback/monitoring form. · Translate the video facilitation manual into 4 local languages spoken by refugees in Kenya.
Objective 2 To take the program to a regional level by providing follow up ToT’s and support to assist and train those who will be dealing with repatriation and reintegration of refugees.
Given the potential for the return of refugees to Sudan, program materials and ideas need to be shared with partners working in those countries and beyond utilizing a regional focus through Phase 3 of SEA. This reflects the need for returnees to know about their entitlements, standards governing all humanitarian workers and peacekeepers, and complaints mechanisms and response during the repatriation phase when they are at one of the most vulnerable points in the refugee lifecycle. Efforts will focus on strengthening PSEA through existing regional humanitarian networks, specifically those focusing on Sudan.
Key activities planned to achieve Objective 2 include: · Conduct 2 follow up TOT workshops at each regional center, specifically concentrating on areas and agencies that will be dealing with repatriation and reintegration of refugees. · IRC Kenya will act as an advisory body for any problems/questions that may arise at a regional level and will provide further training support where required · Duplicate and distribute PSEA videos to 100% of humanitarian agencies in the Kenya Refugee Program as well as in the region. · Distribute the police training module regionally.
Objective 3 To advocate for PSEA awareness within the police force, and train police stationed in the camps
Police are often cited by refugees as perpetrators of violence. In order to assist and encourage police to assert their power by protecting rather than perpetrating abuse, IRC in cooperation with UNHRC, RCK & FilmAid will facilitate a series of police trainings on gender-based violence and PSEA. Police will be trained on refugee rights, gender, children’s rights, protection, case intake and referrals in order to improve their capacity to deal effectively with survivors of SEA. This program will build on the relationships established with police by RCK and UNHCR and will provide linkages for the IRC protection program funded by the Dutch government to initiate the police trainings at an urban level.
Key activities planned to achieve objective 3 include; · Train 90 law enforcement officers in prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse; · Introduce 100% of all police officers in camps to the concept of PSEA through screening of PSEA films and facilitated discussion. · Disseminate the police training module regionally. · Devise a monitoring mechanism for the project, and if necessary carry out a refresher course. · Advocate directly to the police commission for rotational transfers of police within the camps and for more female police within the camps · Advocate to the highest ranks within the police force to ensure the PSEA message is heard and acted upon. · Hold at least 10 facilitated dissemination sessions with police. · Increase dissemination with police to strengthen police awareness on PSEA and their mandate to protect both the refugees and host communities. B. Coordination The project will be managed by a Steering Group comprised of IRC, UNHCR, CARE and FAI, who will continue to collaborate in ensuring all objectives are met. The Steering Group will ensure all partners of the Kenya refugee program are involved at local and national level. The PEAA will be the project supervisor, responsible for assuring the project’s objectives are achieved and for the active monitoring of, and reporting on, project implementation.
Specific roles and responsibilities of the Steering Group members are as follows:
i) IRC IRC will be the PRM agreement administrator, responsible for all contract, financial monitoring, and donor liaison and reporting responsibilities. IRC will employ the PEAA who will report to and be directly supervised by the IRC Kenya Country Director. IRC will facilitate and drive PSEA activities in Kakuma refugee camp. IRC will focus on the longer-term sustainability of PSEA within the Kenya refugee program and will take a lead on the development of a ToT and package of resource materials. IRC will ensure coordination of the project with complimentary global IRC and NGO initiatives through the active involvement of the IRC global Prevention of Exploitation Advisor.
ii) UNHCR UNHCR will assure parity in implementation of the project across all refugee sites in Kenya. UNHCR will facilitate project implementation in Nairobi for urban refugees and will act as the liaison between this project and all GOK institutions and personnel. UNHCR Kenya will engage the UNHCR Regional office and will ensure coordination of the project with complimentary UN initiatives on PSEA, including the UN Focal Point on PSEA.
iii) CARE Through CARE’s, PSEA Coordinator, CARE will facilitate PSEA activities in the Dadaab refugee camps, including the dissemination of FAI’s video messages. CARE will also continue the monitoring and refinement of the PSEA educational module. CARE will be a sub-grantee of IRC
iv) FAI FAI will be responsible for the mass information campaign of video messages on PSEA in Kakuma, Dadaab and Nairobi. FAI will be a sub-grantee of IRC.
5. CODES OF CONDUCT
Implementation of the proposed program will be guided by all relevant national and international codes of conduct and laws. IRC’s Code of Conduct and Mandatory Reporting Policies (MRP), which prohibit all exploitation and abuse of beneficiaries and fiscal impropriety and require identification of known offences, are an integral part of IRC staff policies and strictly enforced. All staff have been trained on the MRPs and copies of the policy are posted at all work sites, including field sites accessed by beneficiaries. IRC Kenya is also a signatory to the Kenya Code of Conduct, which provides guidelines to assist humanitarian agencies, and their staff to better understand the ethical obligation placed upon their conduct and to act accordingly. The Kenyan code does not tolerate abuse, exploitation or corruption within their operations. IRC Kenya provides all new staff with a copy of the Kenya Code of Conduct. Please see Annex 5.
6. MANAGEMENT AND SECURITY A. Program Management Overall responsibility for the development, implementation and administration of all programs and IRC in-country operations is vested upon the Country Director (CD) and the Program Coordinator (PC) and the Protection Coordinator. The CD and PC are the principal liaisons with the government, donors and other agencies. Responsibility for financial management, treasury, accounting, and compliance to donor financial rules and regulations rests with the Finance Controller. In addition, the Program Manager provides support for compliance, reporting, monitoring of targets and indicators, and inter-agency coordination. The costs will be allocated are based on expected time and effort that will be devoted by staff members.
IRC Kenya has been successfully implementing the PSEA program for the past two years, with funding from PRM. IRC Kenya has been operational in Kenya since 1992 working with refugee populations in complex settings in various programmatic sectors (i.e. health, education, protection).
B. Security Operations in Kakuma, Dadaab and Nairobi are subject to security threats but their degree and nature vary from location to location. In Kakuma, IRC continues to consider the following as possible threats: local banditry brought about by drought, famine and weakened livelihood; tensions between hosts and refugees based upon perception of inequity in levels of humanitarian assistance; strikes arising out of staff lay-offs and tensions between various refugee ethnicities premised on events occurring within the camp or other cross-border events. Similar to Kakuma, Dadaab continues to face security threats imposed by banditry attacks, which now occur on occasional basis compared to the past when it was more frequent. IRC’s general strategy is based upon the fact that its image is the best protection against threats from the local and refugee populations. The quality of IRC’s work and conduct of its staff therefore continue to be important ingredients in mitigating insecurity. A security plan complete with documentation on IRC global security policy, protocols, in-country and site-level standard operating procedures have been developed. The Country Director is overall focal point on security management but responsibility is also shared with the Logistics Coordinator for security at the Nairobi level and the Program Coordinator in close liaison with the Field Security Officer at the Kakuma level. The IRC New York Global Security Adviser provides back-up advice and management to the Kenya Country operation. Designated IRC security focal points are targeted and have attended specialized security training such as that offered by Red R.
IRC does not have a permanent presence in Dadaab, in which case, during travel to these camps, IRC staff fit into the UNHCR-managed security system. In Dadaab UNHCR has provided the GoK with vehicles to enhance security patrols in and around the camps. Security escorts are provided for all travel between the three camps: Ifo, Hagadera and Dagahaley. During heavy rains, the roads can become impassable which adds to security concerns. The UNHCR head of sub office in Dadaab is the overall coordinator of security management closely assisted by the UNHCR Field Safety Assistant. UNHCR Field safety Advisor at the Branch office level provides back up, security and safety management advice to the camp. All UNHCR staff have undergone basic security training which has given them basic knowledge and skills required to combat imminent security problems encountered while on duty.
7. MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT
A. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan IRC has developed and will follow a timeline for 2006/2007 for measuring program progress and for tracking the completion of major evaluations and periodic activities. Performance against specified indicators will be measured and internally reported upon on a monthly basis by our implementing partners CARE and FilmAid and by PSEA officers based in Kakuma, Dadaab and Nairobi using program tools such as training and workshop attendance, site visits, progress reports, focus group discussions and the dissemination of materials. CARE and FilmAid will also provide quarterly reports both narrative and financial.
To further monitor and evaluate the progress of the program monthly coordination meetings are held with CARE, FilmAid and UNHCR in Nairobi to review and discuss all program reports and to highlight areas of performance weakness and to provide guidance to ensure all program targets are met.
Field trips for monitoring and evaluation purposes will be made on a monthly basis by the program manager or the PSEA officer. Donors, IRC head quarters PSEA technical unit, and the IRC Horn and East Africa Regional Office will also make site visits to provide additional technical support and for monitoring and evaluation.
Meetings are held on regular basis in both Dadaab and Kakuma with community leaders made up of both the beneficiaries and host community. The meetings are a vital source of feedback and evaluation of the PSEA program. They also provide the community leaders with and opportunity to discuss issues that may arise within the program.
B. Performance Measurement
Performance of the program activities and outcomes in this proposal will be measured in relation to the target indicators and baselines summarized below. A KAP survey was conducted in the initial planning stages of the program in 2004. A comparative KAP survey will be carried out towards the end of the program in July 2007 enabling the programs performance over its entirety (phase one, two and three) to be accurately assessed. In the interim, the implementation process has been evaluated in July 2006, with results available in mid-August 2006.
2006/2007 Key Target Indicator 2005/2006 Baseline Status 20% increase in awareness of PSEA amongst refugees and aid workers Initial KAP survey (2004) showed little to no awareness One steering group meeting per month in both Kakuma and Dadaab 9 held in Kakuma and 6 in Dadaab 100% of all steering group and focal points receive at least one refresher training. 80% of all steering group and focal points received initial training. 100% of teachers trained on Education module Module is still be finalized, 30 teachers have received training for assessment purposes 1 program evaluation will take place To be completed August PSEA program completed and exited Will occur by July 31st 2007 IRC programs in Uganda, Ethiopia, South Sudan and Tanzania have received at least one PSEA training of trainers New activity (no baseline) 100% of all PSEA questions/enquiries are responded to by the Kenya PSEA program New Activity (no baseline) 100% of IRC and their implementing will be provided with PSEA materials and training New Activity (20 agency representatives will receive materials at PSEA conference on the 28th of June 2006) 1 Copy of the police training module will be distributed to all agencies regionally New Activity (no baseline) One police training module is developed Carried over from phase II 90 law enforcement officers will be trained on PSEA Activity carried over from phase II (no baseline as yet) One report will be produced after training New activity (no baseline) Awareness raising/training of all police will take place at camp level in conjunction with UNHCR, FilmAid and RCK Carried over from phase II (no baseline as yet)
8. ATTACHMENTS AND ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
1. IRC’s NICRA Agreement 2. SF 424 version 02 3. Cost Proposal – Detailed Itemized Budget 4. Cost Proposal – Budget Narrative 5. IRC Codes of Conduct/Mandatory Reporting Policy