Page 1


SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.

“For every fresh stage in our lives we need a fresh education, and there is no stage for which so little educational preparation is made as that which follows the reproductive period.” Havelock Ellis

SRH Serbia works towards achieving a discrimination free, gender equal and pro-choice environment in which young people will be able to develop, prosper and make informed decisions regarding various aspects of life, including sexual and reproductive health. Our work aims to improve people’s quality of life by providing and campaigning for sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) through advocacy and services, especially for poor and vulnerable people. SRH Serbia defends the right of all people to enjoy sexual lives free from ill health, unwanted pregnancy, violence and discrimination. We are strongly committed to gender equality, and to eliminating the stigma and discrimination, which leads to the widespread violation of health and human rights, particularly among women.



We believe in working in partnerships with communities, governments, other organizations and donors. As an Associated Member of IPPF EN since 2010, we strive to impact on greater presence of reproductive rights and sexual health in Serbia, be loud in defending the right to make own decisions about one’s sexual rights and reproductive health, be supportive and provide services to Inadequately Served Population and in all respect work on achieving full compliance with wide spectrum of human rights through advocacy and education.

IN THIS ANNUAL REPORT Composition of SRH Serbia’s Executive Board 4 Year behind us 6 SRH in Serbia 10 Advocacy 13 The organization 15 Activities in 2014 18 Financial scope of work 20 Appreciation to our donors

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.


A YEAR BEHIND US… Courage is neither a strategy nor a mission statement.

Courage is the foundation on which SRH Serbiawas built. And it’s inherent at every level in this organization, which is why I chose to stand with the Association. Day in and day out, each member of this organization’s staff strives to uphold one tenet, central to every action taken: The right of access to the full range of reproductive health care is inalienable and fundamental for all women. Behind that commitment is the relentless pursuit of health, dignity, equality, and autonomy for all women everywhere. The same can be said of the Center’s unrivaled staff. 2014 was a year of challenges for Serbian NGOs, including our organization. We, the NGOs from Serbia often refer to ourselves as the best kept secret of the south eastern Europe, but we in SRH Serbia decided it was time to “come out” and show our full potential. After all, isn’t that the point of our 12 years long organizational experience? We have done a lot. Learned a lot. Reached over 30 000 of young people through services and education and created vast number of meaningful partnerships. Improved our knowledge, expanded our experience, visibility and presence in Serbian fundus of decision makers, important stakeholders, and NGOs in Serbia. We have decided it was time to face the music. 2014 was a year when the Global Fund project was finished for Serbia, after 8 years of presence and wonderful results. Over 60 NGOs dealing with prevention of HIV/aids were involved in the project. Sadly, phase out plan did not turn out quite to expectations, leaving majority of NGOs without means for wok, assets, funds and clients. A demand was created, but the supply chain had stopped.In May Serbia had faced severe floods and many lives were lost.



It took some time until we were able to jump back on our feet. We did. Over the summer, we were lucky to continue our Drop In Centre in south of Serbia, with the assistance of GIZ. We worked a lot on advocacy related to ICPD, Post 2015 agenda and Beijing +20, some of our results were visible on the CPD meeting in September, held in NYC, all of which supported by IPPF EN. At the end of September, Serbia saw for the first time Pride March, after 4 years of banning the parade. SRH Serbia was present and involved. In October, we have organized the first regional LGBT conference in Belgrade which hosted over 100 participants from regional countries, with huge assistance of IPPF EN Mas from the region: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria and Macedonia. Thank you. We appreciate your assistance and presence, with a feeling of belonging to a huge family of IPPF EN. We have also done a lot on our Accreditation standards, striving towards full membership. Nearing the end of 2014, we were thrilled by the sex positive approach. This is definitely a force to be reckoned with. Be one of us. Enjoy reading our Annual Report for the year of 2014! Dragana Stojanovic, SRH Serbia’s Executive Director


General Assembly

Volunteers Executive Board

Executive Director

Project manager

Project manager

Financial manager

Project assistants Project assistants Human Rights based Centre for LGBT

Parliamentaria n group (APPG)

Accountant GFATM, UNFPA projec ts

Outreach service coordinator


Medical consultant

Internet coordinator

Financial assistant


Outreach workers

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.



The results of the 2014 election could have a major impact on women’s reproductive health and rights and couldresult in renewed attempts to slash family planning funds

In Serbia, 7 percent of women married or in union have an unmet need for contraception. The unmet need of women within the age group of 25–29 years is higher (13 percent).



According to the Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey MICS (UNICEF 2013) in Serbia, the current use of any contraception was reported by 41 percent of women aged 15–49, currently married or in union. This represents an increase from the 2010 data (37.3%). Among women in Serbia, traditional methods are more popular than modern ones. The most popular method is withdrawal, which is used by one in three married women. The next most popular method is the male condom, which accounts for 14 percent of married women. Eight percent of women reported use of periodic abstinence, while between 3 and 4 percent of women used the IUD and the pill. Women’s education level is associated with contraceptive prevalence. The percentage of women using any method of contraception rises from 53 percent among those with only primary education to 65 percent among women with higher education. Traditional methods are predominant and are used by 39 percent of women while modern methods are used by 22 percent of women. Usage of modern methods increases with women’s education and wealth status. Modern methods are used by only 10 percent of women with primary school education and 11 percent of the poorest quintile in comparison with 33 percent of women with higher education and 31 percent from the richest quintile.

Statistics on abortion are not reliable, as private clinics are not reporting. Underreporting of abortions seems significant. Official number of abortions is not accurate, as private clinics usually do not report on abortions. Estimated figures range between 150,000 – 200,000 abortions annually, but there is no official confirmation to support these figures. Underreporting of abortions has also fiscal implications.



The last DHS in 2013 showed a total abortion rate of 2.84. Elective abortion remains high, with women aged 15-45 having 66 abortions for every 100 live births, and adolescents having 21 abortions for every 100 live births. It was repeatedly said during the interviews that in Serbia for every one live birth there are 5 abortions. According to the Abortion Law, health care institutions that perform pregnancy terminations are obliged to keep administrative and medical records on performed terminations and to deliver reports to the designated institute for health protection. The records and documents are to be considered medical secret and be kept at a designated place at the institute. It was reported that there is a new Law on Medical Records and Reporting under development, which will clarify reporting responsibilities of private and public clinics.

Political environment Family planning in Serbia appears to have been neglected in the last 20 years. The situation has deteriorated further as the economic crisis and social transition pushed this area of health to a distant margin. The current situation shows a low contraceptive prevalence rate and a high abortion rate. Family planning is not regarded in terms of human rights, but rather as a demographic determinant. An explanation for this can be traced back to the opinion present among decisionmakers and health professionals that family planning contributes to lowering of the birth rate in Serbia. Viewed in this negative context, family planning is forced into a niche. There is also a general tendency to see reproductive health as youth health and overlook the other components of RH. It is relevant that family-planning counseling centers in the PHC are called youth counseling centers. Efforts should be done to reposition reproductive health as not only a health care, but also a social and human rights issue, and family planning as not only a demographic or youth only specific issue. There was no serious discussion in the recent years about strategy to increase the contraceptive prevalence rate and decrease the abortion rate, or about an institutional solution for family-planning. All Governments were positive to reproductive health, but still Serbia does not have a RH Strategy until now. Earlier, it was suggested to establish a Department for Family Planning within one of the Ministries, but this was never implemented. Political will is needed to put family planning on the national agenda.

Legal framework Health in Serbia is governed by several fundamental legal documents, including the Constitution (2006), the Health Care Act (2005), the Health insurance Act (2005), the Medicine and Medical Devices Act (2004), the Special Act for the Health Care of Children, Pregnant Women and Childbirth Mother (2013), Ordinance for pregnant women care (1995).

The Law on Public Health (2009) has references to prevention activities, promotion of health and improving the quality of life of the population. It also mentions the need to organize national programs and public campaigns that promote the important health values. The Law on Medicines and Medicinal Items (2010 and 2012) regulates registration and prescription of drugs, including contraceptives, in pharmacies. More specifically, the area of family planning is covered by the laws on termination of pregnancy and another on in-vitro fertilization. The right to contraception is not mentioned, the late abortion is only sparsely mentioned and the voluntary sterilization is not mentioned. There is a lack of a unified view on reproductive rights and health, including the decision-making on pregnancy and birth and contraception and a need to define a more modern and precise legal framework for sexual and reproductive health and family planning. The overall legal basis exists for all practices in relation to family planning, but more detailed legal regulations necessary for the practical application of the legal principles (such as adolescent pregnancy, modern contraception including emergency contraceptives) does not exist. The principle of informed consent should be promoted in all these regulations, alongside the rights to privacy and confidentiality, as well as the principles of good practice in the work of medical services devoted to family planning. There are some changes planned in the Public Health Law and a Public Health Strategy under development. The revision of the Public Health Law is believed to bring more clarity on the strategies on public health. According to the latest Health Protection Plan in Serbia for 2013, which is a strategic and operational document of the Health Insurance Fund, only 20% of the female population (age 15 - 49) was planned to be reached with one “preventative medical exam in relation to family planning� and there is only a mention of the need for a more intensified counseling and education work and reach to prevent unnecessary abortions, secondary infertility and sexually transmitted infections. Such measures are encouraging and commendable but likely insufficient. It was

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.


mentioned by almost all experts interviewed that in practice, the Serbian health care system is geared mostly towards treatment and less on prevention. The current Law on the Health of Women, Children and Adolescents has a weak SRH Component.

Reproductive Health Strategy There is no Reproductive Health Strategy currently, and RH is somewhat covered by other strategies, for example the Strategy for Youth Development and Health. There was also a Population Renewal and Pronatalist Policy published by the Ministry of Labor and Social Policy in 2006, but it is no longer in use. The Strategy should be based on evidence and accompanied by a clear Action Plan with allocated budgets. In order to be effective in increasing access to family planning and contraceptives, it is important that the Strategy addresses both its low demand and limited supply of contraceptives. There is a need for reliable data to support the strategy, and a clear implementation plan including monitoring end evaluation. There is a National Program of Health Care for Women since 2009. It contains eight sections, and one of them is family planning. There are plans to link this Programme with the upcoming strategy, and the MOH has set up a working group to work on this until June of 2014.

Family planning services Institutions providing family planning services The National Family Planning Reference Center The Republic Center for Family Planning is one of seven organizational units of the Institute for Health Protection of Mother and Child of Serbia “Dr. VukanCupic” located in Belgrade, Serbia. The Center is mandated to promote and implement adopted strategy for protection of reproductive health and population renewal in Serbia, and its field of work is defined under the provisions of the Statue of the Institute for Health Protection of Mother and Child of Serbia “Dr. VukanCupic”.



Family planning counseling services Special family-planning services existed in primary health care in the past, but it was reported that their workload was very low. In cooperation with Health Centers around Serbia, the Republic Center for Family Planning has been developing a Network of Counseling Centers for Youth Reproductive Health. There are over 35 Counseling Centers for Family Planning in public Health Centers (HC) across Serbia: 10 in Belgrade, 7 in Vojvodina, 8 in Central Serbia, 2 in Western Serbia and 9 in South and Eastern Serbia. In addition, there are a few Counseling Centers ran by private Health Centers. The Ministry of Health would like to expand this to all primary health centers and make counseling mandatory.Capacities and type of services offered by these Counseling Centers vary depending on the city, and they mostly focus on counseling on STDs, contraception methods, sexual education, organizing workshops and-or individual interviews with adolescents, pregnant women and couples etc. There are two types of counseling: Counseling for Youth (older minors) and Developmental Counseling (pre-school children and children with developmental problems). Every physician has to spend half of the working time in counseling. Services are provided if it is necessary together with a gynecologist and a psychologist. Gynecologists in Primary Health Care Centers perform contraceptive counseling focused mostly on adolescent special needs. There were many opinions expressed regarding the true activity and functionality of these centers. Many said that counseling for young people should be friendlier, and that a holistic approach with youth is needed. One gynecologist in Novi Pazar stated that “We do not have in reality family-planning counseling services in the primary health care”, an opinion echoed by others who believed that these services are more formal. Also the results of the study conducted by SRHS among service providers highlighted the opinion that the counseling services need to be improved. Family planning providers The system of family-planning services is

based on gynecologists and not on general practitioners. Contraceptives can be prescribed only by gynecologists, located in Primary Health Centers, as well as in secondary and tertiary health care institutions. There is no strategy or intention to change that and to confer a role to general practitioners in family-planning. Abortion services Abortion is done both in government health care institutions and in private ones. In governmental clinics it is performed after-hours at full price and is considered a source for additional income for gynecologists. Quality of abortion services was reported as low. Post-abortion contraception Both private and public clinics lack pre- and post-abortion counseling services. Post-abortion counseling for family planning was estimated to be done only by 10% of gynecologists. A suggestion was made to support research about economic aspects of family planning and abortion, conducted by different research or teaching public health institutions.

Contraceptive availability The offer of contraceptives is quite limited on the Serbian market. Some modern contraceptives are not on the market (injectables and implants) and the reasons stated were that pharmaceutical companies are not interested in the small market of a country with a low contraceptive prevalence. This situation is also partly to the fact that there is a low demand for contraceptives in the country, but also due to the complicated administrative procedures for registering drugs. Serbia has also a locally produced combined oral contraceptive (Legrevan), which is cheap and accessible. Available contraceptives, including emergency contraceptive pills with levonorgestrel, can be purchased over-the-counter without medical prescription.

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.



SRH Serbia was dealing with advocacy initiatives that focus on policy implementation which have proved to be a much-needed catalyst for the development of new programs or services. Policy implementation helps ensure support of policy activities among community leaders and community members who may otherwise be ambivalent about or opposed to interventions addressing young people’s sexual and reproductive health and rights. As encouraging as this progress is in the course of the previous year with huge work and support was obtained from MoFA, further action is needed to make sure that these international commitments and national laws and measures are actualized so that population targeted within the country has real access to reproductive and sexual information, as well as counseling and services in the communities where they live. Too many of the enacted laws have not been implemented, and youth often do not reap the benefits of the legislative process.For many of the youth, programs and services are concentrated in capital cities and towns, leaving them little access to the information and services that would enable them to make safe, healthy choices in their sexual and reproductive lives.

health, too often those responsible for implementing these policies are not aware of the policies or their mandate to implement them. Particularly with the decentralization of government planning and programming in health, education, and other sectors, there continues to be a gap between policy commitments and action. Regional and district-level officials have increased responsibility for planning and managing programs to meet the needs of their populations, yet they often have little information on the policies they are charged with implementing. Moreover, they may have limited access to up-todate information on best practices and evidencebased programming. The beneficiaries of policies are also often not aware of the policies that have been enacted for their health and well-being. For policy areas, such as young people’s sexual and reproductive health, that are contentious and sensitive in many settings, local-level officials face another challenge. The reactions of key stakeholders—opinion leaders and the general public alike—can be unpredictable. Without broad-based support, well-intentioned initiatives to introduce sexuality education or youth-friendly SRH services can experience conservative backlash and may collapse or falter as a result.

A stark reminder of the gap between policies and programs on the ground can be found in example as follows:

Advocacyis generally perceived as a means to achieve policy change. As such, we have been engaged in the following:

While many countries have policies in place that provide a basic framework for programs to address young people’s needs for comprehensive information about sexuality and reproductive

• Advocacy as a key role in ensuring that key decision makers are informed about existing policies and their responsibility for implementing them. 



• Advocacy to persuade policy-actors to prioritize particular program approaches (or services). 
 • Advocacy as instrumental in creating support among community members and in generating demand for the implementation of government policies—demands that are often a muchneeded catalyst for the translation of policies into programs and services. Advocacy at the grassroots level can be used to inform the general public and opinion leaders about a particular issue or problem and to mobilize them to apply pressure to those in the position to take action. 
 Our advocacy efforts have proved to be an important strategy for ensuring that policy commitments are translated into actions that reach the intended beneficiaries. Advocacy activities were essential in order to press key decision makers and leaders to meet young people’s needs for SRH information and services. Advocacy is also necessary in order to generate wide-spread support among those at the community level who have a stake in adolescent health, from young people and their parents to teachers, health workers, religious leaders, and community officials. We have however made clear distinctionbetween advocacy and Behavior Change Communication (BCC)
as well as Information, Education, and Communication (IEC). Advocacy, BCC, and IEC initiatives are similar in that they all are focused on raising awareness about a particular issue. However, BCC and IEC are ultimately aimed at changing behavior at the individual level, whereas advocacy activities are aimed at mobilizing collective action and promoting social or legislative changes at the national, district, or community levels. The type of data collected depended on the particular issue or problem that is being addressed. Political mapping on the topic of SRH was supposed to help answer some of the following questions: How widespread is the problem among the target group? What services are currently available to deal with that problem? For example, for a national-level initiative aimed at ensuring that sexuality education is provided in primary schools in accordance with existing government policies,

it would be important to collect information on a wide range of issues, including: • The number and proportion of youth in the country who are enrolled in primary school. • Current levels of knowledge about SRH issues among in-school youth. • Young people’s current sources of information about SRH issues. 
 • Average age of sexual debut among young people. 
 • Prevalence of SRH problems (STIs, including HIV, early pregnancy, unsafe abortion, sexual violence, etc.) among adolescents. 
 • Availability of curriculum and teaching materials for the sexuality education program. 
 • Number and proportion of teachers who have been trained to teach sexuality education. 
 • The extent of sexuality education currently taught in primary schools. 
 In contrast, for a rural-focused initiative to improve the availability of SRH services for youth, initial research focused on issues such as: • The number of adolescents in the district and the proportion of young people in the population. 
 • Average age of sexual debut among young people in the district and nationally. 
 • Prevalence of SRH problems (STIs, including HIV, early pregnancy, unsafe abortion, sexual violence, etc.) among adolescents in the district and nationally, as well as the prevalence of SRH problems among specific sub-sets of adolescents and youth, such as in-school adolescents, out-of-school youth, married adolescents, etc. 
 • The number of health facilities that provide youth-friendly services. 
 • The number and proportion of health providers who have been trained in young people’s SRH services. 
 • Young people’s practices and preferences related to SRH services. 

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.


In compiling data on the scope of the problem and on the efficacy of any programmatic interventions that are being recommended through an advocacy initiative. Analyzing existing commitments



SRH Serbia was reviewing existing government policies, essential in order to identify exactly what the government’s position is on the issue or problem would be, and what specific steps it has committed itself to take to address it.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION ABOUT POLICIES RELATING TO YOUNG PEOPLE’S SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH Type of document • National Health Strategic Plan/Road Map (in lack of Reproductive Health Strategy) • Adolescent or Youth Reproductive Health Policy/ Plan of Action • Youth Policy • Population Policy • Development Policy • Norms and Standards or Guidelines for Health National Guidelines on HIV Prevention • National Education Policy
Decrees or Laws mandating young people’s SRH services Source of documents • Ministry of Health • Ministry of Youth and Sports 
• National H/A Office • Ministry of Education • APPG NOTE: UNFPA and other UN agencies, such as World Health Organization (WHO), UNAIDS, UNICEF and donor agencies, have proven as good sources for government policies on young people’s sexual and reproductive health.




This report builds on the previous one where self-stigmatization was the driving challenge of SOGI population. How does stigma affect personal life goals? Stigma and its effects are distinguished into two forms, public and self-stigma. Public stigma is seen in terms of stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination.

THE “WHY TRY” MODEL The “why try” effect includes three components: self-stigma that results from stereotypes; selfesteem and self-efficacy; and life goal achievement, or lack thereof. People who internalize stereotypes about their sexual orientation and gender identity experience a loss of self-esteem and selfefficacy. Devaluation is described as awareness that the public does not accept the person of SOGI orientation. Self-devaluation is more fully described by what are called the “three A’s” of selfstigma: awareness,  agreement, and application. Experiencing self-stigma, SOGI arebe aware of the stereotypes that describe a stigmatized group and agree with them. These two factors are not sufficient to represent self-stigma, however. The third A is application. The person must apply stereotypes to one’s self.

SELF-ESTEEM AND SELF-EFFICACY Demoralization that results from self-stigma leads to reduced self-esteem. Self-stigma and selfesteem have also been associated with actual help-seeking behavior.

The “why try” effect further includes another important mediator, which is self-efficacy. Selfefficacy is a cognitive construct that represents a person’s confidence in successfully acting on specific situations. Low self-efficacy has been shown to be associated with the failure to pursue work or independent living opportunities. Self-worth perceived is more than the kind of negative self-statements that are observed in people with depressive symptoms. It is directly linked to applying a derogatory stereotype to one’s self. “Why should I even try to live independently? Someone like me is just not worth the investment to be successful”.

EMPOWERMENT What evidence is there that empowerment is the obverse of self-stigma? Personal empowerment is a parallel positive phenomenon conceived as a mediator between self-stigma and behaviors related to goal attainment. People with sense of power are more confident about the pursuit of individual goals. They also play a more active role in treatment, crafting interventions that meet their perceptions of strengths, weaknesses, and needs. “Why try” is a complex construct which has been defined here in terms of four interacting processes. It begins as the personal reaction to the stereotypes; people who in some way internalize these attitudes. The depth of selfstigma depends on whether people are aware of

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.


and agree with these attitudes and then apply the stereotypes to themselves. Such personal applications undermine the person’s sense of self-esteem and self-efficacy. These kinds of decrements fail to promote the person’s pursuits of behaviors related to life goals. As a result, people of SOGI orientation decide not to engage in opportunities that would hasten work, housing, and other personal aspirations. “Why try” is also useful for understanding how unwillingness to obtain services affects life opportunities. Alternatively, reactions to stigma may evoke personal empowerment; the self-assurance that these stereotypes are not going to prevent the pursuit of individually defined goals. Generally, these models of self-stigma are fruitful for understanding change strategies meant to decrease stigma’s impact.




2014 has been a rich year for the activities undertaken, visibility in the country and among international stakeholders. Further in the text please find some of the selected activities:

QUEERING HUMAN RIGHTS REGIONAL LGBT CONFERENCE BELGRADE, SEPTEMBER 29- OCTOBER 1 Gender equality, inherent to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR), is one of International Planned Parenthood Federation’s (IPPF) core areas. In this regard SRH Serbia, an Associate Member of IPPF EN, together with its regional partners, IPPF EN Member Associations from Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republic of Macedonia desires to organize a regional Conference with its civil society partners to ensure this remains a political priority across the region. With the development of the Post2015 framework advancing at fast track, the review process of the ICPD Program of Action (PoA) coming to an end and the currently ongoing review of the Beijing PoA, this is a critical moment to advance regional priorities on SRHR and gender equality and ensure their integration into the new Post-2015 framework. Having this said, SRH Serbia, with the assistance of Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit, as part of the funding for the SRH Serbia’s project Scale-up for the future – Building sustainable Human Rights Based Centre for LGBT community in Southern and Eastern Serbia, is planning a

regional Conference titled Queering Human Rights with the objective to build partnerships to promote and advocate for regional priorities in the field of SRHR and gender equality. Mutual collaboration grounds are seen among the region, but different circumstances require restricted approach that addresses regional characteristics. Moreover the Conference will look into how these regional policies are linked to the national level and aim to update advocacy knowledge to enforcing these at national level. Thus the two-day Conference has taken place in Belgrade, in the period from September 29 October 1, grasping over 100 participants from countries of the region, as to correspond with the Belgrade Pride Week that ends on Sunday 28 September with a Pride March.

ROMA WOMEN UNEMPLOYMENT The behavior of the labor market gatekeepers has a very real impact on the opportunities that are made available to unemployed Roma trying to re-enter the labor market. But there is no comprehensive understanding amongst labor market gatekeepers – employers, human resource personnel and labor office officials – that their behavior is one of the major contributors resulting in systemic exclusion from employment for vast numbers of working-age Roma. Discrimination is not widely acknowledged as a major factor behind Romani unemployment, and when the issue is raised there is often strong resistance to discuss the subject or denial that

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.


the problem is sufficiently severe to demand attention. Employment discrimination against Roma is not considered a major determinant in the employment (or more importantly the nonemployment) of Roma by the key actors in the labor market. SRH Serbia has closely worked with the social services in south of Serbia aiming to sensitivize them in overcoming the existing prejudice and implement “positive discrimination” by offering equal job opportunities for Romani and nonRomani women.

LET’S TALK ABOUT RIGHTS, NOT IDENTITIES – Yogyakarta principles The Yogyakarta Principles are a set of principles on the application of international human rights law in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity. The Principles affirm binding international legal standards with which all States must comply. They promise a different future where all people born free and equal in dignity and rights can fulfill that precious birthright. Human rights violations targeted toward persons because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity constitute an entrenched global pattern of serious concern. They include torture and ill treatment, sexual assault and rape, invasions of privacy, arbitrary detention, denial of employment and education opportunities, and serious discrimination in relation to the enjoyment of other human rights. A week of fierce marketing campaign has been released in cities of south Serbia aiming at raising awareness to the people who feel their human rights have been threated through billboards titled “What a beautiful life”, and “I’m still standing” followed by a radio campaign and radio jingle, heard by over 60 000 persons, thus tackling the moveable middle to be aware of the discrimination and self-stigmatisation still widely present in Serbia among SOGI.

POLITICAL MAPPING Political context shapes the ways in which policy



processes work. To engage effectively in policy processes, civil society organizations (CSOs) and others need to understand political context. In some contexts, policymakers are keen to receive evidence and ideas from CSOs: there are established channels through which CSOs can make their inputs. In other contexts, CSOs are excluded from formal policy processes. To be e Political context refers to the political aspects of the environment that are relevant to action. This includes aspects such as the distribution of power, the range of organizations involved and their interests, and the formal and informal rules that govern the interactions among different players. For development actors seeking to influence policy, political context matters because it determines the feasibility, appropriateness and effectiveness of their actions. Realizing that CSOs need to take different approaches in different contexts, SRH Serbia has engaged in creating Political mapping with respect to Reproductive Health and Sexual Rights, distribution of power, institutions and persons and CSOs which might be the moveable middle or play and active role in placing SRR on the agenda of our society in Serbia. Launch campaign is planned to take place in April of 2015.

ADVOCACY ICPD +20 The year 2014 marked the 20th year review of the International Conference on Population & Development (ICPD) Programme of Action (PoA). Since its adoption in 1994, the ICPD PoA has been instrumental in striving efforts for securing a place for women’s sexual and reproductive health rights (SRHR) on the global development agenda. There is a need to demonstrate evidence and continue the advocacy initiatives to ensure the SRHR still holds a place in the post 2014 agenda. SRH Serbia is keen on bringing together key stakeholders from the SRHR movement including women’s rights organizations and networks Serbia and the region to come up with strategic interventions to influence the government’s commitments on ICPD.  Our advocacy efforts ultimately aim at ensuring local, national, and regional ownership of and

advocacy on the SRHR agenda by utilizing national and regional opportunities in the ICPD Beyond 2014 review processes, through the following key strategies: • Evidence generation, creation of national advocacy briefs and national policy dialogues • Ensure that the national agenda and advocacy are represented and voiced at international levels and bring constituency in support of the SRHR agenda at the international level.

YOUTH AND VOLUNTERISM Through each of our programs, our strategy includes attracting volunteers who are the driving force of our organization. SRH Serbia is constantly working on finding new ways of attracting new people who wish to get involved in our work.

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.


FINANCIAL SCOPE OF WORK SRH Serbia has undergone many changes in the previous year financially wise, but has also managed to attract new donors through and using its Resource Mobilization Plan. At the end of the year, SRH Serbia committed to performing Annual Audit, which is attached below:

AUDITORS REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SRH SERBIA Dragana Stojanović, Executive Director SRH Serbia Belgrade Dear Ms. Stojanović, We have audited the financial statements on pages 1 to 7 which have been prepare d under the historical cost convention and the accounting policies set out on page 4. Respective responsibilities of the Board and auditors The Association’s Board is responsible for the preparation of financial statements. We rep ort to you our opinion as to whether the financial statements give a true and fair view. We also report to you if, in our opinion the association has not kept proper accounting records or if we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit. Basis of opinion We conducted our audit in accorda nce with Auditing Standards issued by the Auditing Practices Board. An audit includes examination, on a test b asis, of evidence relevant to the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. It also includes an assessment of the significant estimates and judgments made by the Board in the preparation of the financial statements, and of whether the accounting policies are appropriate to the Association’s circumstances, consistently applied a nd adequately disclosed. We planned and performed our audit so as to obtain all the information and explanations which we considered necessary in order to provide us with sufficient evidence to give reasonable assurance th at the financial statements are free from material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or other irregularity or error. In forming our opinion we also evaluated the overall adequacy of the presentation of information in the financial s tatements. Opinion In our opinion the financial statements give a true and fair view of the state of the Association’s affairs as at 31 December 2014 and of its income an d expenditure for the year then ended. Belgrade, January 23, 2015 Certified Auditor



Srđan Simić

MANAGEMENT LETTER TO THE BOARD OF SRH SERBIA: Dragana Stojanović, Executive Director SRH Serbia Belgrade Dear Mrs Stojanovic, We would like to thank you for your cooperation during our audit engagement and hope to continue our successful cooperation in the upcoming years. During the course of our audit we have done a comprehensive analysis of your operations, in particular we have examined your internal controls as to gain assurance in their existence, implementation and effectiveness. Therefore we have concluded the following: • Incoming documents (invoices and related documents) have been received and archived properly by your financial assistant; • Proper accounting records are kept by your external accountant; • Individual budgets for grants received have been prepared and every invoice has been accounted for in all the budgets, as well as being archived together with the bank statement confirming the payment of the invoice; • Proper labour contracts have been prepared and taxes and contribution for individuals contracted for projects activities have been paid on a regular basis and upon completion of the project activity for which they have been contracted for; • Financial statements presenting actual costs for each individual grant have been prepared upon project completion and sent to the donors. However, we have identified certain aspects of the internal controls system that can be improved and we prepared a summary stated on the following pages. If you have any questions, we remain at your disposal for any assistance and if any further explanation is required. Kind regards,

Certified Auditor

Srđan Simić

SRH Serbia, www.safersexresurs.org. Be one of us.


APPRECIATION TO OUR DONORS Our success, broad in its reach, deep in its impact, would be unfathomable without the longstanding dedication of the Associations’s donors and partners who provide the foundation to our work, sustain our ideas and walk hand in hand with our organization. Our donors are our allies, and we would like to extend our deepest appreciation for all of the assistance without which our work would be unimaginable in the past years.

*2014 Annual Report is a digital publication which can be found and downloaded on the SRH Serbia’s website: http://www.safersexresurs.org



Profile for SRH Serbia

SRH Serbia 2014 Annual Report  

Read all about our work in 2014.

SRH Serbia 2014 Annual Report  

Read all about our work in 2014.

Profile for draganas