| General Information |
Project/Program |
Program |
| Project Name |
Accountability in Governance and Politics Program |
| Duration |
October 1, 2009 - September 30, 2014 |
| Donor |
USAID |
| Implementiong Organization |
Consortium for Elections and Political Processes Support (CEPPS) |
| Sector and/or Subsector Classification |
Governance |
| Region |
Cambodia |
| Financing |
20110000 |
| Analytical Information |
Stakeholders |
National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), International Republican Institute (IRI), International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) |
| Cross-cutting Issue |
Environment |
|
| Gender |
|
| Impact Analysis |
Objective 1) to strengthen accountability and expand transparency and access to information. While this program could not achieve the first objective, activities such as town-hall style constituency dialogues, moderate candidate debates, youth-oriented televised programs and public opinion surveys had a positive effect on political accountability and competitiveness as well as awareness of public policy issues. Objective 2) to generate progressive leadership. Sustained engagement with political party youth branches at provincial and national level, as well as advanced training for a smaller cadre of youth political and civil society leaders were well received. Objective 3) to support election systems. Election Law reform did not happen. But activities brought welcomed attention to campaign finance. |
| Effectiveness |
Ownership/Partnership |
Evaluation |
The ownership was weak in that authorities had clearly shown no political will for further electoral reforms particularly since the 2008 elections. As a result, national watchdogs and international partners were all confronted with a defensive electoral administration, which led to a restrictive interpretation and weak partnership. However it was notable that IFES’s supply-side engagement with other government actors might grant new opportunities for advancing electoral reform. |
| Rating |
2/5 |
| Policy Coherence/Harmonization |
Evaluation |
The development hypothesis in this program was that USAID activities under this program will help Cambodians hold all levels of their government accountable for policy performance. Given the fact that the dominant party, the Cambodia People’s Party (CPP) had prevented meaning ful participation by opposition parties in the National Assembly, limited access to information and restricted political space, the program contributed to making further progress toward democratic governance. |
| Rating |
4/5 |
| Evaluation Framework |
Evaluation |
Mixed methods were used in the report. The first consisted of semi-structured interviews with key informants, including USAID/Cambodia, CEPPS partners as well as key beneficiary institutions. At the same time, the evaluation team thoroughly reviewed all program documentation, M&E data, and other relevant sectorial data. The second was a series of individual and focus group interviews with representatives of key beneficiary so as to understand behavioral changes among target groups. Lastly, the team conducted a series of panel discussions with key other stakeholders as well as other donors and development partners. However, the team was unable to meet with representatives of the National Election Commission (NEC), the Ministry of Interior and CPP leadership at the national level. Also, causal links were difficult to ascertain between program activities and some of was inconclusive. |
| Rating |
3/5 |
| Alignment/Composition of Finance |
Evaluation |
The program is considered positively sustainable. The evaluation team could observe many positive changes in Cambodia’s political environment such as the new willing of Cambodians of all socio-economic standings and geographic locations to speak openly about their political views. However, these changes should be directed toward either reform or contraction of political space. |
| Rating |
4/5 |
| Other Remarks |
|
