SUMMARY OF UCPV-PILOT, BAHR DAR – DRAFT INITIAL REPORT
1. Preparation for the UCPV
§ UCPV Task force established with 15 staff, mainly management staff, from across the country office. Task force led by PDQS coordinator, and included 6 PDQS staff.
§ Consultants hired to conduct desk review on 3 impact groups – resource poor youth in urban and peri-urban areas (that are vulnerable to HIV and AIDS); pastoralist girls denied of their rights; chronically food insecure sedentary women.
§ Task force, together with ACD decided to conduct UCPV pilot with 1 impact group – Resource poor youth in urban and peri-urban areas that are vulnerable to HIV and AIDs – in one location, Bahr Dar town. This decision was made mainly for logistical reasons, so as to allow the team as much time as possible to learn from the process.
§ Task force elected a small group to develop key questions and tools for the UCPV. There were different opinions within the TF as to whether or not tools would be necessary. Tools suggested: Vulnerability analysis, Power analysis, Institutional analysis, Lifeline case study
§ The key questions were discussed and developed further at the next Task Force meeting. There were great differences of opinion amongst the TF in terms of the types of questions to be asked, number of questions, level of guidance needed on probing questions etc. The process of agreeing key questions took 1 full day, with additional time for translation. The process of developing key questions encroached into the time allocated for training in PRA approaches and tools to be used and therefore the tools (and how they could relate to the key questions) were not thoroughly practiced. Again, there remained differences of opinion as to whether tools should be used. Note example of key questions attached (Annex 3)
§ 3 day training conducted by external facilitator on PRA approaches. 2 female peer group facilitators from a partner organisation joined the team at this point and participated in the rest of the UCPV pilot process.
§ Logistics arrangements by Bahr Dar field office. This involved informing kebeles, communicating with partners, arranging FGDs, hotel arrangements etc.
§ 5 days UCPV-pilot conducted in Bahr Dar involving all TF members, 2 peer group facilitators plus 2 guests from other CARE country offices.
Outline of UCPV-pilot process (by consultant training facilitator)
2. Field work
Field work began with FGDs with male and female youth, parents of youth, people living with HIV and AIDS and commercial sex workers. From these initial FGDs, the team identified issues for follow up the next day via KIIs. Note that the key questions and tools were not applied systematically by the team, but were used according to individuals’ level of comfort with the process. This had pros and cons depending on the experience and skills of the facilitators. A key lesson is that there needs to be ownership and agreement of key questions and tools, these need to be very focussed, and a data quality control system needs to be set up to ensure teams are collecting the necessary depth and quality of data.
Basically, the field work followed an iterative process whereby the information from FGDs led to identification of key informants and issues for follow up, verification and further probing through KIIs. For example, FGDs with male youth led to KIIs with daily labourers and chat chewers around issues of addiction and unemployment; FGDs with commercial sex workers led to KIIs with brokers and the Women’s Affairs bureau on issues around rural-urban migration of women and girls and protection of girl migrants; FGDs with female youth led to KIIs with a voluntary legal aid organisation and with police around issues of GBV. At the same time, the team conducted a ‘mini desk review’, visiting key government and partner offices to gather secondary data, for example on youth policies. The iterative nature of the process also enabled data to be triangulated. In total, the team conducted 22 interviews, 9 FGDs and 13 KIIs with 103 respondents (44 male and 59 female).
3. Some very initial analysis!!!
Identifying impact groups and sub-groups, target groups and stakeholders
See Annex 1 below, but please note that this shows a very initial mapping done by the team in Bahr Dar and needs more discussion and analysis both to define the sub-groups (and the common characteristics of these) further and to better identify the target groups and stakeholders – at present there is a lot of overlap. However, we found this a useful process for getting us to think about vulnerable sub-groups within the broad impact group and for beginning to identify who we might work with and at what level to reach the impact group.
Identifying UCPVs
Annex 2 below shows how we used the UCP framework for initial mapping of immediate, intermediate and underlying causes. Examples are based on FGDs for male youth and commercial sex workers. Also attached are the UCPVs identified by the team on the final day mapped per human conditions, social positions and enabling environment. Again, these are from initial analyses by the team in Bahr Dar and need further thinking through and analysis.
4. Key lessons and recommendations for next UCPVs
Whilst it was difficult to manage 15+ people during the preparation and field work, involving so many people was important in building understanding and ownership of the UCPV within the country office. For the next stage, we will use smaller teams of around 6 people, including partners, led by resource people who were involved in the pilot.
Although there are issues around taking up people’s time (who can least afford it) to participate in the UCPV, on balance, we felt that the UCPV has to include a process whereby we listen directly to the people we are planning to design a program around.
Recommendations
1. Review and share process and outputs of UCP/V exercises from other learning labs before next UCPV (Nepal, Bangladesh, etc)
2. Review desk review findings:
§ Identify key issues affecting IG and information gaps based on UCPV framework
§ Develop broad description of the impact group
3. Identify specific tools relevant to each IG/ area
4. Involve strategic partners & stakeholders in UCPV secondary data analysis and fieldwork
5. Develop field database and analysis system (to enable scaling up of analysis)
6. Train joining team members (partners, commy facilitators) on PRA tools to be used
7. Hold key stakeholders meeting before the assessment (gov’t, LNGOs, partners) to:
§ explain goals of the UCPV,
§ access secondary information,
§ ensure non-CARE perspective;
§ select volunteers to join (as observers?)
8. Conduct regional level desk review i.e. in UCPV assessment location, with key SH
9. Identify very focused KIIs and FGDs to be conducted:
§ Familiarize community leaders with the purpose, timeframe etc of the UCPV
§ Ensure representative sampling of impact group and include non-current project participants as informants
§ Ensure a safe space for FGDs, away from potentially influential people (police?)
§ Conduct on the spot analysis with respondents
§ Provide on the spot feedback to respondents and check data compliance
10. Consider time and seasonal factors, be aware of security situation (pastoralist areas)
10
Annex 1: Examples of key questions used
Example Key Questions: Youth groups (male, female, employed, unemployed…..)
Inquiry themes / Key questions / Lens/ probing questions / Tools to explore KQ /Human Condition
Poverty
Vulnerability / 1. How would you describe your situation and livelihood?
2. How would you describe poverty? What does it mean to you? What does vulnerability mean to you? / · Livelihood related aspects (health, education, income, food, shelter, etc) of poverty/vulnerability
· Social, political, cultural, economic aspects of poverty/vulnerability.
· What are priority problems? Why?
· Who are more vulnerable and why? / FGD and SII
Vulnerability analysis and ranking
Social Position
Power
Relationships / 3. What is your participation and role in society (family, community, formal and informal institutions)
4. Who is powerful in the society? Who is powerless? / · To what extent do you participate? When? With whom? Degree of influence at different levels.
· Constraints to your participation/role/influence?
· Which groups in society are powerful and which are not? Why? What are the factors?
· To what extent do you have power and influence in relation to these groups? Why?
· How do powerful groups exercise their power? How do you respond to this? / Social/ Institutional mapping and power analysis
Enabling Environmental
Institutions
Governance
Policies / 5. What are the enabling environments for youth?
6. What policies and institutional arrangements exist in relation to youth?
7. How can youth powerfulness be increased and vulnerability reduced? / · What are the services available to youth? Who are providers? What are the benefits? Who is benefiting more? Why?
· How do policies and institutional arrangements affect your life (resources, livelihood, etc) – positively and negatively
· What personal, social and institutional relationships are most important to young people? What are the roles of each in increasing powerfulness/ reducing vulnerability? Who are role models for vulnerable youth? / Institutional mapping and power analysis
Example key questions: Impact group, vulnerable sub-groups e.g. CSWs
Inquiry themes / Key questions / Lens/ probing questions / Tools to explore KQ /Human Condition
Poverty
Vulnerability / 1. How would you describe your situation and livelihood?
2, How would you describe poverty? What does it mean to you? What does vulnerability mean to you? / · To what extent do you feel vulnerable? Why? Livelihood related aspects; Social, political, cultural, economic aspects; Acceptance, Access to services
· Are there others who are more vulnerable? Why? / FGD and SII
Lifeline case study
Social Position
Power
Relationships
Change / 3. What is your participation and role in society (family, community, formal and informal institutions)?
4. Who and what are contributing to your vulnerability? Who and what are contributing to your powerfulness? / · To what extent do you participate? When? With whom? Degree of influence at different levels.
· Constraints to your participation/role?
· To what extent do you have power and influence in relation to these groups? Why? Why not?
· Are there others who have less power and influence? Why?
· How can you increase your power and influence? Who and what can support you? What are the constraints? / Lifeline case study
Enabling Environmental
Institutions
Governance
Policies / 5. How do you envision your situation in 5 years time?
6. Who and what could help you to achieve your goals? Who and what could hinder you? / · What opportunities exist to achieve this vision (individual, community support, policy support, institutional support, ….?
· What constraints exist to achieve this vision (individual, community support, policy support, institutional support?
· What is your role, roles of others in increasing powerfulness/ reducing vulnerability? Who are your role models for change? / Lifeline case study
Annex 2: Impact, Target, Sub Groups and Stakeholders
Annex 3 Examples: Identifying UCPVs – done for each FGD
GROUP 1: MALE YOUTH
Social position / Human condition / Enabling environmentImmediate causes / Hopelessness
Lack of social services
Engaged in crime
Lack of income / Unemployment
Hopelessness
Exposure to different
addictions
Poor education quality / No/ limited support from formal and nonformal institutions
Intermediate causes / Community perception towards unemployed youth
Lack of life skills
Low capacity of teachers (interest, lack of selection criteria and low skill) / lack of resource (capital & land)
lack of life skills
communities perception to youth (unemployed)
absence of recreation centers
low capacity of teachers
High & unbalanced ratio (student to teacher ratio, students vs. school facility/ capacity, students vs. number of classes)
high population pressure
Not recognized by different institutions
Underlying causes / Lack of trust to the youth by financial institutions (ask for collateral) / Less knowledge about family planning / Gov is less responsive to youth affairs
Less government’s focus to the youth (unlike to the investors)
GROUP 3: CSWs
Social position / Human condition / Enabling environmentImmediate causes / Unwanted pregnancy and STD and HIV
No trust amongst CSW
Low participation in social, political, economic activities / Lack of regular income
Lack of social services (shelter, education, health) / No/ limited support either from formal or informal institutions
Intermediate causes / Migration due to family disintegration
No/ limited social networking / Limited access to SRH information
GBV
Low level of capacity and competency (skills and knowledge) / Brokers influence on female migrants (e.g. to find work as housemaids etc)
Lack of legal protection and justice (e.g. related to GBV - lax sentences incl. prison)
Not recognized by different institutions
Underlying causes / Broken families,
Lack of trust between CSW and community/excluded by other community members
No proper parental guidance / -ve attitudes towards CSWs Family resource poverty / Corruption
Financial services/ policies don’t recognize livelihood situation of CSWs (livelihoods not recognized for collateral etc)
Limited job opportunities in rural areas.
Initial mapping of UCPVs
10