Search Results: 2021년DB㈕텔ㄹSein07 2021년DB판매합니다 2021년DB업체 2021년DB업자 2021년DB판매합니다
CARE in the Pacific PARTNERSHIPS RESEARCH REPORT
Partnership is central to CARE International’s global vision where poverty has been overcome and all people live with dignity and security. CARE International’s partnerships in the Pacific are carried out through CARE Australia managed country offices in Papua New Guinea (PNG) and Vanuatu, and through the CARE in the Pacific team (which sits under CARE Australia) which manage partnerships in countries where CARE Australia does not have a country office. This currently includes Fiji, Kiribati, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, and Tuvalu. CARE Australia is in the process of developing its Pacific strategy. Central to this process is understanding its approaches to partnership and supporting local leadership with its partners in Fiji, Kiribati, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, and Tuvalu. CARE in the Pacific commissioned this Partnerships Research to document its partnership approach and reflect key contributions and gaps to advancing localisation for its partners in the Pacific. The research was conducted during September and November 2021 and involved CARE in the Pacific and 12 partners in Fiji, Kiribati, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, and Tuvalu.
What this research report does
⮚ Documents CARE in the Pacific’s partnership approach and the key features of the partnership that are supporting locally led outcomes
⮚ Employs a qualitative approach drawing on the voice of partners through feedback captured during interviews, and secondary documentation related to CARE’s partnership and localisation practice, and current sector discourse on localisation to demonstrate how CARE in the Pacific is supporting localisation, and approaches hindering locally led outcomes
⮚ Identifies actions and approaches for CARE in the Pacific for charting a more strategic course for partnership and localisation by building on existing positive practices and considering areas for improving partnership practice to better support localisation
Key findings
Partnership findings
⮚ CARE’s partnership can be characterised by long-term and short-term partnerships. The long-term partnership is guided by a high-level partnership agreement with sub-agreements developed for project or program specific engagement. Capacity strengthening is focused on supporting organisation-wide learning and growth. The short-term partnership usually begins with CARE either securing or identifying a funding opportunity. Based on consultation and shared objectives, agreement is sought to work together and co-design proposals/projects. A sub agreement guides the engagement. Capacity strengthening (informed by due diligence assessments) is largely focused on ensuring partners can meet CARE’s program quality, administrative and financial requirements, including donor compliance requirements.
⮚ Both long-term and short-term partnerships are contributing to positive change, in advancing CARE’s strategic objective of achieving greater impact through partnerships, and for partners, helping to achieve positive change at organisational and community levels. Having both short-term and long-term partnerships allow for flexibility in the partnership and as partnering is also influenced by the amount of funding CARE has available to support partners. A long-term partnering approach would better position CARE to achieve its broader partnership goals for transformed partnerships in the Pacific for reduced poverty and inequality. A key consideration is for CARE to articulate how it will support partners who want to transition to long-term partnerships, the strategy to engage long-term partnerships and with which organisations it will establish such partnerships.
⮚ CARE’s approach is grounded in supporting partners to achieve their mandate and objectives, working within partners priorities, and partners strengths. Partners perceive CARE is taking a partner led approach that is based on shared values and complementary vision, and a strong commitment to partnership. This approach together with the provision of quality technical support in gender, disaster, and humanitarian programming is helping establish CARE as a partner of choice. This is noted by partners as a core strength of CARE’s partnership approach and an area that CARE should continue to build on.
⮚ CARE has strong foundational policies, processes, and principles in place for partnership, but these are not being consistently applied outside of project implementation. CARE has strong processes and principles in place for partnering but these are not being fully maximised, with the focus more on assessing project delivery and results and not partnership outcomes. This approach to partnerships is potentially hindering achievement of more meaningful partnership outcomes, including more effective programming. There is a desire from partners to have more conversations and participate in processes that are focused on assessing the partnership.
⮚ CARE is directly investing in partnerships in several ways: recruitment of dedicated staff and consultants to the CARE in the Pacific team including a Partnerships Coordinator, Gender, and Inclusion Senior Advisor (Fiji), Program Quality Coordinator, Finance & Grants Coordinator and Project Coordinators. CARE is also demonstrating ongoing financial investment in partners by mobilising consecutive funding with the majority of its partners. It will be important for CARE to consider and plan for future resourcing that may be needed to support a long-term partnering approach, acknowledging that CARE largely operates on project specific funding which directly influences the parameters of support CARE is able to provide to partners as this support has to fit within project budgets. Read More...
What this research report does
⮚ Documents CARE in the Pacific’s partnership approach and the key features of the partnership that are supporting locally led outcomes
⮚ Employs a qualitative approach drawing on the voice of partners through feedback captured during interviews, and secondary documentation related to CARE’s partnership and localisation practice, and current sector discourse on localisation to demonstrate how CARE in the Pacific is supporting localisation, and approaches hindering locally led outcomes
⮚ Identifies actions and approaches for CARE in the Pacific for charting a more strategic course for partnership and localisation by building on existing positive practices and considering areas for improving partnership practice to better support localisation
Key findings
Partnership findings
⮚ CARE’s partnership can be characterised by long-term and short-term partnerships. The long-term partnership is guided by a high-level partnership agreement with sub-agreements developed for project or program specific engagement. Capacity strengthening is focused on supporting organisation-wide learning and growth. The short-term partnership usually begins with CARE either securing or identifying a funding opportunity. Based on consultation and shared objectives, agreement is sought to work together and co-design proposals/projects. A sub agreement guides the engagement. Capacity strengthening (informed by due diligence assessments) is largely focused on ensuring partners can meet CARE’s program quality, administrative and financial requirements, including donor compliance requirements.
⮚ Both long-term and short-term partnerships are contributing to positive change, in advancing CARE’s strategic objective of achieving greater impact through partnerships, and for partners, helping to achieve positive change at organisational and community levels. Having both short-term and long-term partnerships allow for flexibility in the partnership and as partnering is also influenced by the amount of funding CARE has available to support partners. A long-term partnering approach would better position CARE to achieve its broader partnership goals for transformed partnerships in the Pacific for reduced poverty and inequality. A key consideration is for CARE to articulate how it will support partners who want to transition to long-term partnerships, the strategy to engage long-term partnerships and with which organisations it will establish such partnerships.
⮚ CARE’s approach is grounded in supporting partners to achieve their mandate and objectives, working within partners priorities, and partners strengths. Partners perceive CARE is taking a partner led approach that is based on shared values and complementary vision, and a strong commitment to partnership. This approach together with the provision of quality technical support in gender, disaster, and humanitarian programming is helping establish CARE as a partner of choice. This is noted by partners as a core strength of CARE’s partnership approach and an area that CARE should continue to build on.
⮚ CARE has strong foundational policies, processes, and principles in place for partnership, but these are not being consistently applied outside of project implementation. CARE has strong processes and principles in place for partnering but these are not being fully maximised, with the focus more on assessing project delivery and results and not partnership outcomes. This approach to partnerships is potentially hindering achievement of more meaningful partnership outcomes, including more effective programming. There is a desire from partners to have more conversations and participate in processes that are focused on assessing the partnership.
⮚ CARE is directly investing in partnerships in several ways: recruitment of dedicated staff and consultants to the CARE in the Pacific team including a Partnerships Coordinator, Gender, and Inclusion Senior Advisor (Fiji), Program Quality Coordinator, Finance & Grants Coordinator and Project Coordinators. CARE is also demonstrating ongoing financial investment in partners by mobilising consecutive funding with the majority of its partners. It will be important for CARE to consider and plan for future resourcing that may be needed to support a long-term partnering approach, acknowledging that CARE largely operates on project specific funding which directly influences the parameters of support CARE is able to provide to partners as this support has to fit within project budgets. Read More...
Tipping Point Global Impact Evaluation Summary
This summary presents the major findings from a mixed methods impact evaluation study conducted in Bangladesh (Rangpur district) and Nepal (Rupandehi and Kapilvastu Districts) in 2021. This impact evaluation was coordinated by CARE and led by its research partners, International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh (icddr,b) in Bangladesh and Emory University & Interdisciplinary Analysts (IDA) in Nepal. Read More...
THE ZIMBABWE DISASTER RAPID RESPONSE MECHANISM
Globally, there are concerted efforts being directed towards reducing disaster risks particularly in developing countries where the vulnerability of people, their assets and livelihoods are increasing du to natural hazards. The international principle of common but differentiated responsibilities also sees different forms of support being channelled from the more developed countries to those less developed. In the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) where Zimbabwe is domiciled, there is a rising trend of vulnerabilities to droughts, floods, storms, and epidemics among others. These hazards arbitrarily impose a heavy burden on majority of the poorer population, worsening their food insecurity, exposing many of them to gender-based violence, communicable diseases, reduced access to pertinent health services and compounded socio-economic setbacks. In that respect, Care International, Dan Church Aid and Plan International established a Rapid Response Management Unit (RRMU) to implement a comprehensive rapid response framework for rapid onset emergencies in seven (7) provinces in Zimbabwe from February 2020 to June 2021. The targeted provinces were Harare, Masvingo, Bulawayo, Midlands, Manicaland, Matabeleland South and Matabeleland North. Read More...
Reducing Vulnerabilities for refugees and internally displaced persons in Afghanistan – CARE/ABADEI Baseline
Reducing vulnerabilities for returnees and IDPs in 4 provinces of Afghanistan is a Resilience Building Program in Afghanistan, which is implemented by CARE Afghanistan. This project, which is funded by United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is targeting 312,800 vulnerable people (153,272 female & 159,528 male). This program is aimed at reducing vulnerabilities for returnees and IDPs through the provision of essential services to local communities and protecting them against natural disasters; source to support rural livelihoods through strengthened social cohesion.
Towards the end of 2021, CARE conducted a multi-sectoral need assessment, which confirmed the lack of access to health & food. The chronic conflict, lack of humanitarian assistance, poor outlook for the population and lack of available basic services, the assessment emphasized a strong need to meet the basic humanitarian needs for local people, IDPs and, returnees. In particular, health response, cash for work, food provision, and economic improvement / livelihoods initiatives were identified as priority assistance areas. Read More...
Towards the end of 2021, CARE conducted a multi-sectoral need assessment, which confirmed the lack of access to health & food. The chronic conflict, lack of humanitarian assistance, poor outlook for the population and lack of available basic services, the assessment emphasized a strong need to meet the basic humanitarian needs for local people, IDPs and, returnees. In particular, health response, cash for work, food provision, and economic improvement / livelihoods initiatives were identified as priority assistance areas. Read More...
HYGIENE AND BEHAVIOR CHANGE COALITION (HBCC) PROJECT END-LINE EVALUATION
The Covid-19 pandemic remains a global concern, it has affected all social-economic spheres of life around the world. People have and continue to lose life. The global economies continue to decline. Countries and the development partners continue to spread millions of dollars in educating people on dangers, control and prevention of the Covid-19 pandemic. Multiple barriers can affect efforts to minimize transmission and harmful impacts of health emergencies; this is not different for COVID-19. The barriers vary from inadequate knowledge at individual and community levels and limited access to hygiene/WASH facilities among others. With such limitations, the risk of contracting Covid-19 increases. As part of Rwanda’s Covid-19 response plan, CARE Rwanda designed and implemented HBCC project over the period of 1 year (July 2020-July 2021). (54 pages) Read More...
RED SAACC Rapport Annuel 2017
Le projet de recherche-développement pour la sécurité alimentaire et l’adaptation climatique des systèmes ruraux de production au Niger (RED/SAACC-Niger) a pour objectif d’améliorer d’ici fin 2021, les revenus, la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle de 15.000 exploitations agricoles familiales fragiles à faible résilience, dans 15 communes des régions de Maradi, Tahoua et Tillabéri. [33 pages] Read More...
Strengthening the Economic Resilience of Female Garment Workers during COVID19 – Phase 2
This is the End of Project Evaluation Report for the Strengthening the Economic Resilience of Female Garment Workers during COVID19 – Phase 2 (SER) Project which was implemented in Phnom Penh, Kandal and Kampong Speu provinces. The Project commenced in July 2021 and concluded in February 2022. The goal of the project was to strengthen the economic resilience of female garment workers who are socially and economically marginalized in Cambodia to cope with the negative impacts of COVID-19. In order to conduct the evaluation, data was collected through a comprehensive literature review and fieldwork. The literature review was conducted reviewing reports and documents from the SER Project and also other relevant external publications. The evaluation interviewed 400 people and was conducted in January 2022.
• It should be noted that the project was not wholly a humanitarian type intervention project, which tend to have a short implementation period, rather the project had knowledge, capacity and resilience training elements which require a longer timeframe to implement. For this reason, as well as the delay to the start of the project and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, project staff were faced with a high workload within a challenging environment. Specifically, a longer time period would have given more time to prepare for project interventions such as the training, baseline and rapid situation assessment of the labour market. With more time the baseline and rapid situation assessment of the labour market could have been used to better tailor and inform the development of the training materials and curriculum.
• The focus on social protections in the project interventions was a relative new topic especially for factory workers, who are mostly only aware of the NSSF and the IDPoor. As highlighted as an unexpected result of the project, many project participants directing enquiries to local authorities about social protections. While local authorities are aware of social protections in general, they do not have detailed knowledge, especially since many social protections are administered at the national level and not at the village level. Therefore, more cooperation with local authorities should have been sought in order to prepare the local authorities for this situation.
• The delay in the signing the project’s administrative contract, caused the project to miss opportunities to use the findings of the baseline survey and the rapid situation assessment of the labour market to better inform the development of the project’s training activities.
• The evaluation found that while knowledge of GBV improved, the same was not the case for sexual harassment. Indeed, respondents who could not identify sexual harassment increased from 32% (114/356) at the baseline to 38% (139/362) at the endline. Project staff reported that this was not an unexpected finding as CARE’s previous sexual harassment projects had encountered similar such resistance to changing attitudes.
Read More...
• It should be noted that the project was not wholly a humanitarian type intervention project, which tend to have a short implementation period, rather the project had knowledge, capacity and resilience training elements which require a longer timeframe to implement. For this reason, as well as the delay to the start of the project and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, project staff were faced with a high workload within a challenging environment. Specifically, a longer time period would have given more time to prepare for project interventions such as the training, baseline and rapid situation assessment of the labour market. With more time the baseline and rapid situation assessment of the labour market could have been used to better tailor and inform the development of the training materials and curriculum.
• The focus on social protections in the project interventions was a relative new topic especially for factory workers, who are mostly only aware of the NSSF and the IDPoor. As highlighted as an unexpected result of the project, many project participants directing enquiries to local authorities about social protections. While local authorities are aware of social protections in general, they do not have detailed knowledge, especially since many social protections are administered at the national level and not at the village level. Therefore, more cooperation with local authorities should have been sought in order to prepare the local authorities for this situation.
• The delay in the signing the project’s administrative contract, caused the project to miss opportunities to use the findings of the baseline survey and the rapid situation assessment of the labour market to better inform the development of the project’s training activities.
• The evaluation found that while knowledge of GBV improved, the same was not the case for sexual harassment. Indeed, respondents who could not identify sexual harassment increased from 32% (114/356) at the baseline to 38% (139/362) at the endline. Project staff reported that this was not an unexpected finding as CARE’s previous sexual harassment projects had encountered similar such resistance to changing attitudes.
Read More...
The Impact of the Food Crisis on Women and Girls in Afghanistan
CARE conducted a study on how the food crisis in Afghanistan affects women and girls differently to better understand the gendered economic, cultural, and practical barriers to food security. This research highlights key findings on household food security, negative coping strategies women and families adopt, and shortcomings of humanitarian actors in gender-responsive aid delivery. The study is based on a comprehensive desk review of existing data since August 2021, a household survey comprising of 345 women respondents, completed in both urban and rural communities, a series of qualitative interviews with 18 women, 9 focus group discussions (FGDs) with men, and key informant interviews (KIIs) with food security specialists and humanitarian actors. The data was collected in urban and rural districts in 9 provinces in the north, west, south, and center of the country. Read More...
RED/SAACC-Niger Baseline
Le projet de recherche-développement pour la sécurité alimentaire et l’adaptation climatique des systèmes ruraux de production au Niger (RED/SAACC-Niger) a pour objectif d’améliorer d’ici fin 2021, les revenus, la sécurité alimentaire et nutritionnelle de 15.000 exploitations agricoles familiales fragiles à faible résilience, dans 15 communes des régions de Maradi, Tahoua et Tillabéri . Read More...
Access Protection Empowerment Accountability and Leadership (APEAL) II project Endline Evaluation
The APEAL II project was a follow on project to APEAL I. The purpose of APEAL 2020 was to Enhance multi-sectoral responses by providing targeted life- saving protection, mental health, Psychosocial support and inclusive services to Congolese refugees and vulnerable host communities in Kyangwali and Kyaka II settlements. APEAL II deferred from APEAL I by; increasing the Consortium members from six (6) to nine (9) after incorporating three (3) organizations, programme scope included changes from GBV to SGBV, disability and Inclusion Services and strengthening the capacity of community structures. The community structures were strengthened to identify, respond, support and refer persons in need of MHPSS, comprehensive rehabilitation, disability and inclusion, protection and SGBV services. The Project operated in a COVID 19 environment which was not present in APEAL 1. As such, the project embedded a specific focus on COVID 19 response.
The European Civil Protection & Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) funded the Project with Euro3,462,889.15 spanning from May 01, 2020 to April 30, 2021.
The project targeted 40,000 beneficiaries split between Kyaka II and Kyangwali refugee settlements and distributed support to 20% of surrounding Host communities and 80% of Refugees. The APEAL II intended to achieve: Enhanced access to timely protection, SGBV, MHPSS and disability and inclusion services, Improved protection mainstreaming and strengthen the capacity of community structures, duty bearers and stakeholders, provide extra capacity in nutrition screening for young children, pregnant and lactating mothers and supportive advocacy for standards setting, and harmonized approaches to refugee protection and MHPSS at the national level.
The APEAL II project end line evaluation was conducted to assess change and impact by comparing data from before and after for APEAL Project implementation. The end line evaluation was constructed on a cross-sectional assessment of intervention focus area, the individual refugees and host community members. Qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were applied with the former utilized to obtain information on project relevance, effectiveness and outcomes from Project key stakeholders including beneficiaries through key informant interviews and focus group discussions. Read More...
The European Civil Protection & Humanitarian Aid Operations (ECHO) funded the Project with Euro3,462,889.15 spanning from May 01, 2020 to April 30, 2021.
The project targeted 40,000 beneficiaries split between Kyaka II and Kyangwali refugee settlements and distributed support to 20% of surrounding Host communities and 80% of Refugees. The APEAL II intended to achieve: Enhanced access to timely protection, SGBV, MHPSS and disability and inclusion services, Improved protection mainstreaming and strengthen the capacity of community structures, duty bearers and stakeholders, provide extra capacity in nutrition screening for young children, pregnant and lactating mothers and supportive advocacy for standards setting, and harmonized approaches to refugee protection and MHPSS at the national level.
The APEAL II project end line evaluation was conducted to assess change and impact by comparing data from before and after for APEAL Project implementation. The end line evaluation was constructed on a cross-sectional assessment of intervention focus area, the individual refugees and host community members. Qualitative and quantitative data collection methods were applied with the former utilized to obtain information on project relevance, effectiveness and outcomes from Project key stakeholders including beneficiaries through key informant interviews and focus group discussions. Read More...