youth voices for community action · “youth voices for community action” was designed to...

1 | P a g e

Evaluation Report

USAID Cooperative Agreement 294-A-00-9-00210-00 Catholic Relief Services/JWBG Prepared by: Tom Bamat Mariane Mathia Reviewed by: Khalil Ansara

April 5, 2012

Youth Voices for Community Action

C o v e r P h o t o – H e b r o n Y o u t h A m b a s s a d o r s . T r i b u t e t o M a r i a n e

M a t h i a

Table of Contents Introduction and Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... 1

Brief Project Summary .................................................................................................................................. 2

Project Modifications .................................................................................................................................... 5

Executive Summary of this Report ................................................................................................................ 7

Strategic Objectives .................................................................................................................................. 7

Theory of Change ...................................................................................................................................... 8

Sustainability ............................................................................................................................................. 8

Lessons Learned ........................................................................................................................................ 8

Recommendations from Respondents ................................................................................................... 10

Evaluation Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 11

Data Collection Process ........................................................................................................................... 13

Limitations/Cautionary Note on Data Collection .................................................................................... 14

Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 15

Major Findings ............................................................................................................................................ 16

Strategic Objective 1 ............................................................................................................................... 16

Strategic Objective 2 ............................................................................................................................... 18

Theory of Change .................................................................................................................................... 20

Sustainability ........................................................................................................................................... 21

Unintended Results ................................................................................................................................. 22

Lessons Learned ...................................................................................................................................... 22

Recommendations of Stakeholders ............................................................................................................ 23

Evaluators’ Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 24

Recommendations of the Evaluation Team ................................................................................................ 24

List of Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... 27

Appendix 1: Schedule of Meetings ......................................................................................................... 28

Appendix 2: Data Collection Tools .......................................................................................................... 30

Appendix 3: Indicators Sheet – Youth Voices for Community Action project ........................................ 36

Appendix 4: Brief Description of 22 Youth-Led Projects ......................................................................... 39

1

Introduction and Acknowledgements This final evaluation report on the Catholic Relief Services/Jerusalem, West Bank and Gaza

(JWBG) project “Youth Voices for Community Action” was commissioned and paid for by

CRS/JWBG as a means of ascertaining project results, and especially the lessons that can be

learned from it, in order to enhance project designs and implementation in the future. Given

limited resources, CRS entrusted the evaluation to a team of specialized CRS staff rather than

contract an outside evaluator. The team was comprised of Tom Bamat, CRS’ headquarters-

based Senior Technical Advisor for Justice and Peacebuilding; and Mariane Mathia, the M&E

Project Officer for CRS JWBG. They worked closely with Khalil Ansara, Chief of Party of the

“Youth Voices” project; and Ian De La Rosa, Deputy Country Representative of CRS/JWBG--

primary stakeholders and users of the evaluation—in the design of the effort and its tools, and

discussion of dissemination and utilization of the results.

The evaluators relied on secondary data already collected through project monitoring and

reporting to USAID. They also met with 38 project participants during 23 roughly one-hour-long

interviews and mini-focus-groups over a two week period in March, 2012. While

acknowledging the dangers of bias given their employment by CRS, the evaluators have striven

to be as objective as possible. It is hoped that the evaluation will promote recognition of this

project’s significant contribution to a culture of non-violence in the areas targeted, and

widespread understanding of valuable lessons that can be learned from it.

The evaluation team wishes to acknowledge the support of the donor; the work of the highly

competent and dedicated staff and partners of this project; the cooperation of local Palestinian

authorities; and the energy, creativity and commitment of the dozens of Youth Ambassadors

(YAs) who were chosen for this project and carried out 22 different project initiatives.

We are indebted to this project’s mid-term reflection team, who besides Mariane Mathia

included Shireen Obaid, Ghaida Rahil, Reham Owda and chief-of-party Khalil Ansara. We

recognize the evaluation work and report prepared by consultant Alan Frisk in May 2009 for a

CRS/Kosovo project, “Youth Securing the Future;” it was extremely helpful in designing tools

and structuring the present Report. Finally, the support of Country Representative Matt Davis;

Operations Officer Raed Abu Rdeineh; administrative assistant Maissa Amer; receptionist Mirna

Abuleil, and driver Khaled Dadu was indispensable; to each our sincere gratitude.

This report is the intellectual property of CRS, and may not be used without permission. It does

not, however, necessarily reflect the views of the donor, nor of CRS leadership or staff.

Tom Bamat and Mariane Mathia Jerusalem, April 5, 2012

2

Brief Project Summary Catholic Relief Services was awarded USAID’s Cooperative Agreement 294-A-00-09-00210-00 in

2009 in order to implement the peacebuilding project entitled “Youth Voices for Community

Action.” First notice of the award came in February of that year. Modifications were requested

and provided in the month of June. The performance period began July 17, 2009 and, including

an extension granted in December 2011, is scheduled to end on April 30, 2012. $1,121,820 was

awarded by USAID and CRS contributed an additional $149,628.

“Youth Voices for Community Action” was designed to respond to a variety of local

community-based conflicts within the Palestinian territories, and to contribute to a culture of

non-violence in selected areas of both the West Bank and Gaza. A succinct description of the

broader context and of the specific aims of the initiative was spelled out in the Executive

Summary of the Revised Application to USAID dated June 19, 2009:

“Increasing violence severely threatens the long-term viability of a Palestinian state and the

well-being of its people. Chronic conflict with Israel, a steady dissolution of the rule of law within

the West Bank and Gaza (WBG), and mounting violent confrontation between rival Palestinian

political actors, all are combining to create volatile and intolerable conditions within Palestinian

society. Representing the largest demographic segment of the WBG population, Palestinian

youth are paying the highest price for the escalating bloodshed. With rising unemployment and

poverty, declining incomes, and a breakdown in Palestinian infrastructure, social services and

facilities, young people lack opportunities for productive activity and thus are increasingly

vulnerable to manipulation, exploitation and violent activity.

These conditions are exacerbated by a closed political environment with very limited

opportunity for substantive dialogue or communication availed to Palestinian youth. Detached

from their leaders, and not fully integrated into the community, many Palestinian youth have no

outlet for their anger and disappointment, nor do they have access to the knowledge and skills

that would allow them to contribute fully and nonviolently to society. This deficit of opportunity

exists in spite of significant recent investment by the Palestinian Authority and the international

community in youth and child well-being initiatives supportive of sports, infrastructure and

empowerment activities, but not specifically focused on the development of nonviolent youth

leaders or the increasing violence.

Catholic Relief Services is requesting $1,121,820 from USAID/CMM to implement this 30-month

project. Together with its implementing partner, the Middle East Nonviolence & Democracy

(MEND) organization, CRS will implement the Youth Voices for Community Action (YVCA) project

in six urban centers of the West Bank and Gaza Strip -- Jerusalem/Bethlehem, Hebron,

Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin and Gaza City. Targeting 360 direct and 4860 indirect beneficiaries

3

between the ages of 18-25, as well as beneficiaries from the community, the project will

produce a cadre of Palestinian youth who use nonviolent approaches to address conflict within

their communities. Concurrently, sustainable platforms will be established enabling youth to

voice concerns to local and national leaders regarding conflict in the WBG. In support of these

objectives, the YVCA will promote cooperative relationships between Palestinian civil society

actors and youth leaders for addressing issues of conflict in their communities. It will employ

experience-tested “continuous learning” and “learning-by-doing” approaches to reach

Palestinian communities with messages of nonviolence, and then will connect those messages

with Palestinian leaders…”

At the heart of the project were the “cadre of Palestinian youth” referred to above, particularly

those known as “Youth Ambassadors” (YAs). These were recruited from youth adventure camps

that began in September of 2009. Participants in the camp experiences submitted written

applications explaining why they wanted to become Youth Ambassadors, and indicating the

length of time they could commit to service. Applicants were observed during the camps and

interviewed to determine commitment, leadership skills and belief in the power of non-

violence. 16 Youth Ambassadors were selected from each camp from an average of 35

applicants.

The articulation of overall project goals was set out in a Results Framework, which appeared as

an Annex to “Youth Voices’” Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Plan (PMEP). The two

Strategic Objectives, central to the project, were that:

1. Targeted Palestinian youth use non-violent approaches to address conflict within their

communities, and

2. Targeted community members cooperate to address conflict in their communities

nonviolently

The full Results Framework is on the following page:

4

Strategic Objective 1: Targeted Palestinian youth use non-violent

approaches to address conflict within their communities.

Indicators:

% of targeted youth who are able to demonstrate skills gained through the project to their peers.

% of targeted youth exhibiting proactive community behavior

Intermediate Result 2.1: Platforms to address issues of Palestinian conflict are provided for Palestinian youth and local/national leaders. Indicators:

# of people attending USG-assisted facilitated events that are geared toward strengthening understanding and mitigating conflict between groups -

Outputs: 72 youth selected to act as Youth Ambassadors for the six

project locations;

Three national level meeting organized, gathering a minimum of 600 participants; and, participants have increased understanding of conflict analysis in the six project locations:

A minimum of 18 town hall meetings as part of the grants bringing together 900 community members;

15 meetings with appropriate local authorities in the West Bank;

12 focus groups meeting engaging 360 participants held in six localities; and,

At least five interviews with stakeholder per location;

GOAL: A CULTURE OF NONVIOLENCE IN TARGETED AREAS IS ENHANCED.

Strategic Objective 2: Targeted community members cooperate to

address conflict in their communities nonviolently.

Indicators:

% of participants who state there was positive cooperation between youth and community members

Intermediate Result 1.1: Targeted Palestinian youth have capacity to mitigate conflict in their communities nonviolently. Indicators:

# of people trained in conflict mitigation/resolution skills.

Outputs: Adventure Camp (AC) Curriculum in nonviolence is developed with input from CRS, MEND, and Scouts;

A two-day training-of-trainers session is conducted for project coordinators, CBO individuals, scouts in the West Bank and Gaza on the AC curriculum;

Pilot Nonviolence AC in West Bank is organized and the camp curriculum is tested;

Five ACs in five locations engaging 300 youth organized.

300 youth improve their skills in non-violent approaches to resolving conflict and life skills;

36 full days training sessions organized for 72 Youth Ambassadors in 6 localities trained in leadership skills, communication and conflict resolution and context analysis skills; and,

Working Groups’ understanding and skills of project design is enhanced

Cross-Cutting Intermediate Result: Targeted Palestinian civil society organization and youth implement conflict resolution projects in their communities nonviolently.

Indicators:

# of community- Based reconciliation projects completed with UGS assistance

# of community members reached from targeted communities through conflict mitigation projects. such as youth –led community projects

Outputs: 6 CBOs are identified and are committed to YVCA;

6 Working Groups are formed in the 6 project locations;

6 context analyses in each localities spearheaded by Youth Ambassadors including:

Working Groups complete the initial design for their first projects;

6 contextual analysis reports produced for the six localities;.

Up to 30 youth projects will be implemented in 6 localities with a total budget of $90,000 US;

Orange Paper is produced;

Joint work plan by youth for follow up steps and sustainability of the YVCA project is produced; and,

Booklet containing Context Analyses, Orange Paper, lessons learned and other important project documents is produced.

5

The PMEP indicated that a mid-term assessment would be carried out to ascertain if objectives

were being met, and if any changes in strategies were necessary. Quantitative indicators were

established for each of the two Strategic Objectives as well as outputs related to the

Intermediate Results; and a system of quarterly and annual reporting was established.

Project Modifications In the course of implementation several modifications were made. Some of these emerged

from regular monitoring and from the mid-term assessment carried out in September 2010.

The project:

Provided more incentives or rewards for distinguished ambassadors who committed

themselves for the whole duration of training, community analysis, proposal writing,

and project implementation.

Increased YA engagement with local leaders particularly the mayors and head of village

council as opposed to national leaders because work with local leaders proved to be

more effective.

Slightly decreased the number of townhall meetings, because people who came to

those meetings were engaged in project design and implementation.

Reviewed the management plan for the second phase of the project to allow for less

work for Middle East Nonviolence and Democracy (MEND) coordinators during the

implementation phase of the youth initiatives (mini-grants), and delegated MEND’s

project officer some of the coordinators’ work. As a result two MEND coordinators did

not continue working on the project.

Provided further communication skills training courses for YAs, as these skills were

considered critical for them to achieve their goals in creating a change on the ground in

their respective communities.

Other modifications were made as unforeseen issues arose among youth participants within

two of the targeted areas, and with project partners. These included:

Replacing, upon agreement with USAID, Jenin with Ramallah as a targeted area of this

project; thus maintaining the Project’s geographic scope of 6 localities in the West Bank

and Gaza. This decision was taken after the Women Activities Center (WAC) decided in

May 2010 to withdraw from the project upon receiving USAID’s negative vetting

information for one of the potential ambassadors from Jenin.

Replacing the Gaza partner, the Palestinian Commission for Human Development (CHD),

with the Basma Society for Culture and Art (Basma) after CHD was shut down by de

facto Ministry of Interior in Gaza. Since 2006, the de facto government has been

6

working to control civil society in Gaza; especially, the nongovernmental organizations

that are working with youth, children and/or human rights.

During the brief extension period of the YVCA project (from January 15, 2012 until April

30, 2012), not extending agreements with the Center for Democracy and Community

Development (CDCD) and MEND. This was for the following reasons:

o For MEND: It became evident to CRS that partners were able to continue on their

own without MEND support; and,

o For CDCD: It was difficult to maintain commitment of YAs to continue with the

project.

The final evaluation that led to the present report was carried out in the last weeks of the

project, when all but descriptions of the last four of twenty-two projects, a final “Orange Paper”

document, and a final National Assembly had yet to be completed.

On the regional map below, the project sites are indicated by a red dot.

Map of YVCA sites locations in West Bank and Gaza (red dots)

7

Executive Summary of this Report This report is largely focused on project results. Its findings are structured around the two

Strategic Objectives (SOs) of the project, its stated Theory of Change, and matters of initiative

sustainability. The report also provides a set of lessons learned and recommendations by

different project participants, and concludes with the evaluators’ own final reflections and

recommendations to CRS/JWBG regarding future youth and peacebuilding projects. Various

appendices are attached, among which are the list of interviews and mini-focus-groups carried

out, the semi-structured questionnaires, and the table of quantitative indicators previously

presented to USAID and provided to the evaluators.

For the hurried reader, what follows is a summary of the main points of this final evaluation

report. We hope it does not dissuade from closer examination in due time.

By every measure employed, this was a highly successful project. The quantitative data

collected for project tracking and reporting, most of them standard output indicators, tell a part

of the story. They are impressive, especially because absolutely every one of the score of

indicators were met or exceeded by project end. The Indicator Performance Tracking Table that

demonstrates this is in the appendices.

Arguably more important, the project was universally perceived as successful by randomly

selected representatives of the Youth Ambassadors (YAs) who were at the heart of the project;

by local municipal authorities in the project’s chosen implementation sites, by the leadership of

the principal project partner and its community-based organization (CBO) implementing

partners, and by CRS’ own chief of party and key staff. To quote USAID’s Technical

Representative (AOTR) for this project, “I’m very proud of this program…it’s remarkable; all

very impressive indeed.”

Strategic Objectives

As proposed by SO1, selected youth ambassadors addressed local conflict issues non-violently,

and did so in sometimes creative and innovative ways. They broke through passivity and

skepticism to transform local social dynamics, such as bringing together Christian and Muslim

youth in one site, reducing school violence and gaining the closure of environment-polluting

quarries within municipal boundaries—despite quarry owners’ resistance-- in another. Their

own understanding of and appreciation for non-violence has reportedly grown in the process.

As proposed by SO2, targeted community members (including local citizens, civic associations

and municipal authorities) did indeed cooperate with the youth in carrying out their initiatives.

The degree and forms of cooperation varied from place to place, but they included the

provision of meeting space, moral support, direct collaboration, and even small monetary

8

contributions. The self-confidence of many youth increased, as did the perception of them by

local authorities and their elders as responsible and capable citizens.

Theory of Change

The project’s stated theory of change, or working hypothesis, was that “when youth use

peaceful means for participation rather than violence, they become the major agents for peace,

and thus play a critical role in the future of Palestinian society.” When asked to comment on its

perceived validity, the vast majority of respondents in interviews and mini-focus-groups

endorsed this theory of change enthusiastically, particularly for the present. They had

witnessed evidence of it first-hand, and expected positive future results. A much smaller

number deemed it to have been at least partially validated, adding qualifiers such as its

dependence on carefully selected youth, variation from one young person to another, or

obvious uncertainty about participants’ contributions to the future of Palestinian society. A few

answered the question about the theory of change by saying they hoped it would prove valid,

shrugged “God knows,” or affirmed that it should be evaluated in a decade or more. One

project partner commented, “Social change is not like engineering; not like building a house.

For social change you need fifteen years.” Interestingly, not a single respondent indicated that

the project’s theory of change was mistaken or had been proven erroneous in practice.

Sustainability

Asked what besides fond memories the project was leaving in place, respondents referred to

increased social awareness, knowledge, and skills among young people—as well as much

greater self-confidence among many. They referred to apparently transformed personal

attitudes, and to a notable new appreciation for youth as responsible and effective by older

members of their communities. The evaluators learned of initiatives to create Youth Councils in

some municipalities, of the creation of at least relatively autonomous youth organizations, and

of the independent preparation by participating youth and beneficiaries of facebook pages to

remain in touch with one another and share ideas.

Concern was expressed nonetheless that the impressive gains of this project could be lost if

there is no continuity or follow-up, if youth do not find institutional moorings for future

engagement, or if a solid network of youth for non-violent service is not forthcoming. Many

lamented that the project was now ending, and expressed a desire for some form of continuity.

Lessons Learned

Different people learn different things in the course of a project such as this. When

respondents were asked in the interviews about lessons that could be carried into the future,

the evaluation team heard a wide variety of things. There was relatively little repetition.

9

A realization by youth participants themselves was just what the real problems in their

communities were, and especially how much they could

actually accomplish through a project like this. The realization

was not limited to young people. Asked what most surprised

them in the course of this project, Youth Ambassadors,

municipal authorities, CRS staff and partners alike often

referred to the changes youth were actually able to make or

to foster, their ability to communicate with authorities, their

energy, and their capacity to learn and to implement specific

concrete initiatives. This was both a pleasant surprise, and a

lesson learned that was widely shared by project

stakeholders. The learning suggests the accuracy of the first element of the Theory of Change,

namely that engaged youth can become “major agents for peace” in their communities.

A second rather widely shared lesson, and much related to the first, was the effectiveness of

this overall project and its methodology. Some referred to it as a “good model” or “a new way

to deal with problems.” The donor’s AOTR indicated that the key element was engaging youth

in “doing,” in carrying out practical activities-- not merely training them.

A pair of Youth Ambassadors indicated that they had learned the importance of never giving up.

One stated that obstacles are simply part of life and must be expected.

Of particular importance for an evaluation like this are the lessons that were learned by CRS

staff and partners: general principles drawn from or reaffirmed through the implementation of

a project, which they can later apply in comparable situations to enhance effectiveness. Here

again, there was not a great deal of overlap among respondents, but the following lessons

merit attention:

A project can be seriously weakened by a top-heavy or complicated management

structure, and/or confusion about roles and responsibilities.

Good partner selection needs to consider many elements. These include the capacities

of a partner across the entire range of activities they are expected to carry out, and the

competencies of not only top leadership but also the staff who will be directly

coordinating or implementing.

In projects such as this one in the West Bank and Gaza, compliance with US regulations

will take up an enormous amount of the time of the chief of party or project

manager—a majority of the time in the early phases. The regulations also dissuade

some young people from participating—not because they are terrorists but because

they are insulted; while they also prevent peacebuilding projects from including and

MEND coordinator

10

positively influencing segments of youth that may be more strongly inclined to use

violence.

Recommendations from Respondents

The most common recommendation the evaluators heard during the interviews were to

continue this kind of programming if possible; or even to scale it up, expand budgets or extend

the length of initiatives.

There were a variety of reflections on partnership and partner selection. These included a

simpler management structure, better matching of partner strengths to project roles, clearer

definition of partner roles and responsibilities, and better communication about administrative

and financial matters.

There were several relatively frequent suggestions about ways to enhance a project like this:

Selecting a slightly younger cohort of Youth Ambassadors (first and second year

university students rather than third or fourth) would probably improve YA retention. As

implemented, YVCA lost a number of Youth Ambassadors as they graduated and/or

became employed

Modest stipends for YAs would likely contribute to both motivation and retention,

without dampening the spirit of volunteer commitment

Time could be saved, and youth kept engaged, if further training and local initiatives

could be carried out without waiting for all YAs across the sites to reach the same

stage in the project, and

Implementing fewer local projects, each of them carried out over a longer period of

time and with more resources, would probably be more effective than the number (22)

that were actually carried out in YVCA.

Finally, there were a wide range of other recommendations that merit some consideration.

Some of these were:

Youth and partners who gained experience and skills in YVCA should be mobilized for

future initiatives

Greater attention should be paid to institutionalization of the initiative, including even

closer links to municipalities, the strengthening of CBOs and/or work with Palestinian

universities

More attention should be paid to helping youth gain livelihood skills and job

opportunities

YAs should work with children, whose attitudes and values are still in formation, and

11

Youth Ambassador in Bethlehem

If donors would allow it, work should focus on youth in Palestinian political parties and

factional conflicts, putting a hand on what one respondent called “the real wound.”

Evaluation Methodology As indicated above, the final evaluation of YVCA was carried out with a focus on the cumulative

results of the project after its nearly three years of existence (summative in character), but with

major emphasis on lessons learned and recommendations for future youth peacebuilding work

by CRS (utilization-focused).

The evaluation team employed desk review of original project documents and secondary data

already collected through the regular project monitoring

process; semi-structured interviews with key CRS staff and

partners (MEND and CBOs), as well as local

authorities/mayors; and mini-focus groups with Youth

Ambassadors. (The staff and partner interviews and the mini-

focus group for Gaza were carried out by Skype video,

because security concerns prohibited travel to Gaza). It is

important to note that the evaluation team did not interview

any of the many young people who participated in the

adventure camp experience at the beginning of the project but were not chosen as Youth

Ambassadors; ideally, it would have helped in assessing project methodology to learn what

these youth gained from the experience, and what if any negative consequences they

experienced.

The Evaluation Team was provided with the following secondary data for desk review:

1. The approved project proposal including its Performance Monitoring and Evaluation

Plan and the Indicator Performance Tracking Table for the original and revised Project

2. Local Partner Reports with raw data (in Arabic only)

3. Data uploaded on the USAID WBG GEO-MIS portal, and

4. Quarterly and Annual Reports to USAID, including completed Indicator Performance

Tracking Table and the Mid-term Reflection

While there was no baseline data as such, the final evaluation work was thus carried out with

the benefit of findings from mid-term reflection activities in September of 2010.

The mid-term assessment had attempted to answer the following questions:

(1) To what extent have project activities and/or approaches helped Palestinian youth in

using non-violent approaches when addressing conflict within their communities?

12

(2) What are the early signs of the project’s effects in targeted communities, showing that

members cooperated to address conflict nonviolently? and

(3) How effective is the current management structure in meeting project needs?

Some of the findings from the mid-term reflection, such as the fact that local communities had

begun to support the Youth Ambassadors and that mutual trust among them was increasing; or

that context analysis activities had unearthed root causes of problems in the targeted

communities, appear particularly relevant. So does the finding that the project’s management

structure was problematic, particularly involving confusion about reporting procedures and a

perceived weaker engagement of CRS’ principal partner, Middle East Nonviolence and

Democracy (MEND), after the first stage of the project had concluded.

Two lessons learned, presented in the mid-term reflection document, also remain relevant.

The first is that partners from the targeted communities and operations “owned” by them tend

to be important for project success. The second is that youth unemployment is both an

economic and a social issue, suggesting the importance in working with youth on both job-

specific skills; and life skills such as discipline, communication, self-confidence and teamwork.

The Scope of Work prepared for the final evaluation asked the team to address a different set

of questions and corresponding areas of inquiry. The final evaluation thus functioned

independently from the mid-term reflection process.

It should be noted too that while the final evaluation questions did not directly include financial

matters or management issues, the latter emerged in the interviews and they are thus referred

to as problematic in the sections on Lessons Learned and Recommendations.

The Final Evaluation team was asked to ascertain:

To what degree the project contributed to a culture of nonviolence in the targeted

areas (Goal)

Whether youth had in fact addressed conflicts non-violently in their communities

(SO1)

Whether communities had cooperated to address those conflicts or not (SO2), and

What the immediate and potentially longer-term effects of the project were

(Outcomes and Sustainability).

The evaluation team and the project’s Chief of Party prepared three separate but parallel Semi-

structured interview and focus group questionnaires. All aimed to address the above questions,

but each was tailored for a different group of respondents: (a) Youth Ambassadors, (b)

Municipal Authorities, and (c) CRS staff and partners.

13

Given the large number of Youth Ambassadors, it was determined to select only some of them

for the evaluation process, and to do so randomly for each site.

This was done using organized random selection of the youth,

where every fourth name was selected from a list for each site

in order to have a total of four YAs from each site. Where any of

the selected YAs were unable to participate in an interview, the

team invited the next person down on the list to replace that

individual. The result yielded what appeared to be a relatively

representative distribution of the YAs and a relatively good

gender balance.

A Schedule for the 23 sessions (Interviews and Youth Mini-Focus-Groups) is in the appendices at

the end of this Report.

Data Collection Process

Data collection from the field lasted from March 12, 2012 through March 22, 2012. There were

18 interviews and 5 mini-focus-groups, as indicated in the Schedule. These were carried out

face to face and on site, except in the case of Gaza. The trip to Gaza City, planned for March 19-

20, 2012, was cancelled by CRS/JWBG because of security concerns. Three interviews and a

mini-focus-group with participants in Gaza required the use of Skype videoconferencing, with

the Evaluation Team at the CRS Jerusalem office and the interviewees in the CRS office in Gaza

City.

The interviews and focus groups sessions each lasted between 45 minutes and 1 hour and 15

minutes, depending on the information provided and individuals’

availability. CRS scheduled all of these in advance, and the

purpose of the requests and evaluation were explained to the

informants.

Most of the interviews and focus groups were video-recorded for

future use, and in case any quote needed to be checked for

accuracy. Permissions to use the data were requested of and

granted by the interviewees. Video-recording was partial in some cases because of equipment

issues. In the case of the AOTR, it was not carried out because, due to USAID regulations, it

would have needed prior approval.

CRS Bethlehem Staffer – Ghaida

Rahil

Mini focus group in Nablus

14

Limitations/Cautionary Note on Data Collection

For clarity and transparency it is important to note a variety of factors which might have

affected the quality and accuracy of the data collected. These include (a) translation, (b) the

presence of CRS staff, (c) lack of anonymity, (d) the use of recording equipment, and (e) the

dynamics of group processes.

Translation issues

In the first place, all of the Youth Ambassador focus group sessions and most of the interviews

were carried out in Arabic, with Mariane posing the questions and translating the answers for

Tom. Translation could have slightly affected the precision of

the information requested and/or provided, and some direct

quotes may be less than perfectly accurate.

In cases in which informants were fully comfortable in the

English language, the interviews were carried out directly in

English, with Tom posing most of the questions. The interviews

in English were those with CRS staffers Khalil Ansara, Ghaida

Rahil, Reham Owda; that with MEND partners Lucy Nusseibeh

and Adel Ruished; that with implementing partners Walid Salem

of CDCD, and Nelly Nemeh at Bethlehem University; and that

with USAID AOTR Rima Ghandour.

To provide for a second note-taker when Mariane was engaged

in Arabic-English translation, the Evaluation Team was also

accompanied by CRS Operations Officer Raed Abu Rdeineh in

the visits to Hebron, Bethlehem and Nablus. Raed then

translated and submitted his interview notes to the team.

Internal evaluators

While the evaluators did not sense it, the fact that it was CRS staffers conducting the interviews

may also have had some distorting effect. The presence was limited to Tom and Mariane, at

times Raed, and Shireen Obaid who served as a translator for the Gaza focus group. Chief of

Party Khalil Ansara provided an introduction for the Evaluation Team in some cases, but always

left before the Q and A began. Mariane was not directly related to the YVCA project and Tom

was in the Palestinian territories for the first time, but the fact that they are CRS staff may have

inhibited the willingness of interviewees to speak critically of the project or otherwise affected

the nature of the dialogue.

Director of MEND – Lucy

Nusseibeh

Board Member of MEND- Adel

Ruished

15

Lack of anonymity and the presence of recording equipment

Some types of evaluations have the advantages --and disadvantages-- of engaging respondents

who are able to maintain their anonymity. This is not the case with face-to-face interview and

focus group methods of collecting data. Moreover, most of the evaluation sessions were video-

recorded. The presence of recording equipment is known to also affect interviews at times, so

the evaluation team sought to make the equipment unobtrusive and to put respondents at

ease.

Focus group dynamics

Interviewing a group of people simultaneously has its own drawbacks. A principal one is that

one or two people dominate, while others –for a variety of reasons—may say little. Here too,

the Evaluation Team attempted to mitigate the possibility by encouraging all to participate,

disagree, and provide different points of view.

The evaluation team, as indicated, was cognizant of and

sought to limit any negative impacts on the data collection

process due to translation, internal evaluators, lack of

anonymity, the presence of recording equipment, and group

dynamics. They perceived no obvious reserve, reticence, or

other negative effects. To the contrary, respondents exhibited much enthusiasm and at least

appeared to them to be frank in their answers.

Data Analysis

The process of data analysis involved a desk review of secondary data, including completed

project reports, descriptions of 18 of the 22 youth projects, and indicator matrix tables. The

Evaluation Team also reviewed a draft of an “Orange Paper” document describing the entire

project, the context and the outcomes.

Interview and mini focus groups data was carefully reviewed, distinguishing staff and partner

responses; those of authorities; and those of Youth Ambassadors. Similar types of responses

were clustered and their frequency noted.

Draft findings were prepared, with the Review Team then coming to consensus about its

findings and their presentation in this Report.

Some subjectivity in the interpretation of data is of course unavoidable. Secondary data and

final evaluation questionnaire sheets with raw data, as well as videotapes of interviews, remain

on file at the CRS/JWBG office.

Bethlehem Youth Ambassadors

16

Major Findings

Strategic Objective 1

The youth addressed a wide variety of local conflict issues non-violently, and with

considerable efficacy.

Discussion:

22 different projects on conflictive local issues have been completed. They were summarized in

the brief description of each of them from Annex I of the project’s concluding “Orange Paper,”

and are included among the appendices of this Evaluation Report.

According to the Indicators Performance Tracking Table from the YVCA project’s last quarterly

report to USAID, nearly 400 people were trained in non-violence or conflict

mitigation/resolution skills early in the life of the project. Over 70% of targeted youth were

reportedly able to demonstrate the skills gained to their peers, and a similar percentage of

them have exhibited “proactive community behavior.” This slightly exceeded the project’s

planned values for each of these categories.

Finally, when the Evaluation Team asked youth participants whether they had addressed

specific conflicts in their communities, their response was always in the affirmative. When the

Team asked municipal authorities if the youth had effectively addressed conflicts non-violently,

the mayors answered “yes, very effectively” (Hebron), that “results were achieved” despite

limited time (Bethlehem), and that the work was “positive” (Bethlehem and Ramallah). Specific

examples were consistently provided, and the Evaluation Team was itself able to observe some

of the physical products of the project, such as the trees planted in Hebron.

What was considered most significant by respondents was not the number of projects

completed nor the impact of any particular project/s, but (a) the capacities the youth gained

through participation in the project, (b) changes in relationships, and (c) the role of non-

violence.

Discussion

CRS staff members, partners and the USAID AOTR were all asked what they considered the

most significant results of the YVCA project overall. Answers varied greatly, but the most

frequent response was the number of youth trained, or the youth capacities that were built.

Next in order was the positive response of the young people to non-violence as a way to solve

problems.

17

Other responses included personal transformations of the youth, the respect and trust they

gained from others, their ability to interact with authorities, and the youth-initiated projects

they implemented.

Representatives of the Youth Ambassadors, when asked for visible or tangible signs of the

results of their work, mentioned outcomes or outputs like a reduction in school violence, or the

closing of the quarries inside municipal boundaries (Bani Naim, Hebron focus group). More

often, however, they spoke of new relationships such as Muslim and Christian youth coming

together (Aboud, Ramallah), or cooperation and trust (Bethlehem). A YA from Gaza commented

that “parents changed their minds about us.”

The perceived factors for the project’s success were widespread: the quality and energy of

the youth ambassadors; sound project methodology; a number of good partners; and CRS

management including the leadership of the Chief of Party

Discussion

Staff and partners’ assessment of the principal factors behind the project’s success ranged quite

evenly over the above four items. The AOTR was emphatic about the importance of the role

played by the Chief of Party, and mentioned the selection of the CBOs as well.

The principal difficulties or obstacles encountered were with project management, and with

official policies and practices

Discussion

As mentioned in the lessons learned section of Executive Summary above, the project suffered

from a top-heavy or unnecessarily complicated management structure, and some confusion

about roles and responsibilities. From the perspective of CRS, MEND was extremely effective in

the project’s conceptualization and in the initial stages of training, but –with some important

exceptions locally—not at all effective in overall coordination in the implementation phase. CRS

staff ended up coordinating much of the work with the CBOs and the YAs at the local level.

Political policies of both the US government and Hamas, though known in advance, created

some serious challenges. Ensuring compliance with US regulations took an enormous amount

of the time of the Chief of Party, especially in the earliest phases of the project. US regulations

also dissuaded some young people from participating in YVCA (Jenin) or continuing (Jerusalem).

In Gaza, Hamas closed down the first YVCA local CBO partner; it had to be replaced with

another.

Young people’s understandings and perceptions of non-violence very clearly changed—

though on a small scale and mostly in everyday life

18

Discussion

When CRS staff and its partners (both MEND and local CBO leaders) were asked if young

people’s perceptions of non-violence had changed, the responses were overwhelmingly yes.

The responses were qualified, however, with phrases like “on a small scale” or “not to the

extent we wanted.” Mentalities and communication patterns were said to have changed. Youth

were described as “less aggressive after the trainings.” One partner commented that at least

some of the youth clearly recognized “the power of non-violence.” Another stated that youth

had been helped see non-violence as an ethical principle and not merely an “instrumental”

approach to issues. A local coordinator in Gaza commented that the people live with “a circle of

violence,” and that the goal had been positive engagement and violence reduction.

When the Evaluation Team asked youth ambassadors if their perceptions of non-violence had

changed, the answers were again overwhelmingly in the positive. The concept had come to be

better understood, but the applications were of course largely in everyday life. YAs gave

examples like no longer striking a sibling, having a new respect for the environment, not

shouting, considering other people before acting, and breaking up fights when they see them.

They also said they can more effectively address problems.

Strategic Objective 2

There was clear and positive cooperation between youth working groups and community

members across the project sites

Discussion

Interview and focus group respondents overwhelmingly reported to the Evaluation Team that

communities had been cooperative in the YVCA project.

The IPTT data collected prior to the final evaluation indicated that 73% of participants stated

that there was positive cooperation between youth and community members, well above the

projected 60% value for YVCA’s second fiscal year. And the number of people who attended the

project’s USG-supported facilitated events came to 1523, over 400 above the indicator target.

It is important to differentiate, however, between the cooperation of local authorities and that

of broader civil society in the communities. Distinctions and details are dealt with in the two

findings here below.

Local authorities cooperated with the youth to address conflict-related issues in their

communities, except in Gaza and Jerusalem

Discussion

19

Cooperation from municipal authorities was widespread in the project, though the degree of

support varied from place to place. The strongest occurred in Bani Naim (Hebron) and Al

Khader (Bethlehem), and it seems to have grown as youth carried out the projects. The

weakest cooperation was arguably in Aboud, where youth had to work hard for support and

were disappointed it was not stronger.

Because of the US government’s contact policy, there could be no involvement of municipal

authorities in Gaza City. And because of the absence of the

Palestinian Authority in Israeli-controlled Jerusalem, there was

no involvement of municipal authorities there.

In Bani Naim, the municipality was present for virtually every

project event. The mayor told the evaluation team that it had

not been easy for municipal council members to make way for

youth, but that they had done so as a sign of growing respect.

He commented, “I feel jealous; youth ambassadors are the

stars in the village.” Besides the mayor’s cooperation, there was support from the governor and

some ministries.

In Al Khader, YAs recognized the support provided by the

mayor, as well as the Ministry of Education. Plans were

underway there for the establishment of a Youth Council.

“Even my own view has changed” said the mayor; “I see what

youth can do.”

In Nablus, the largest of the target municipalities, the mayor

participated in one YVCA town hall meeting. He reportedly told

the YAs “Whatever you want, I’m ready.” Representatives of

the governor and local police authorities were also supportive.

Other social sectors and organizations in the target communities cooperated, despite some

early resistance

Discussion

Here again, cooperation varied by locality and project. There was resistance and/or early

skepticism in a variety of communities, from Bani Naim to Al Khader to Aboud to Nablus. But

local CBOs, parents, sports clubs, women’s organizations, organizations of people with

disabilities, universities and school officials were among the sectors who got involved. Police

officials became supportive in Nablus, where one project had to do with traffic issues. “I’m

Mayor of Bani Naim (Mr. Radwan

Manasrah)

Mayor of Nablus (Mr. Adly Yaish)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adly_Yaish

20

really satisfied,” commented the project’s Chief of Party with regard to overall community

engagement in YVCA.

In Bani Naim, the evaluation team was told that community turnout for events consistently

exceeded expectations. In Jerusalem, on the other hand, cooperation was more difficult,

affected according to the director of MEND by the population’s general “depression and

frustration.”

Scheduled town hall meetings were seen as a useful vehicle for connecting authorities, youth

leaders and communities. The town hall sessions informed communities, fostered serious

communication, and garnered feedback on proposed activities. They connected YAs with

communities, while fostering broad participation, transparency and accountability.

Theory of Change

Youth employing non-violent means of solving problems did indeed become major actors

(agents for peace) in their communities

Discussion

When asked to comment on the validity of the project’s theory of change, that “when youth use

peaceful means for participation rather than violence, they become the major agents for peace,

and thus play a critical role in the future of Palestinian society”, the vast majority of

respondents in interviews and mini-focus-groups endorsed it enthusiastically, particularly the

part of the theory dealing with the present. They had witnessed evidence of it first-hand, and

had been surprised by what the youth had been able to accomplish. A much smaller number

deemed it to have been at least partially validated, adding qualifiers such as its dependence on

carefully selected youth, or noting variation from one young person to another. Absolutely no

one said the theory had been disproved. A contributing factor that bears mention is that most

of the targeted project sites were relatively small communities, where engaged youth

ambassadors could and did truly stand out as major social actors.

Whether or not these youth ambassadors will play a critical role in the future of Palestinian

society remains uncertain

Discussion

There is obvious uncertainty about participants’ contributions to the future of Palestinian

society. A few respondents answered questioning about the second part of the theory of

change by saying they hoped it would prove valid, or that “God knows;” or by affirming that this

should be evaluated in a decade or more. One project partner commented, “Social change is

not like engineering; not like building a house. For social change you need fifteen years.”

21

Still, respondents referred to such predictors of a critical role in the future as the current

enthusiasm and engagement of the youth, their new capacities, and their personal

development over the course of the project. Many of the Youth Ambassadors in the focus

groups expressed strong conviction that they would have significant roles in the future, as

social workers, managers or political leaders. In Bani Naim some of the YAs essentially ran the

municipal government for a week with minimal supervision.

Sustainability

Some promising institutional bases and social processes for continuity have been created, but

they appear to be relatively fragile

Asked what YVCA is leaving behind as it comes to a close, interview respondents referred to

increased social awareness, knowledge, and skills among young people—as well as far greater

self-confidence among many. They referred to apparently transformed personal attitudes, and

to a notable new appreciation for youth as responsible and effective by older members of their

communities. Concern was expressed nonetheless that the impressive gains of this project

could be lost if there is no real follow-up or mentoring, if the youth ambassadors do not find

institutional moorings for future engagement, or if a strong network of youth is not

forthcoming. Many lamented that the project was now ending, and expressed a desire for it to

be extended.

The evaluators learned of initiatives to sustain or create ongoing Youth Councils in some of the

YVCA municipalities, of the employment of some Youth Ambassadors by local CBOs, of the

creation of a youth organization within the CBO partner in Nablus, and of the independent

preparation of facebook pages by YVCA youth in various places in order to stay in touch with

one another and share ideas. Some former YVCA youth ambassadors have been incorporated

into more recent USAID-funded projects, like CRS/CPP (Civic Participation Program).

Furthermore, some municipalities intend to carry on or expand elements of the work, such as

additional environmental measures in Bani Naim and security for the park in Al Khader.

These are all encouraging signs that the initiatives undertaken and the momentum created will

not be lost, but Youth Councils will depend on municipal government leaders, local CBOs often

struggle to stay afloat, and project funding for the Palestinian Territories is currently on shaky

ground in the US Congress.

A hope of the director of MEND is the establishment of a formal network of youth for non-

violent service, but it has not been possible to achieve at least thus far.

22

Unintended Results

Projects often have unintended consequences, be they positive or negative. Quite remarkably,

absolutely no negative outcomes were reported by any of the individuals interviewed by the

Evaluation Team. Perceptions of the YVCA project were extremely positive across the board.

The Chief of Party and the Deputy Country Representative (DCR) for CRS/JWBG did express

some concern about the sizeable number of young people who participated in the youth

adventure camps in the first stages of the project, but were not chosen to be YAs ambassadors.

There had been a hope that many would continue to engage in some way with project

activities, but this was not structured into the design as such. There were no activities explicitly

for them, or tracking of them. Neither were any of them included among the 38 people

interviewed for the Final Evaluation, so it is impossible to gauge to what degree they perceived

participation in the project to have been beneficial, and/or harmful in some way. There was,

however, a conviction of those who designed the project that project success would depend on

selecting as YAs those with commitment, available time and leadership capacity. Some

disappointment among those not chosen was inevitable.

The Evaluation Team was surprised and energized by the enthusiasm and self –confidence

expressed by many of the YAs. At the same time, as the project came to an end, the Team felt

some concern that disappointment and frustration could be lurking for some of them once the

opportunities and mentoring of the project ended.

Lessons Learned

As stated in the Executive Summary, different people learn different things in the course of a

project like this. Youth participants learned about pressing problems in their communities, and

especially how much they were capable of accomplishing through a project like this. The

realization was not limited to young people. Asked what most surprised them in the course of

this project, Youth Ambassadors, municipal authorities, CRS staff and partners alike often

referred to the changes youth were actually able to make or to foster, and their ability to relate

and communicate with authorities. This lesson learned was widely shared by project

stakeholders.

A second widely shared lesson, including by the Evaluation Team itself, was the effectiveness of

this overall project and its methodology. Some referred to it as a “good model” or “a new way

to deal with problems.” As stated above, the donor’s AOTR indicated that the key element was

engaging youth in “doing,” in carrying out practical activities-- not merely giving them workshop

training.

23

What CRS staff and partners learned, that is, lessons drawn from or reaffirmed through the

implementation of this project which they can later apply in comparable situations, included

the following:

A project can be seriously weakened by a top-heavy or complicated management

structure, and/or confusion about roles and responsibilities within the structure.

Good partner selection is crucial, and it demands the consideration of many elements.

These include relevant experience, competency across the entire range of project

activities they are expected to carry out, and the capability of not only top leadership

but also the staff who will be directly coordinating or implementing.

In projects such as this one in the West Bank and Gaza, compliance with US regulations

take up an enormous amount of the time of the chief of party or project manager—a

majority of the time in the early phases.

Current US regulations also dissuade some young people from participating—not

because they are terrorists but because they are offended by vetting procedures, and

they also prevent peacebuilding projects from including and positively influencing

segments of youth that may be more strongly inclined to use violence.

Recommendations of Stakeholders The final section of this Report provides the priority recommendations of the Evaluation Team,

but it is useful to review the most common recommendation the evaluators heard during the

interviews:

Continue this kind of programming, but expand budgets and especially the length of

time dedicated to specific community initiatives.

Design a simpler management structure, better match partner strengths to project

roles, more clearly define partner roles and responsibilities, and improve

communication about administrative and financial matters.

There were several relatively frequent suggestions about ways to enhance a project like this:

Select a slightly younger cohort of Youth Ambassadors (first and second year university

students rather than third or fourth) to improve YA retention. The project lost a number

of Youth Ambassadors as they graduated and/or became employed

Provide modest stipends for YAs, for both motivation and retention, without dampening

the spirit of volunteer commitment

Implement further training and local initiatives without waiting for all YAs across the

sites to reach the same stage in the project, and

24

Implement fewer local projects, but over a longer period of time and with more

resources.

Additional recommendations included:

Mobilize youth and partners who gained experience and skills in YVCA for future

initiatives

Pay more attention to institutionalization of the initiative, including even closer links to

municipalities, the strengthening of CBOs and/or work with Palestinian universities

Pay more attention to helping youth gain livelihood skills and get jobs

Work with children whose attitudes and values are still in formation, and

If donors would allow it, focus on youth in Palestinian political parties and factional

conflicts, where some of the most serious issues arise

Evaluators’ Conclusion The YVCA project has proven to be highly successful in the eyes of youth, coordinators, mayors,

partners and community representatives; as well as those of CRS staff and of the donor, USAID.

That widespread and firmly grounded opinion is shared by the Evaluation Team, and clearly

reflected in the pages of this Report.

This type of carefully designed and focused project is effective, and its impact is already clear to

beneficiaries and stakeholders alike. Youth in Palestine lack this kind of non-violent civic

engagement, and are in need of similar projects now and into the foreseeable future.

Recommendations of the Evaluation Team The evaluation team is in agreement with the most of the recommendations made by the

stakeholders, and adds a few others here. It concludes this Report with ten priority

recommendations to CRS leadership and other interested parties. They are as follows:

Replicate this kind of programming—including its focus on youth as change agents; and

its carefully crafted methodology with training in non-violence, a selection of key youth,

learning by doing, and institutional links to local communities—as a model for future

civic engagement and peacebuilding work

Design a simpler management structure for partners and carefully match partner

strengths and capacities to their specific roles

Give preference to work in villages where it will generally be more effective and have

greater impact

Work on fewer total initiatives but for longer periods of time and somewhat larger

budgets for each

25

Work on visible signs of success in the different sites because they serve as enduring

symbols of what is possible and register in people’s memories

Select a younger cohort of university youth (maximum second year of studies) to

improve retention

Prepare to incorporate new youth leaders/ambassadors during project

implementation because turnover is always expected

Provide modest incentives to young people (stipends, scholarships, livelihood skills

training and employment opportunities), while simultaneously promoting the spirit of

personal commitment

Take advantage of the prepared cadre of Youth Ambassadors for future projects, and

Pay careful attention to sustainability and institutionalization of initiatives, including

close links with municipalities, schools/universities and local community-based

organizations.

26

Acronyms

AOTR Agreement Officer’s Technical Representative

Basma Basma Society for Culture and Art

CBOs Community Based Organizations

CDCD Center for Democracy and Community Development

CHD Palestinian Commission for Human Development

CPP Civic Participation Program

CRS Catholic Relief Services

DCR Deputy Country Representative

Geo-MIS Geo-Management Information System

IPTT Indicator Performance Tracking Table

JWBG Jerusalem West Bank and Gaza

MEND Middle East Nonviolence and Democracy

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

PMEP Performance Management and Evaluation Plan

RWG Ramallah Working Group

SO Strategic Objective

WAC Women Activities Center

WBG West Bank and Gaza

YA(s) Youth Ambassador(s)

YVCA Youth Voices for Community Action

USAID United States Agency for International Development

27

List of Appendices

Appendix 1: Schedule of Meetings

Appendix 2: Data Collection Tools

Appendix 3: Indicators Sheet – Youth Voices for Community Action project

Appendix 4: Brief Description of 22 Youth-Led Projects

28

Appendix 1: Schedule of Meetings

# Meeting and Place Date Hour

1 Head of Village Council Abood – in Abood Village Council- Abu Saleh

Monday March 12 10:00 - 10:30

2 Meeting with Marian Mualem and Razan Abdelmajid- Youth Ambassadors

Monday March 12 10:30 - 11:15

3 Razan Najjar - Ramallah Ambassador Monday March 12 12:30-13:30

4 Hamza Shinawi -Ramallah Ambassador Monday March 12 3:00 - 4:00

5 Mayor of Bani Naim Tuesday March 13th 11:00 AM -11:45 AM

6 Bani Naim Youth Group Tuesday March 13th 12:00 PM- 1:00 PM

7 Bani Naim management Tuesday March 13th 1:00 PM-1:30 PM

8 Mayor Al Khader Wednesday March 14 10:00 AM -10:45 AM

9 Dalal Center For Culture and Art - Nelly Nemeh Wednesday March 14 11:00 AM-11:45 AM

10 Bethlehem Youth Group Wednesday March 14 12:00 PM -12:30 PM

11 Meeting with Ghaida - CRS Employee Wednesday March 14 14:00 - 15:00

12 Mayor of Nablus Thursday March 15 1:15PM -1:45PM

13 Nablus Youth Group Thursday March 15 2:00 PM – 3:00PM

14 Happy Childhood Management Thursday March 15 3:00PM – 4:00PM

15 Iyad Krunz, the pervious manager of CHD-( First partner of YVCA in Gaza )

Monday March 19 11:00 PM -11:30 PM

16 Management of Basma Center for Culture and Art –Gaza

Monday March 19 11:40 AM -12:20 PM

29

17 Gaza youth Group Monday March 19 1:00 PM- 2:00 PM

18 Reham Owda- project coordinator Tuesday March 20 9:00 AM- 10:00 AM

19 Khalil Ansara Tuesday March 20 10:00 AM- 11:00 AM

20 Nidal Allan -MEND coordinator Wednesday March 21 13:00PM -14:00 PM

21 Meeting with Walid Salem Wednesday March 21 03:00 - 4:00

22 Rima Ghandour - USAID Thursday March 22 10:00 - 11:00 Am

23 Lucy Nusseibeh and Adel Ruished-MEND Thursday March 22

3:00 - 4:00 pm

30

Appendix 2: Data Collection Tools

Final Evaluation, CRS/JWBG Youth Voices for Community Action (YVCA)

Tom Bamat and Mariane Mathia. March 2012

Data Source: Youth Participants

Method: Mini Focus Groups (youth ambassadors)

GUIDING QUESTIONS

Youth Addressing Conflicts Non-violently (SO 1)

1. As project participants, have you addressed specific conflicts in your communities? (Y/N)

a. What is the most significant result achieved by the project?

b. What are visible or tangible signs of these results?

c. What has been the major difficulty or obstacle you have faced?

d. Have there been any negative effects of project activities?

e. Has participation in the project changed your perception of non-violence as an

option in handling conflicts? (Y/N) If so, how?

f. What do your friends think about what you are doing? ( hero, crazy, neutral)

2. What new skills or capacities from the project have helped you to address conflicts?

a. What is the most important skill gained through the project?

b. How difficult was it to put new skills into actual practice?

c. Has addressing community conflicts through this project changed your view of

yourself, as someone able to contribute to positive change in the larger society?

d. Is it reasonable to think that you can and will play a critical role in the future of

Palestinian society? (2c and 2d in particular are meant to get at the validity of

the theory of change)

Community members Cooperating to Address Conflicts Non-violently (SO2)

3. Did targeted/designated community members cooperate with you to address conflicts

non-violently?

a. Were local authorities engaged?

b. If so, how and to what degree were the authorities engaged?

c. Did other sectors of the community cooperate? If so, which?

d. Who participated in the town hall meetings?

e. What were the effects (positive/negative) of the town hall meetings?

31

Sustainability

4. As this project comes to a close, what besides its memory is left among people and the

institutions in your communities?

5. What do you think will be the effects of this project, if any, in three to five years?

Lessons Learned

6. What, if anything, surprised you during your participation in this project?

7. Have you learned any lessons from being part of the project?

Recommendations

8. If you were to give any advice about future projects, what would you suggest and to

whom would you say it?

**********************************

32



Data Source: CRS staff, partners and other implementers (Coordinators and Directors)

Method: Semi-Structured Questionnaire (one or two people)

GUIDING QUESTIONS


1. Which are the most significant results achieved by YVCA?

2. What key factors contributed to these results?

3. What are visible or tangible signs of these results?

4. What difficulties or obstacles were encountered and how have they been addressed?

5. Do you think youth perceptions of non-violence changed? If so, how?


6. Have community members cooperated to address conflicts non-violently?

7. Were local authorities engaged?

8. If so, how and to what degree were the authorities engaged?

9. Did other sectors of the community cooperate? If so, which?

10. Who participated in the town hall meetings?

11. What were the effects (positive/negative) of the town hall meetings?

12. How did you use the context analysis?

Theory of Change

13. The theory of change was basically that if youth address conflicts non-violently, then they

become major agents of peace, and play a critical role in the future of Palestinian society.

Do you think this theory was validated, or not?

14. What, if you perceive any, are “predictors” of that critical future role?

Sustainability




17. How is your organization affected by the projects? Plans, grants gained

33

Lessons Learned



20. What where were the challenges of gaining women participation in this project?

Recommendations



**********************************

34



Data Source: Mayors and Key Community Stakeholders separately- (varies by localities)

Method: Semi-Structured Questionnaire

GUIDING QUESTIONS


1. Through YVCA, have youth been able to effectively address conflicts non-violently?

2. Which are the most significant results achieved?

3. What are visible or tangible signs of the results?


4. How have (you) local authorities worked with youth to address conflicts non-violently?

5. Are there other authorities engaged and to what degree?

6. Did other sectors of the community cooperate? If so, which?

7. How have community members cooperated?

8. Who participated in the town hall meetings?

9. What were the effects (positive/negative) of the town hall meetings?

10. Did community perceptions of youth and their capacities to engage change during the

project?

11. Did youth themselves seem to change; if so, how?

Theory of Change

12. The theory of change was basically that if youth address conflicts non-violently, then

they become major agents of peace, and play a critical role in the future of Palestinian

society. Do you think this theory was validated, or not?

13. What, if you perceive any, are “predictors” of a critical future role?

Sustainability




35

Lessons Learned



Recommendations



**********************************

36

Appendix 3: Indicators Sheet – Youth Voices for Community Action project

# Level GEO-

MIS

Code

Indicator name Ind

icato

r

form

at

PM

P

Ind

icato

r

typ

e

Ba

seline

va

lue

Planned

value for

FY1

Actual

value

for

FY1

Planne

d value

for FY2

Actual

value

for

FY2

Planne

d value

for

FY3

Actual

value

for

FY3

Actual

Total

/average

Total

Variance

to date

1 SO1 PRP0012 % of targeted youth

who are able to

demonstrate skills

gained through the

project to their peers

% MGT 20% 40% 57% 60% 73% 70% 73% 3%

2 SO1 PRP0013 % of targeted youth

exhibiting proactive

community behavior

% MGT 34% 40% 57% 60% 71% 70% 71% 1%

3 IR1.1 PRP0014 # of people trained

in conflict

mitigation/resolution

skills

Integer MGT 387 392 0 0 392 5

4 Output PRP0015 #of the adventure

camps implemented

in the six lactations

Integer MGT 7 7 0 0 7 0

5 Output PRP016 # of full days

training sessions

organized for 72

Youth Ambassadors

in six localities

Integer MGT 0 36 65 0 0 65 29

6 C-C IR PRP0017 # of community-

based reconciliation

projects completed

with UGS assistance

Integer OP 0 0 0 18 13 0 5 18 0

7 C-C IR PRP0029 # of community

members reached

through community-

based reconciliation

Integer MGT 0 0 2,700 5,190 0 916 6,106 3,406

37

projects, such as

youth led-

community projects

8 Output PRP0018 # of Working

Groups formed in

six project locations

Integer MGT. 0 6 6 0 0 6 0

9 Output PRP0019 # of context analysis

spearheaded by

Youth Ambassadors

in the target

localities

Integer MGT 0 6 6 0 0 6 0

10 Output PRP0020 # of contextual

analysis reports

produced for the six

localities

Integer MGT 0 6 6 0 0 6 0

11 SO2 PRP0021 % of participants

who state there was

positive cooperation

between youth and

community

members.

% MGT 53% 0 60% 73% 0 73% 13%

12 IR2.1 PRP0010 #of people attending

USG-assisted

facilitated events

that are geared

toward

strengthening

understanding and

mitigating conflict

between groups

Integer OP 0 600 561 460 837 50 125 1523 413

13 Output PRP0022 #of the national

meeting held Integer MGT 0 1 1 1 1 1 2 -1

14 Output PRP0023 #of focus groups

meetings held in the

six localities

Integer MGT 0 12 19 0 0 19 7

15 Output PRP0024 #of interviews with

stakeholder Integer MGT 0 30 72 0 0 72 42

38

conducted in each

location

16 Output PRP0025 # of town hall

meetings held in the

six localities

Integer MGT 0 0 18 16 0 2 18 0

17 Output PRP0026 #of meeting held

with the local

authorities in the

WB.

Integer MGT 0 0 15 21 0 21 6

18 Out put PRP149 # of USG-supported

facilitated events

geared toward

strengthening

understanding

among conflict-

affected groups

Integer MGT 0 29 93 19 17 1 2 112 63

19 Out put PRP153 Number of men

attending facilitated

events that are

geared toward

strengthening

understanding

among conflict

affected groups that

were supported with

USG assistance

Integer MGT 0 300 310 480 430 25 81 821 16

20 Out put PRP154 Number of women

attending facilitated

events that are

geared toward

strengthening

understanding

among conflict

affected groups that

were supported with

USG assistance

Integer MGT 0 300 251 120 407 25 44 702 257

39

Appendix 4: Brief Description of 22 Youth-Led Projects

Color Your Life Initiative- Gaza Strip Summary Objectives: Alleviate psychological pressure of 360 children from AlZaytona, Maghazy, Beit Hanoun, and Gaza City, and promote the culture of nonviolence and tolerance among the targeted children.

Conducted ten story sessions for 253 children. Conducted six game sessions for 107 children. Conducted two awareness workshops for the 55 parents of children on the relationship

between parents and children Distributed brochures about the project activities.

Be Strong Project – Gaza Strip:

Summary Objectives: Raise awareness of 180 women and 34 men from Gaza City on domestic

violence and strengthen the role of the targeted women in reducing violence.

Eight workshops on domestic violence for 166 women and 34 men; A seminar for 14 women on women’s rights; Organized an art competition; Increased knowledge of 224 targeted community members on the negative effects of

domestic violence and the effective interventions that can be used to prevent violence: and, Ten young women artists expressed violence against women in their paintings.

People and the Environment - Bani Naim, Hebron Summary Objective: Targeted Bani Naim people are aware of violence resulting from environmental issues and act to reduce its effects.

The Working Group reached out to 1,575 community members; Planted 185 trees along the Wadi al Jouze Street (Bani Naim- Hebron road). (Targeting 332

people directly and 834 people as beneficiaries of the trees in the community) Cleaned the street of Wadi Al Jouze (29 participants); Conducted nine awareness workshops in seven schools on pollution (309 children); First town hall meeting (33 participants) and final town hall meeting (38 participants) with a

total of 71 participants; and, Distributed one thousand brochures.

You [women] Constitute Half of the Society and the Creator of the Other Half, Bethlehem To strengthen the capacity of targeted women from Al Khader City and enhance their role in the community.

Over five days, conducted forty hours of training work to enhance the role of 40 women and build their capacities and skills (including computer skills). These workshops focused on women’s self-esteem, and enhancing their role in society. With more skills and knowledge on how to access their rights, they are now able to reduce the violence against them as well as teach their children how to do the same.

Field visits to community organizations and charities, including homes for old people. One of the field visits was to the Mehour protection center for women who are victims of violence. Fifty women attended these visits and learned about the different kinds of violence that Palestinian women face.

Installed an engraved tablet made of stone at the entrance of Al Khader City containing the text on women rights.

40

“Whether City, Village or Camp, We Are All One”, Nablus Summary Objective: Break prejudice and negative class stereotypes that has marred the relationship between groups and individuals in Nablus area.

Kick-start town hall meeting with 75 participants; Survey of 055 students of Al Najah University pertaining to the problem of intolerance

between youth from different backgrounds. Three awareness workshops targeting 36 participants (20 of them were women); Three art murals in the three localities emitting the message of tolerance. Six workshops with the targeted youth, women, children and officials targeting 62

participants (13 were females). Distributed posters and badges to people in the area about the importance of tolerance and

social cohesion. Closeout town hall meeting with attendance of 50 participants of which 23 were female.

“Aboud for All”, Aboud Village Ramallah: Summary Objective Enhance relationship and social cohesion among Christian and Muslim of Aboud, with focus on youth and children.

Outing for 30 youth in Jericho to discuss intra-communal violence and harmony between Muslim and Christian communities.

Twenty Aboud Volunteers met in Aboud Village Council. In this meeting, the Youth Ambassadors conducted team building and leadership exercises to strengthen the relationship between youth.

Fifteen Aboud Volunteers attended a film about nonviolence. Aboud Volunteers took a tour around Aboud to see the other side of the town and at the same

time enhance their sense of community. An open day for 70 Christian and Muslim Children of Aboud. A Facebook group established for Christian and Muslin volunteers and Ramallah Youth

Ambassadors; and, Maintained 3 bus stops.

Children Safe from Violence – Jerusalem: Summary Objective: Reduce violence in the targeted school and reduce psychosocial stress among 22 pupils 8-12 years of age in the Old City of Jerusalem.

A town-hall meeting for 66 participants (33 women). Two orientation sessions for 24 children, including a visit to the elderly house of Beit Al

Rahma in Jabal Mukaber in Jerusalem (15 children and 15 seniors). Ten drama trainings for 12 children on a play especially designed to address the problem of

child-to-child violence. Ten Dabka trainings with a specialized trainer allowing youth to interact together in a free,

fun and normal environment for children. “Open day” for 132 children in the Old City of Jerusalem. Three performances of Dabka and a play. Final meeting (20 participants).

Bani Naim More Beautiful and Cleaner, Hebron Summary Objective: Through an awareness campaign and distribution of small garbage containers provided by the YVCA project and the Municipality, the Hebron Working Group and the Municipality will mitigate the source of conflict in 3 neighborhoods targeted in this project.

Meeting at Al Thanawia Girls School in Bani Naim, to present the project to the mayor and 32 participants.

A mural on the outer wall of the Girls School was completed promoting nonviolence values to

41

the public. “Open Space” meeting for Children in Bani Naim was conducted under the title “fun day”

attended by 693 participants including disabled children, teachers and principals. A workshop on the conflict resulting from environmental concerns in the city. In attendance

of 22 school teachers and imams. Bani Naim imams dedicated their Friday Speech on February 25, 2011 to speak about the

importance of civil peace with focus on environmental related violence. A football match in support of nonviolence and environmental protection (98 participants); Distribution of 104 garbage containers for three neighborhoods in Bani Naim; One large billboard containing messages of nonviolence and environmental protection were

installed in four central locations in Bani Naim. Let the Theater Talk, Gaza City Summary objective: Enhance the skills of 20 children in arts and, providing a safe space for targeted children to peacefully express themselves.

Selected 18 children to act in a play promoting nonviolence, tolerance and peace values through Dabka and puppetry.

Conducted 15 trainings for 18 children. Performed the play, Dabka, and puppet shows 4 times targeting 449 children. Closeout town hall meeting attended by 39 people.

Beautiful Without Violence, Nablus Summary Objective: reduce the level of school violence against and among children in a local school

Four sessions on non-violence for 41 pupils (22 female) Two workshops for 31 teachers and school administration at two schools (22 female). Two workshops for 41 teachers and parents at two schools (21 female) Open day for 75 students, teachers and parents of the two schools (39 female). Two murals in two locations in Nablus area targeting the two communities. Closeout town hall meeting attended by 50 people (23 female).

Towards Nonviolent Childhood, Bethlehem Summary Objective: Reduce the level of school violence against and among children in a local school and to replace foul words and expressions with proper ones.

A town hall meeting by 40 people excluding YVCA staff, CRS, partners, and Youth Ambassadors.

Meeting with the mayor of Al Khader to discuss the activities of this project. After being selected in coordination with the two schools, the 30 targeted children 9-14 years

of age were engaged in activities aimed at positively redirecting their energy. First open days were held for 28 children at the premises of YVCA partner Dalal Institution for

Culture and Art (Dalal). A second open space in Jericho for the 30 targeted children and 30 of their friends. BWG divided the children into two groups based upon their preferences and abilities to

engage in Dabka dance training, while the other group received training on acting. The acting group was engaged in a play on children rights. The play and the dance were

performed in the closeout ceremony of the project on October 7, 2011. No for Child Violence, Bani Naim: Summary Objectives: Reduce the level of school violence among children ages 11-14 years in two local schools

Dabka trainings for 33 children (twenty-one days). Choir rehearsals for 28 children (five days). Drama sessions over 41 children (five days).

42

Painting classes for 43 children (seven days). Evaluation session for 82 children. Open-day ceremony for 102 people. Kite running competition for 162 children. Cross-country running race for 84 participants of which 50 were racers. Close-out town hall meeting for 41 community leaders of which 33 were women.

Let us Light Aboud, Ramallah Summary Objective: Reduce conflict, enhance Muslim – Christian relationship, encourage social networking, and making night community in the village safer.

Designed and distributed 50 questionnaires to Aboud people to study and analyze the impact of the dark Main Street on them;

A field survey and identification of the number of street lights to install; Procurement and installation of 01 street lights in Aboud’s Main Street; Distributed 300 stories to school boys in Aboud to encourage them not to break street lights; A cross-country race for 30 Muslim and Christian children; and, Close-out ceremony of the project in Aboud.

Towards a Better Traffic, Nablus Summary Objective: Reduce the level of traffic related violence between drivers, pedestrians and commercial shop owners in Nablus city through opening dialogue between decision makers and the public about this phenomenon.

Ten NYAs received two-day trainings on audio visual interviews and news reporting; Designed a questionnaire that was used to interview 150 pedestrians, drivers and commercial

shop owners to study and analyze reasons behind traffic chaos in Nablus; An analytical report about traffic chaos in Nablus was developed and shared with Annajah

University; Conduct one radio interview with Raya FM Radio Station about traffic chaos in Nablus; Developed thirteen videos and written interviews with commercial shop owners, pedestrians

and drivers to voice their concerns to decision-makers about traffic chaos in Nablus; Held an awareness session for twenty students on road safety; Distributed a thousand stickers and nine banners in Nablus City to encourage drivers and

pedestrians to adhere to road safety laws and regulations. Conducted a radio Interview with Voice of AnNajah. Held a dialogue meeting during October 2011 between representatives of right-holders,

including the Nablus Municipality, the Traffic Department, the police, and a number drivers, pedestrians, commercial shop owners, and civil society organizations (39 participants).

Smile of Hope, Gaza Summary Objective: Promote a culture of non-violence and civil peace within the Palestinian community through raising awareness of 200 people from Gaza City on violence and its negative impacts, particularly on Palestinian families.

Film production Film screening on October 11, 2011, at Women Activity Centre (52 participants) Film screening on October 17, 2011, at Gaza University (57 participants) Film screening on October 18, 2011, at Palestine of Tomorrow association (41 participants); Film screening on October 24, 2011 at Palestine of Tomorrow (58 participants); and, Closeout ceremony on November 24, 2011 (86 participants).

Females have the Right to Sports, Hebron Summary Objective: Reduce the level of gender related violence in Bani Naim through enabling females to participate in sports activities.

43

A town hall meeting attended by 41 people. Training workshop about women and sports attended by 44 women. Began building a rooftop for the BNCS swimming pool; and, Designed a swimming training program for women. Red Ball training for 20 girls during October 2011. Finalize the pool rooftop. Swimming lessons for 16 girls. Create a brochure on women and sports. Close-out ceremony.

Be Active, Jerusalem Summary Objective: Increase volunteerism among children in Silwan neighborhood of Jerusalem through activities geared towards non-violence, social cohesion, and skills development.

Three Dabka dance session for 26 children. Three drama trainings for 26 children (same targeted group). Three painting and art sessions for 26 children (same targeted group). Continued training of the children on Dabka, drama and painting to reach 40 hours of training

for all disciplines. An open day for the children and their families and friends to demonstrate what they have

learned. Children Free from Foul Language, Bethlehem Summary objective: Address the looming problem of foul language used by children ages 8-14 years old in Al Khader village as a source of verbal violence and a trigger for physical violence.

Selected 18 children to participate in this project. Painting workshop in coordination with the Boys School of Al Khader. Designed and printed an awareness brochure on foul language. Three awareness sessions for 18 right-holders on foul language. Three workshops for 25 children on how to manage their time; activities included painting. Rehabilitation and maintenance of playground for the children. Close-out ceremony in November 2011.

Book in my Friend, Gaza Summary Objectives: to bolster nonviolence and tolerance values among school children through book and short story reading.

Five short story sessions in three schools and two child centers in Gaza, targeting 153 children.

Short story completion allowing 64 children to creatively write about nonviolence, friendship and tolerance.

Two training workshops to enhance GYAs capacity in designing and implemented peacebuilding projects, and how to organize meetings for children.

Final closeout ceremony in participation of 64 people. Youth for Change, Bani Naim Summary Objectives: To address problems and concerns of Bani Naim youth and create a safe space for youth to work for the benefit of their community.

Town hall meeting for 28 people

Training for core group of the youth department (16 youth)

Establish a youth department at BNCS that included activities

44

o Establish bylaws for the department;

o Meetings of the course group ( the last meeting had 18 youth);

o Establish a computer lab that contains 25 computers, 3 were purchase by USAID

money along with a copying machine also purchased by USAID money. The remaining

computers and space was community cost share.

Tree planning activities in four schools and one local organization. 300 trees were donated by

BNCS.

Closeout town hall meeting 20 people (excluding the volunteering youth).

Towards Nonviolent Cheering in Sports, Nablus Summary Objectives: address the growing problem of violence in sports in Nablus area

Three radio interviews with youth ambassadors for the wider public to learn about the project

and tackle violence problems in Palestinian sports;

Two workshops for the two soccer clubs in Nablus in the presence of the Union of Sports Clubs

and the Police in Nablus (27 people);

Composition of two anthems for the two clubs;

Distribution of cheerleading equipment;

Documentary about violence in sports

Match between the two clubs

Final ceremony

Empowering Women = Reducing Violence, Bethlehem Summary Objectives: providing a number of women leaders from Al Khader with leadership skills

Eight training days for women in cooperation with Cardinal Martini Institute of Bethlehem

University (full donated by the university) (18 women).

Four day training for two sets of women given by a social worker.

youth voices for community action · “youth voices for community action” was designed to...

Documents