General Information |
Project/Program |
Program |
Project Name |
The Counter-Trafficking in Persons Ⅱ(CTIP Ⅱ) |
Duration |
2011-2015 |
Donor |
USAID |
Implementiong Organization |
Winrock International (Winrock) |
Sector and/or Subsector Classification |
Other social service |
Region |
Seven targeted provinces : Kampong Cham, Prey Veng, Phnom Penh, Banteay Meanchey, Svay Rieng, Koh Kong, and Siem Reap. |
Financing |
US $ 5.4 million |
Analytical Information |
Stakeholders |
USAID, Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC), Winrock International (Winrock), National Committee (NC), Khmer Youth Association (KYA). |
Cross-cutting Issue |
Environment |
|
Gender |
|
Impact Analysis |
Based on the report's findings, Winrock is making tangible progress toward achieving some of the intended results includingt the objectives of prevention, protection. CTIP II prevention activities have improved TIP-related knowledge, attitudes, and behavior at the local level. The project has also contributed to enhancing protection and care for trafficking survivors—especially through flexible service delivery. However, in the case of the other objective of prosecution, the issue of prosecution has constrained CTIP II program efforts to improve law enforcement capacity to identify and prosecute traffickers and TIP-related crimes. |
Effectiveness |
Ownership/Partnership |
Evaluation |
While USAID provided a substantial amount of support to CTIP II and Winrock during the first year of implementation, it has not provided the necessary level of feedback and support to CTIP II during subsequent years of the project. In particular,USAID’s concerns about CTIP II’s reporting and monitoring and evaluation(M&E) system have not been communicated effectively with Winrock. And USAID has not provided sustained and proactive support to Winrock to address and resolve them. |
Rating |
2/5 |
Policy Coherence/Harmonization |
Evaluation |
The project has made a contribution to dealing with the absences of a coherent coordination mechanism and strategy between government and civil society. USAID’s CTIP II program supports the RGC as it further improves its capacity and readiness to combat all forms of human trafficking The objectives reflect the programs’ relationship with the RGC’s National Anti-Trafficking Committee to support its efforts to coordinate the RGC’s overall response to the human trafficking. |
Rating |
4/5 |
Evaluation Framework |
Evaluation |
This evaluation was carried out primarily during a seven-week period between April andJune 2014 and included one week of preparatory desk review, two and a half weeks of fieldwork inCambodia, one week of data analysis, and two weeks of report writing. Following submission of a draftreport, additional document reviews and key informant interviews were undertaken at the request ofUSAID and Winrock. The evaluation employed standard rapid appraisal data collection methods:document review, key informant interviews (KIIs), focus group discussions (FGDs), and site visits. |
Rating |
4/5 |
Alignment/Composition of Finance |
Evaluation |
The report found that elements of protection and prevention services demonstrate significant potential for sustainability. However, other critical elements such as prosecution and partnership appear destined for termination. Thus, it is recommended that Winrock and USAID acknowledge the particular focus of CTIP II on sustainable outcomes and identify concrete ways in which other elements of the program could be strengthened. In terms of fund, there was a lack of clarity about whether CTIP II would be funded via Winrock or directly through USAID, despite USAID’s detailed program launch ceremony speech, which clearly identifies Winrock as the recipient of USAID’s CTIP II funding. This type of confusion has created tension and obstacles for Winrock throughout program implementation.
|
Rating |
3/5 |
Other Remarks |
|