Indicators for Mainstreaming Sexual Diversity

Executive Summary

RutgersWPF and dance4life have set up a sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) Alliance that includes sexual diversity in its program as part of its learning agenda. It was felt abaseline study was needed to review the readiness of the Indonesian partner organizations to mainstream sexual diversity. The specific objectives of the study are:

1.To assess how sexual diversity is addressed within the organization in terms of policies, awareness raising for staff and plans for such;

2.To assess how sexual diversity is addressed in programs/projects;

3.To identify what needs to be addressed at the organizational level to mainstream sexual diversity;

4.To provide recommendations for partner organizations in making a plan of action for mainstreaming sexual diversity.

Study methodology

The methodology and tools for the study were developed in a workshop held on January 2012. In the workshop Prof. Saskia Wieringa of the University of Amsterdam introduced a scoreboard which was adapted from the African Women’s Progress Scoreboard (AWPS) implemented by the UNECA, to measure the performance of organizations regarding mainstreaming sexual diversity. On the horizontal axis the variables of the scoreboard consist of the elements of an organization which are relevant to capture performance: vision-mission, long term policy, program, projects, focal point, budget, research, capacity building, skill-tools, personnel policy, monitoring system, and public relations. On the vertical axis the specific topics on which performance must be measured are indicated. During and after the workshop the scorecard was further adapted for this specific projectand the researchers developed specific indicators for each element of organizational performance and determined scores for each element. The scores range from zero to three. The scorecard is useful in measuring performance of individual organizations; it should not be used to compare organizations, although at times a comparison can yield interesting insights.

In addition an in-depth interview guide and a questionnaire were developed to gather data on the attitudes in relation to sexual diversity of individual staff members of the participating organizations. The questionnaire was adapted from the more extensive questionnaire that the Kenyan team designed. Only those questions that were felt to be relevant to the Indonesian context were included. It was applied to staff members of the two non-LGBTI organizations[1].

Data collection was done in four partner organizations: the Ardhanary Institute (AI), GWL-INA, Rifka Annisa, and PKBI Jambi; in-depth interviews were held, a document study and a survey were done and participant observation was applied. Key informants for the indepth interviewswere advisory board members, directors, program/project managers and staff members, human resource staff members, financial staff members and volunteers. Documents related to the organization consisted of the organizational constitution, long-term policy/mid-term strategicplanning documents, annual reports, program/project reports, monitoring and evaluation reports, financial reports as well as other relevant documents and IEC materials. Surveys were conducted to obtain information about the knowledge and the attitudes of the staff members of thenon-LGBTI organizations in relation to sexual diversity.

The questionnaire in this limited form was found to be useful. Yet it was clear that socially acceptable responses were given to certain questions. These answers diverged from replies given in more in depth interviews.All respondents answered that they agree that homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals; however in-depth interviews revealed that these rights need to be justified by Islamic doctrines. The issue of equal rights for LGBT people turned out to be still controversial among the staff members who were interviewed in depth.

Main findings

The baseline study showed different patterns of organizational performance between LGBTI organizations (AI and GWL-INA) and non-LGBTI organizations (Rifka Annisa and PKBI Jambi). For LGBTI organizations, their vision and mission, long term policies, programs, and budgets include sexual diversity elements. However, since the two organizations are newly established, their capacity to do research, capacity building of their staff members, skills-tools, and monitoring systems can be enhanced. Rifka Annisa as a non LGBTI organization, has included sexual diversity in its vision and mission, but PKBI Jambi has hardly included sexual diversity in its vision and mission. Both organizations are not inclusive of sexual diversity issues in their long term policies, programs, and budgets.Howeverboth organizations have better established systems regarding research and monitoring.

The AI was the most advanced organization in including sexual diversity in almost all elements of organization. Its vision and mission has been developed referring to the 1945 Constitution of Indonesia, the Declaration of Human Rights, CEDAW and the Yogyakarta Principles; it consists of the following elements democracy, human rights, equality and equity, and sexual and gender diversity. Its long term policy and programs also include LBTI needs. Its personnel policy addresses sexual diversity issues. The AI actively builds networks and promotes sexual diversity to other organizations. In spite of this, regular capacity building for new staffs is still needed.

GWL–INA is the youngest organization of all. GWL–INA is a network of LGBTI organizations in Indonesia. The baseline was conducted in the national office of GWL – INA. Its vision and mission, long term policy, program, and budget include LGBTI issues and needs to a certain extent. Nevertheless, capacity building for its staff members is a major issue since GWL-INA has no regular sensitization training on sexual diversity for staffmembers. GWL–INA also does not have a spokes person for LGBTI issues. Only a limited number of staff members have skills to handle LGBTI issues. Since GWL–INA is a new organization, its personnel policy and monitoring system need to be developed to include sexual diversity issues. Yet, GWL–INA has already managed to build institutional linkages with other organizations that could be maintained and expanded.

Rifka Annisa, as a non-LGBTI organization, has to be commended for itsexplicit inclusion of theLGBTIcommunity and its commitment to serve LGBTI people. This demonstrates that Rifka has a clear position on the issue of sexual diversity. Yet the challenge is to mainstream sexual diversity at the level of staff members, organizational policies, and programs. Rifka Annisa has not included sexual diversity issues in its long term policy. However, Rifka does implement programsin collaboration with LGBTI organizations , it has an advocacy program related to sexual diversity, and it has a program that provides education on SRHR issues that includes sexual orientation and gender identities. To mainstream the issue of gender identities and sexual orientation in the programs of Rifka Annisa, the director and staff agree that they need internal capacity building beforehand. The small survey administered to the staffindicates the limited knowledge of Rifka’s staff members on homosexuality and sexual rights and also demonstrates that they uphold a heteronormative perspective. Some staff members are still reluctant to advocate homosexual rights openly. Their hesitation is mainly caused by their lack of confidence that homosexual and transgender rights can be justified in Islamic doctrine. All their staffmembers require an understanding of religious aspects of sexual orientation and gender identities, before they will be able to mainstream sexual diversity in their programs. The inclusion of sexual diversity issues in the personnel policy and monitoring systems of Rifka Annisa should be improved since the organization already has established a policy and monitoring system. Rifka Annisa also has a variety of IEC material for use in mass media, yet the inclusion of sexual diversity issues in the media still has to be done in the future.

PKBI Jambi is a part of PKBI Indonesia that works at the provincial level. As part of a very well-established organization in Indonesia, PKBI has an evolved, yet bureaucratic organizational system. Its vision and mission and long term policy have to be developed in regional and national meetings. Neither the vision and mission, nor the long term policy of PKBI explicitly include the LGBTIcommunity however they somewhat reflect a commitment to serve the LGBTI population.To its credit PKBI Jambi has a partnership program with LGBTI organizationsand it has programs in collaboration with organizations or representatives of theLGBTI community. It has to be noted in relation to itsexisting programsthat the LGBTI groups with which they collaborate are defined as target groups rather than as subjects of the programs.Director and staff in PKBI Jambi said that they need internal capacity building on the issues of sexual diversity before they will be able to mainstream sexual diversity at the programlevel and that they need to assign someone to be a person-in-charge and representative of the organization for sexual diversity issues.According to the small survey administered to the director and staff members, there are still biased perspectives against homosexuals among the staff members. However, the survey also revealed that all respondents agree that homosexuals should have the same sexual and reproductive rights as heterosexuals enjoy. In regard to attitudes towards working with LGBTI people, all respondents stated that they are comfortable or somewhat comfortable working with a lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender person. Nevertheless, during the interview two persons said that they feel rather uncomfortable to work closely with the lesbians since they are afraid people may judge themselves as lesbians. It indicates there is still a stigma against homosexuals and homophobic attitudes are prevalent among some staff members. In addition, the most challenging aspects in mainstreaming sexual diversity in PKBI Jambi is to convince the board and make them accept the ideas of sexual diversity. LGBTI issues are not addressed explicitly in PKBI personnel policy. Although PKBI Jambi has a monitoring system for its programs, it still needs to include sexual diversity indicators in its monitoring system.

Recommendations

The baseline study provides some recommendation for the partner organizations. For AI, since it has already included sexual diversity issues in almost all elements of organization, only some elements of organization could be improved in the inclusion of sexual diversity. In programs and projects, a comprehensive SRHR program for LBTI communities can be conducted. In budget, AI could also allocate a minimum percentage of the budget to address non-LBTI issues, not only to LBTI issues. In capacity building, AI could enhance the capacity of its staff members and also support capacity building for other organizations (PKBI Jambi, Rifka Annisa, and GWL-INA). On the other hand, AI could learn from Rifka Annisa and PKBI Jambi regarding the development of a standard monitoring tool for its existing programs.

Since GWL–INA is a new organization, the issue for this organization is that GWL-INA has to develop its policy and system, and also to include sexual diversity elements in its policies and programs.GWL–INA also has to include sexual diversity elements in its vision and mission, long term policy, and in its programs and projects. In capacity building, GWL–INA needs to have regular capacity building and also to monitor the impact of the capacity building to staffmembers. GWL–INA could develop a module on linkages between sexual diversity and SRHR which can be used by its members. As an LGBT organization, it is important to GWL–INA to expand its linkages with non- LGBTI organizations.

The exposure of Rifka Annisa to the issue of sexual diversity has occurred relatively recently. However Rifka Annisa has several experiences regarding issues related to lesbians in providing services for women survivors of violence. The programs of Rifka Annisa also have incorporated LGBTI organizations. However, its long term policy and program should include sexual diversity elements. Capacity building is needed before implementing mainstreaming sexual diversity at the level of programs. Capacity building is particularly important to change the heteronormativebiases among staff members and to enhance the conceptual knowledge on sexual diversity. Therefore, regular budget allocation is needed for internal capacity building. to build the capacity on sexual diversity of Rifka’s staff members, existing resources and networks can be used; for example the Ardhanary Institute can support Rifka Annisa in issues of perspective and values of sexual diversity. Knowledge and attitude of staff members can be monitored regularly after the trainings are given. Rifka Annisa also needs special capacity building for its psychological counselors, legal counselors, community organizers, and to lobby local government officials and other important stakeholders. Inclusion of sexual diversity indicators in all the instruments of monitoring and of IEC material developed by Rifka Annisa should be developed.

As part of a very established organization in Indonesia, PKBI has an established, yet bureaucratic organizational system. To revisit and to revise the PKBI vision and mission and its long term policy,in the short run the efforts that can be done are developing a strategy to approach the national and regional boards and to introduce them to sexual diversity as well as to introduce sexual diversity issues in regional meetings (musyawarah daerah). Capacity building before mainstreaming sexual diversity at the program level is necessary. Capacity building should be a routine affair and should aim to change heteronormative perspectives, to provide knowledge on the concept of sexual diversity and its relation to sexual and reproductive health and rights, and also to revisit the concept of high risk groups that so far has excluded lesbians from its SRHR programs. Therefore, regular budget allocation is needed. Capacity building can utilize existing resources and networks for example the Ardhanary Institute can support PKBI Jambi for SRHR for lesbians and GWL – INA for a rights- based perspective in SRHR for gay, MSM and transgender persons. For personnel policy, it is necessary to recruit men, gays, and lesbians based on a written policy. The policy should also include measures to protect all staff members from sexual and gender based violence. The confidentiality policy of SOGI should alsobe incorporated. Sexual diversity indicators in all the instruments of monitoring and media should be developed. PKBI can learn from the variation of media campaigns developed by Rifka Annisa and from the inclusion of SD materials from the Ardhanary Institute. Existing social media can be strategically developed to reach youth in general and LGBTI youth in particular.

In sum, capacity building is needed before all the partner organizations are enable to mainstream sexual diversity in their policy and programs. Capacity building can utilize existing resources within partner organizations. Each organization can learn from each other and help each other to strengthen their capacities in mainstreaming sexual diversity. Topics that should be included in capacity building include religion and homosexuality, traditional forms of gender diversity in Indonesia, sexual politics and theories of sexuality. The strategies to enhance mainstreaming of sexual diversity should consider the nature of organizations: whether they are an LBGTI or a non-LGBTI organization, whether the organization is a single entity or a network, which is the organizational focus of work, as well as the size and the experiences with sexual diversity of the organization concerned.Efforts to mainstreaming sexual diversity could be divided in to short term, mid-term, and long-term goals and include other civil society organizations to assure a broader impact.

1. Introduction

1.1.Background of the project on mainstreaming sexual diversity in SRHR and HIV programs

Sexual rights are by and large absent in the MDGs and remain highly controversial in many countries. In the context of SRHR and HIV programs, issues of sexual rights are least understood and least addressed. Hence, RutgersWPF and dance4life set up the sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) Alliance which addresses four identified key priorities:

1)improved sexual and reproductive health services

2)comprehensive sexual education

3)combating sexual and gender-based violence

4)freedom of expression of sexual diversity and gender identity

An assessment by dance4life of its programs showed that sexual diversity issues were hardly included in the content of the education program. Partner organizations admitted a lack of understanding on how to address these issues among their staff members. Hence, the need of capacity development is to ensure all staff of partner organizations understandthe need to integrate sexual diversity issues within programs, projects and interventions and have the awareness, attitudes, skills and motivation to do it effectively.

The SRHR Alliance has prioritized the inclusion of sexual diversity in programming as part of a learning agenda. The complexity of inclusion of sexual diversity by local partners needs theThematic Learning Program (TLP) to analyze the barriers and identify best practices. By sensitizing local partners to the issues and ensuring they have the necessary information, appropriate attitudes and skills, itwill be easier to provide better SRHR services for LGBTI people. Based on contextual analysis within the SRHR Alliance and its partners, Kenya and Indonesia were identified as the participating countries in this TLP because of their capacities and experiences in addressing this issue in their work. In Indonesia with its long history of action research and reflective monitoring, based on insights gained from Paolo Freireand other thinkers on community learning and education for change, the NGO’s selectedfor this project were already familiar with the basic principles of the TLP approach. The collection of life stories and story telling, which is central to the TLP method isa methodology with which several NGOs in this project have a wide experience.