Impact (Mid Term) Evaluation Report of "Project Worst Form of Child Labour (WFCL) by L&HRD, GoP"

Page 1

Mid Term Evaluation Report on Project

COMBATING WORST FORMS OF CHILD LABOUR IN 4 DISTRICTS OF PUNJAB

DIRECTORATE GENERAL MONITORING & EVALUATION PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB

72, Garden Block, Garden Town, Lahore .Pakistan Tel: +92-42-99233187-91 www.dgmepunjab.gov.pk / info@dgmepunjab.gov.pk


[This page is intentionally left blank]

4|Page


ACRONYMS PC-I

Planning Commission Performa-I

DGM&E

Directorate General Monitoring & Evaluation

P&DD

Planning & Development Department

ILO

International Labour Organization

O&M

Operation & Maintenance

DCC-CL

District Coordination Committee on Child Labour

DCO

District Coordination Officer

DOL

District Officer Labour

PMU

Project Management Unit

EU

European Union

CMC

Centre Management Committee

DIH

District Industrial Home

FO

Field Officer

IP

Implementing Partner

LSTCs

Literacy cum Skill Training Centers

NFECs

Non-Formal Education Centers

NGOs

Non-Government Organizations

OSH

Occupational Safety & Health

SW

Social Welfare

MIS

Management Information System

TNA

Training Need Assessment

WFCL

Worst Forms of Child Labour

2|Page


TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS

2

List of Tables .................................................................................................................. 5 List of Figures ................................................................................................................. 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 7 1 INTRODUCTION 8 1.1

DIFFERENCE between child labour and Worst forms of Child Labour 8

1.1.1

Defining Child Labour ....................................................................................... 8

1.1.2

The Worst Forms of Child Labour .................................................................... 9

1.2

Project Details ..................................................................................... 10

1.3

Project at a Glance ........................................................................... 12

1.3

Project Objective and Interventions ............................................... 14

1.4

Project Staff as APPROVED in PC-I ................................................... 16

2 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY OF THE PROJECT .......................................................... 17 2.1

The Evaluation Report: Purpose & Structure................................... 17

2.1.1

Limitation of Evaluation ................................................................................. 17

2.2

TEAM FORMATION .............................................................................. 19

2.2

DOCUMENTS REVIEW.......................................................................... 19

2.3

IDENTIFICATION OF KEY INDICATORS ............................................... 20

2.4

PROJECT SITE VISITS ............................................................................. 21

2.5

INTERVIEWS WITH PROJECT OFFICIALS ............................................ 22

3 DG M& E Assessment ................................................................................................. 23 3.1

Planned Objectives/Interventions vs. Achieved ........................... 23

3.2

Financial assessment (Planned vs. Actual) .................................... 27

3.2.1

YEARLY COST BREAKDOWN ........................................................................... 27

3.2.2

ADP allocation vs. Actual Releases vs Actual Expenditures ........................... 29

3.3.3

Procurement and physical verification of procured items and COMPARISON of Estimated

VS. Actual Cost 30 3.4

Project Planned duration .................................................................. 31 3|Page


3.5

Input, outPUT and process ANALYSIS ............................................... 31

3.5.1

Enrollment Status ........................................................................................... 32

3.5.2

Children Assessment ...................................................................................... 33

3.5.3

CENTER’S ASSESSMENT .................................................................................. 34

3.5.4

Teachers Assessment ..................................................................................... 35

3.6

Strength Weakness Opportunity and Threat (SWOT) Analysis ..... 36

3.7

DAC - OECD: CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING Development ASSISTANCE 37

3.8

Model Work Places(OSH) vISITS ........................................................ 39

4 OBSERVATIONS 39 5 Recommendations ..................................................................................................... 41 ANNEXURES

43

Annexure 1: ILO C 182 wORST fORM OF CHILD lABOUR....................................... 43 Annexure 2: Chakwal District IMPLEMENTING partner (PAIMAN) Issue .............. 44 Annexure 03: Project Staff Vacant Posts May’2017 .............................................. 45 Annexure 4: Toolkits.................................................................................................... 46 Annexure 5: Main Stream Record Specimens ....................................................... 47 Annexure 6: Model Work Places .............................................................................. 48 Annexure 7: Physical Asserts ..................................................................................... 49 Annexure 8: Assessment Tools for OutPut /Unit of Analysis .................................. 50 Annexure 9: ASSESSMENT Tools Input and Process ................................................ 51

4|Page


LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Project at Glance ............................................................................................................................12 Table 2: Project Staff....................................................................................................................................16 Table 3: Project Site Visits............................................................................................................................21 Table 4: Interview with Project Officials ......................................................................................................22 Table 5: Planned Vs Achieved Objectives-...................................................................................................23 Table 6: Cost Breakdown .............................................................................................................................27 Table 7: ADP Yearly Allocation (Till April’17) ...............................................................................................29 Table 8: Procurement and Physical Verification..........................................................................................30 Table 9: Dac- OECD: Criteria For Evaluating Elevating Development Assistance ........................................37

5|Page


List of Figures Figure 1: Schematic flow of the scale of problem in the figure ....................................................................9 Figure 2: Schematic Flow/ Diagram of Evaluation Process .........................................................................18 Figure 3: Yearly Cost Breakdown .................................................................................................................28 Figure 4: Internal Expense and Outsource services share of expense ........................................................28 Figure 5: ADP Yearly Allocations ..................................................................................................................29 Figure 6: Enrolment Status - NFE Centers ...................................................................................................32 Figure 7: Enrolment Status –Adolescent Literacy Cum Skill training centers (ALCS) ..................................32 Figure 8: Non Formal Education Centers (NFE) ...........................................................................................33 Figure 9: Assessment of Children at Adolescent Literacy Cum Skill training centers (ALCS) ......................33 Figure 10: Assessment Non Formal Education Centers (NFE) .....................................................................34 Figure 11: Assessment of Adolescent Literacy Cum Skill training centers (ALCS ........................................34 Figure 12: Teachers Assessment of NFE Centers .........................................................................................35 Figure 13: Teachers Assessment of ALCS Centers .......................................................................................35

6|Page


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The overall purpose of this mid-term evaluation was to assess the extent to which the project Combating Worst Forms of Child Labour Project in 4 Districts of Punjab has started bringing about anticipated changes. First PC-I was approved with cost of Rs. 180.832 Million approved but later PC-1 was revised for deduction of main micro finance component and revised cost was Rs. 159.544 million. This report is aimed to evaluate the project’s objectives/targets as per verifiable indicators, and to prepare recommendations for further improvements in the project implementation in order to achieve desired outcomes and have sustainable impacts. The Government of Punjab in the Labour and Human Resource Department based on its interactions with stakeholders a comprehensive review of the existing literature on child labour and its worst forms in Pakistan and globally as well as in light of the experience of ILO and other organizations, intended to undertake a 05 year project (2011-2016) revised (21st November, 2016 – 20th November, 2017) for elimination of worst forms of child labour in 04 districts of Punjab, namely Chakwaal, Jhelum, Jhang and Layyah, as a pilot project potentially replicable throughout the province. The evaluation methodology adopted was desk literature review, field visit of project districts, statistical analysis of quantitative data and review of qualitative data by the evaluation team. It was observed that resources were underestimated and set targets set was on lower side in PC1 design, i.e. targeted number of children in NFE & ALCS total was 4000 whereas even 6 month prior to completion of project planned gestation more than 8000 children were passed out/transferred to main stream. Project was executed with 4 different implementing partners (NGOs) in each district so to get optimum results there should be more effective and define monitoring framework. Overall performance of the project is satisfactory in comparison with targets set in PC-I. But researches, public awareness, social media campaigns and up-to-date management information system (MIS) should be key areas of focus till end of the project.

Mr. Shoaib Kamran (Individual Consultant)

7|Page


1

INTRODUCTION

1.1

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHILD LABOUR AND WORST FORMS OF CHILD

LABOUR Considerable differences exist between the many kinds of work children do. Some are difficult and demanding, others are more hazardous and even morally reprehensible. Children carry out a very wide range of tasks and activities when they work. 1.1.1 Defining Child Labour Not all work done by children should be classified as child labour that is to be targeted for elimination. Children’s or adolescents’ participation in work that does not affect their health and personal development or interfere with their schooling is generally regarded as being something positive. This includes activities such as helping their parents around the home, assisting in a family business or earning pocket money outside school hours and during school holidays. These kinds of activities contribute to children’s development and to the welfare of their families; they provide them with skills and experience, and help to prepare them to be productive members of society during their adult life. The term “child labour” is often defined as work that deprives children of their childhood, their potential and their dignity, and that is harmful to physical and mental development. It refers to work that: 

is mentally, physically, socially or morally dangerous and harmful to children; and

interferes with their schooling by: 

depriving them of the opportunity to attend school;

obliging them to leave school prematurely; or

Requiring them to attempt to combine school attendance with excessively long and heavy work.

In its most extreme forms, child labour involves children being enslaved, separated from their families, exposed to serious hazards and illnesses and/or left to fend for themselves on the streets of large cities – often at a very early age. Whether or not particular forms of “work” can be called “child labour” depends on the child’s age, the type and hours of work performed, the conditions under which it is performed and the objectives pursued by individual countries. The answer varies from country to country, as well as among sectors within countries. 8|Page


1.1.2 The Worst Forms of Child Labour Whilst child labour takes many different forms, a priority is to eliminate without delay the worst forms of child labour as defined by Article 3 of ILO Convention No. 182(Annexure 01) a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict; b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances; c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties; d) Work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children. e) Labour that jeopardizes the physical, mental or moral well-being of a child, either because of its nature or because of the conditions in which it is carried out, is known as “hazardous work�. (Source: http://ilo.org/ipec/facts/lang--en/index.htm)

Figure 1: Schematic flow of the scale of problem in the figure

9|Page


1.2

Project Details

Child labour is as old as mankind. In the second half of the 20th century, an international consensus developed on the elimination of the practice based upon the desire to protect children and favour their mental and cognitive development. Echoing this consensus, in 1973, the International Labour Organization (ILO) designed a convention establishing at ďŹ fteen years the minimum age for admission to employment (Convention C138). The Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour, known in short as the Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, was adopted by the International Labour Organization (ILO) in 1999 as ILO Convention No 182. It is one of 8 ILO fundamental conventions. By ratifying this Convention No. 182, a country commits itself to taking immediate action to prohibit and eliminate the worst forms of child labour. The Convention is enjoying the fastest pace of ratifications in the ILO's history since 1919. The Labour and Human Resource Department, Punjab is a partner of ILO-IPEC and EC in the project titled as Combating Abusive Child Labour-II (CACL-II). This project was being implemented in two districts of Pakistan, namely Sahiwal in Punjab and Sukkur in Sindh. Project was funded by the European Community (EC), with contributions from ILO and the Government of Pakistan. The Project was focused on combating worst forms of child labour by building institutional and technical capacity of the government at federal, provincial and district levels through concerted actions by all stakeholders. The Project was implementing a District-based Approach to eliminate Worst Forms of Child Labour (WFCL) in two pilot districts selected by the government. The district approach aims to inter-link the relevant district government departments for strengthening project interventions, leveraging of resources, enhancing the project impact and most importantly, establishing a child labour monitoring system at the district level. The present project aims was to replicate the interventions of CACL-II project and will continue to benefit from the experience of this project. In fact the target districts for this have been selected by the Provincial Coordination Committee on Child Labour (PCC) involving all key stakeholders from government and non-government sectors. This Committee is headed by the Secretary Labour and Human Resource Department for guidance and support to all initiatives in the province for elimination of child labour. The PCC will also continue to provide backup and support to the current project. ILO will also be asked to provide technical support for training the key functionaries from target districts and 10 | P a g e


carrying out baseline surveys for the prevalence and distribution of worst and hazardous forms of child labour in target districts. The ILO estimates that of the world’s 215 million child labourers, 115 million are involved in hazardous work, including 41 million girls and 74 million boys; 53 million are aged 5-14, and 62 million are aged 1517. One concern is that the number of child labourers engaged in hazardous work has been increasing among the 15-17 age groups. The highest concentration of hazardous child labour is in agriculture (59%) followed by 30% in services (e.g. domestic work, street-based work) and 11% in industry (e.g. small workshops, mining, construction). The Government of Punjab in the Labour and Human Resource Department intends to undertake a 5 year project (2011-2016) revised (21st November, 2016 – 20th November, 2017) for elimination of worst forms of child labour in 4 districts of Punjab, namely Chakwaal, Jhelum, Jhang and Layyah, as a pilot project potentially replicable throughout the province. The impact of child labour on the health and development of a child depends on factors related to the type of work the child is engaged in, the conditions of that work, employer treatment, hours of work, the opportunity to attend school and child’s own vulnerability. Working children may suffer from fatigue, muscular/skeletal disorders, cuts, fractures, burns, malnutrition, poisoning, infectious disease, psychological harm, and even death, depending on the type of work they do. Children often join hazardous labour because of lack of awareness on the risks involved. Also, the opportunities for choosing safer forms of work are limited. Sometimes, employers persuade children to undertake jobs that adults refuse to do either because of low wages offered or awareness of health hazards involved in the work. Certain jobs are hazardous for children simply because they do not either have the dexterity of adult workers or a blatant lack of awareness on the use of safety devices (or their non-availability). Children are therefore at a greater risk from unsafe working conditions than adults are. Hazardous work can have immediate and long-term impacts on children. These may include injury (e.g. a wound from a blade), disability (e.g. crushed limb from a machine) and even death (e.g. as a result of pesticide poisoning). Children and adolescents are specifically vulnerable to the effects of hazardous work because they are still developing physically and mentally. Exposure of children to dangerous chemicals or physical stress can also harm their proper and healthy development. Some of the physical or psychological impacts of hazardous work may not be obvious immediately, but only begin to appear at a later stage in their lives.

11 | P a g e


1.3

PROJECT AT A GLANCE

Table 1 reflects project brief at glace describing project locations, budgets and generation period Table 1: Project at Glance PROJECT NAME

Combating Worst Forms of Child Labour in 4 districts of Punjab

Location

Districts of Chakwaal, Jhelum, Jhang and Layyah with headquarters at Lahore

Sponsoring

Labour and Human Resource (L&HR) Department, Government of Punjab through the Annual Development Programme (ADP)

Sector

Social Sector

Execution

The project is being implemented by the Directorate General Labour Welfare Punjab. The Director General Labour Welfare, Punjab is ex-officio Project Director. He is being assisted by the District Officers (Labour) of respective districts as well as the project staff in implementation of the project activities.

Concerned

Provincial Labour and Human Resource Department, Government of Punjab

Department

Cost (PC – I)

Rs. 180.832 Millions (Approved on 21st November, 2011)

Gestation Period (PC-I)

20th November 2011 – 20th November 2016

Cost (Revised PC – I)

Rs. 159.544 Millions (Approved on 18th January, 2017)

Gestation

Period 20th November 2011 – 20th November 2017

(Revised PC-I)

12 | P a g e


Social

benefits

with The social benefits of the project are summarized below.

indicators

The project will contribute in a significant manner to eliminate Child Labour in the target districts. The project interventions are potentially replicable and can be subsequently expanded to other districts and sectors.

The project aims at social and political empowering of families and children engaged in Child Labour. The empowerment will make them more useful members of the society.

The project will impart primary education to approximately 2000 children of school going age presently engaged or vulnerable to child labour, through non-formal schools. This will contribute to improve literacy rates in the four districts.

The project also aims to provide life skills and vocational training to adolescents and member of families of target children. This will result in improvement on human development indicators, earning potential and overall availability of useful skills in the four districts.

Emphasis on health and safety and establishment of model workplaces aims to promote better health, work environment and productivity at the workplaces. This may help improve the businesses and provide a model for child labour free production and service delivery.

Project interventions will help Pakistan to comply with its commitments and obligations under international conventions.

Employment generation The project does not generate employment as such, except the few (direct and indirect)

contractual positions in the PMU-WFCL and the teachers and service providers who will be outsourced some of the work. Therefore, effect on employment generation is negligible.

Environmental impact

No positive or negative environmental impact. However, there are significant positive impacts on the social environment.

13 | P a g e


1.3

PROJECT OBJECTIVE AND INTERVENTIONS

The Project is focused on combating worst forms of child labour by building institutional and technical capacity of the government at provincial and district levels through concerted actions by all stakeholders. The Project is implementing a District-based Approach to eliminate Worst Forms of Child Labour (WFCL) in four districts selected by the government. The district approach aims to inter-link the relevant district government departments for strengthening project interventions, leveraging of resources, enhancing the project impact and most importantly, establishing a child labour monitoring system at the district level. In fact the target districts for this have been selected by the Provincial Coordination Committee on Child Labour (PCC) involving all key stakeholders from government and nongovernment sectors. This Committee is headed by the Secretary Labour and Human Resource Department for guidance and support to all initiatives in the province for elimination of child labour. The PCC also continued to provide backup and support to the current project. ILO has also been asked to provide technical support for training the key functionaries from target districts and carrying out baseline surveys for the prevalence and distribution of worst and hazardous forms of child labour in target districts. The project proposes a holistic strategy and consists of a set of administrative arrangements and direct interventions. 

Recruitment of professional staff to oversee the implementation arrangements of Project.

Establishment of District Coordination Committees (DCCs) in the target districts to coordinate the project interventions in the respective districts.

Baseline and/or Rapid Assessment Survey to assess the geographic and sectoral dimensions of child labour in the respective districts.

Establishment of non-formal education (for children age between 05 to 14 years) and literacy cum skill training centers (for children age between 14 to 18 years) in the clusters where majority of target children and their siblings prone to Child Labour can be enrolled.

Enrolment of 2000 children having age between 05 to under 14 years in non-formal education centers.

Enrolment of 2000 children having age between 14 to 18 years in the literacy cum skill training centers.

Establishment of 20 model workplaces in target districts to demonstrate risk reduction as tool to promote healthy employment of young and adult persons. 14 | P a g e




Establishment and testing of mechanism for community level child labour monitoring in the four project districts.



Research studies, awareness campaigns, web and database development, special events, stakeholders dialogues to promote the lessons learned and to encourage their large scale adoption.

15 | P a g e


1.4

PROJECT STAFF AS APPROVED IN PC-I

Table 2: Project Staff

Sr.

1

Position

Project Director (ex-officio Director General labour Welfare)

Part/full

No. of

time

posts

19/20

Part time

1

BS

2

Program Manager

19

Full time

1

3

Manager M&E

17

Full time

1

4

Manager Admin & Accounts

17

Full time

1

5

Database Administrator

17

Full time

1

6

Field Officer

17

Full time

4

7

Assistant Manager Accounts & Admin

16

Full time

1

8

Driver

5

Full time

2

9

Naib Qasid

1

Full time

2

16 | P a g e


2

EVALUATION METHODOLOGY OF THE PROJECT

2.1

THE EVALUATION REPORT: PURPOSE & STRUCTURE

This evaluation report is divided into 5 different parts. The first part starts with introduction giving details about the project domain and structure of the project evaluation report. The second part of this report focuses on evaluation methodology, followed by documents review, selection of performance indicators, project site visit plan etc. The third part of the report depicts the DGM&E’s assessment pertaining to the actual status of the project performance against its planned objectives and data analysis based on project cost and beneficiary analysis of the project. The fourth part of report consists of observations regarding the project activities made by the evaluation team of DGM&E, P&D Department. The fifth part reflects recommendations for improvement in running process as well suggestions for the effective usage of available resources. This section addresses the suggestions for improvement in project planning and execution as well as, identifying matters requiring follow up actions. The rationale for the recommendations is clearly explained and linked with the information collected during the evaluation. 2.1.1 LIMITATION OF EVALUATION I.

Implementing partner (PAIMAN) worked in Chakwal not able to get NOC from government/home department and suspended activities on 16th July, 2016. Evaluation team limit themselves only to record provided by PMU-WFCL, on ground activities or centers were not available for evaluation in district Chakwal. Details of case was reviewed and meeting minutes is attached in Annexure 02

Following criteria has been used to carry out evaluation of the project as elaborated in flow chart as given below.

17 | P a g e


TEAM FORMATION

PC-I REVIEW

PROJECT DOCUMENTS REVIEW

PC-IV REVIEW

OTHERS OBJECTIVES COST

IDENTIFYING PROJECT KEY INDICATORS

FINANCIAL ACHIEVEMENTS

DURATION

SITE VISITS

PHYSICAL ACHIEVEMENTS

PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES AND DATA COLLECTION

PERIODIC PHYSICAL PROGRESS REPORTS

PERIODIC FINANCIAL PROGRESS REPORTS

INTERVIEWS

PROCUREMENT RECORDS SITE SNAPS

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION PROJECT COST ANALYSIS

DGM&E ASSESSMENT

OBSERVATIONS/ RECOMMENDATION

REPORT SUBMISSION

Figure 2: Schematic Flow/ Diagram of Evaluation Process

18 | P a g e


2.2

TEAM FORMATION

Evaluation team was constituted under the patronage of Director General (M&E) in a meeting held in the office of DGM&E for evaluation of the WFCL project having expertise in project’s domain, data collection methods, data analysis and interpretation along with preparation of evaluation report. The project was assigned to Mr. Shoaib Kamran, Individual Consultant, DG M&E, P&D Department. Report Review: 

Mr. Ghazanfar Mubin ( Sr. Specialist R & D )

Project Field Visits: 

Mr. Shoaib Kamran (Individual Consultant)

Mr. Ihsan Nadir (Project Asst.)

Mr. Muhammad Kashif (M&E Asst.)

Mr. Haroon Jamil (Project Asst.)

Mr. Umair Anjum (Project Asst.)

In-House Data Analysis & Report Writing: 

Mr. Shoaib Kamran (Individual Consultant)

Mr. Ihsan Nadir (Project Asst.)

Mr. Haroon Jamil (Project Asst.)

2.2

DOCUMENTS REVIEW

Following project documents, evaluation tools and techniques were consulted. 

Planning Commission Form-I (PC-I, Original) of the Project

Revised Planning Commission Form-I (PC-I, Original) of the Project

DG(M&E) approved Evaluation Guidelines

Progress Report - WFCL

http://www.wfcl.punjab.gov.pk/

https://www.punjab.gov.pk/provincialdepartments_labour_DG_labour

http://ciwce.org.pk/

http://ilo.org/islamabad/lang--en/index.htm 19 | P a g e


2.3

IDENTIFICATION OF KEY INDICATORS

Component wise progress against planned vs achieved objectives

Financial assessment (Planned Vs. Actual) i.

Cost Analysis

ii.

ADP allocation vs. Actual Releases

iii.

Procurement and physical verification of procured items and Comparison of Estimated vs Actual Cost

Project duration

Input, outcome and process Analysis

Enrolment Status of NFE and LSTCs

Children Assessment of NFE and LSTCs

Centers Assessment of NFE and LSTCs

Teachers Assessment of NFE and LSTC

Strength ,Weakness, Opportunity and Threat (SWOT ) Analysis

DAC- OECD: CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING Development ASSISTANCE

Model Work Places Visits (OSH component)

20 | P a g e


2.4

PROJECT SITE VISITS

The project site visit conducted by the Evaluation Team of the Directorate General, Monitoring & Evaluation, Planning & Development Department for data collection and evaluation purposes as depicted in below Table Table 3: Project Site Visits

Sr. No.

1.

LOCATION/ DISTRICT

District Jhang

DATE OF VISIT

05-Apr-2017

TEAM MEMBERS  

   

Mr. Shoaib Kamran Mr. Muhammad Kashif Mr. Umair Anjum Mr. Haroon Jamil

 

Mr. Shoaib Kamran Mr. Muhammad .Kashif Mr. Umair Anjum Mr. Haroon Jamil

12-April-2017

 

Mr. Shoaib Kamran Mr. Ihsan Nadir

IP-PMU, Lahore

03-May-2017

 

Mr. Ihsan Nadir Mr. Haroon Jamil

5.

District Jhelum

10-May-2017

 

Mr. Ihsan Nadir Mr. Haroon Jamil

6.

IP-PMU, Lahore

11-May-2017

Mr. Ihsan Nadir

7.

DG (M&E), Lahore

16-May-2017

Mr. Ihsan Nadir

2.

District Layyah

06-Apr-2017

3.

PMU-WFCL, Lahore

4.

21 | P a g e


2.5

INTERVIEWS WITH PROJECT OFFICIALS

The interviews and telephonic conversation were conducted with officials who were directly linked with this project. The detail of the officials belonging to sponsoring & executing agency is as follow . Table 4: Interview with Project Officials Sr.

NAME

DESIGNATION

1

Mr. Muhammad Saleem Hussain

Project Director-WFCL / Director 042-99230348 General Labour Welfare, Punjab

2

Mr. Muhammad Rehan Nabi

Programme Manager – WFCL 0300-4199299 (Additional Charge)

3

Mr. Haider Ali Khan

Manager M&E – WFCL

Mr. Muhammad Imran Younas

Field Officer - WFCL, Chakwal / Manager Admin & Accounts 0333-6812 012 (Additional Charge)

No.

4

CONTACT No.

0323-4174083

Field Officer – WFCL, Jhang / 5

Mr. Muhammad Salman Fazal

Field Officer – WFCL, Layyah 0300-7988902 (Additional Charge)

6

Mr. Aamir Qasmi

Field Officer, Jhelum

0334-7462217

7

Mr. Aftab Nabi

Database Administrator

0304-3340082

22 | P a g e


3

DG M& E ASSESSMENT

DG M&E Assessment has been carried out regarding planned objectives/interventions of the project and with reference to verifiable indicators & targets mentioned in as revised PC-1 3.1

PLANNED OBJECTIVES/INTERVENTIONS VS. ACHIEVED

Table 5: Planned Vs Achieved ObjectivesPlanned

Objectives Indicator

Target

DGM&E Assessment

/Verifiable Indicators Recruitment of professional Hiring staff

to

oversee

of 14 members

the Professional Staff 11 / 14 recruitment done. Presently (03) Key Positions are vacant/by additional charge (Annexure 03)

implementation arrangements of Project.

Establishment of Coordination

District Notifications of 4

4 DCCs

Committees DCCs

(Yet not reissued after

to coordinate the project in

Local

the

Government

Ordinance)

respective districts.

Baseline

Partially Achieved Notifications are Issued

(DCCs) in the target districts

interventions

Partially Achieved

Survey/Research Training

Assessment

Assessment

Need 4 Reports

Achieved

for 01 each district

centers and skills Component 1:

Achieved

Provision of Social Services Provision education

of to

non-formal Number of non- 120 NFEs children formal

schools

120

NFE

centers

established

involve in worst form of - established

23 | P a g e


child labour

Proportion

of 2000 Learners

4677 children enrolled:

children enrolled

Enrollment

233% achieved

Dropout rate

<30%

Below

30%

as

per

analysis of given record Proportion of

40%

students

More than 40% as per analysis of given record

completing 5 grades in 3 and 1/2 years.

Proportion of

100%

Achieved

4

Achieved

teachers trained Number of school monitoring visits Record

each month

of

visits

available Literacy and skill training for Number of children 2000 children

in

higher

age of

groups (14-18)

upper

provided

age Adolescents 187%, 3751 children of

literacy

upper age Passed

cum skill training

Provision of tool 100% kits

to

Achieved

Achieved

training Pictures of tool kits in

graduates

(Annexure 04) Improvement of working Number of visits

05 model work

conditions, at workplaces

per month per

places

model workplace

established in

Achieved

each district 24 | P a g e


Component from

2:

Support

districts

Partially Achieved

line

departments Health

Screening

of Screened children

100%

Achieved

enrolled children No Satisfactory record of health screening available Mainstreaming to formal Number of children 100% schooling

Achieved

mainstreamed Certificate attached in (Annexure 05)

Component 3: Institutional

Achieved

Interventions Promotion

of

model Establishment

workplaces

of 20

Achieved

model workplaces (Annexure 06) Awareness

100%

provided

to

workers

&

employers

of

Achieved

model workplaces Component 4: Research,

Partially Achieved

Publications and Mass Awareness Research studies on the

Number

‘Nature and dimensions of

research

Worst form of Child Labour

commissioned

in respective project

of 2

Partially Achieved

studies 01 / 02 Done “Fighting Out Struggles”

25 | P a g e


districts Number

of 2

research

Partially Achieved

studies 01 / 02 Done

completed

“Fighting Out Struggles� Number

of 2

Partially Achieved

dissemination 01 / 02 Done with

events organized

collaboration

of

Employers Federation of Pakistan (EFP) / ILO Mass awareness on Worst Number of news Above 24 Form of Child

labour articles/columns

through print and electronic published in Urdu media

Not Achieved

and

Only 03 Done

English

newspapers Number

of

talk 4

shows electronic media

on

Not Achieved 01 / 04 Done (12th June, 2013 on state channel PTV)

26 | P a g e


3.2

FINANCIAL ASSESSMENT (PLANNED VS. ACTUAL) I.

Yearly Cost Breakdown

II.

ADP allocation vs. Actual Releases vs Actual Expenditures

III.

Procurement and physical verification of procured items and comparison of Estimated vs. Actual Cost

3.2.1 YEARLY COST BREAKDOWN As PC-I had been revised on 18th January, 2017 so all actual expenditures incurred and reported to AG Office as per reconciliation statements for the financial years from FY 2011-12 to FY 2015-16 were included in Budget.

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

2016-17Till April’17

5 6 7

2012-13

1 2 3 4

2011-12

Sr. No.

Table 6: Head wise Yearly Cost Breakdown

Non Formal Education (NFE) Centres

-

-

4,406,053

17,446,945

18,995,527

13,854,351

54,702,876

Vocational Training + Literacy

-

-

745,422

9,801,370

8,289,770

4,465,443

23,302,005

Model Workplaces

-

-

-

1,999,997

-

-

1,999,997

Baseline survey

-

-

-

376,580

423,180

50,000

849,760

Total for Out sourced services

0

0

5,151,475

29,624,892

27,708,477

18,369,794

80,854,638

Establishment Expenditure

60,000

3,725,469

5,780,040

5,954,267

4,881,074

4,501,330

24,902,180

Operational Expenditure

283,899

817,760

1,804,959

2,488,040

4,989,880

1,176,390

11,560,928

Purchase of Physical Assets

4,606,327

701,867

249,013

-

-

-

5,557,207

Total Internal Expense/Purchases Department

4,950,226

5,245,096

12,985,487

38,067,199

37,579,431

24,047,514

42,020,315

Description of Expense

Grand Total PKR.

4,950,226

Total

5,245,096 18,136,962 67,692,091 65,287,908 42,417,308 122,874,953

27 | P a g e


Figure 3: Yearly Cost Breakdown 20000000 18000000 16000000 14000000 12000000 10000000 8000000 6000000 4000000 2000000 0 2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

Non Formal Education Centres ( NFEC)

Vocational Training + Literacy

Model Workplaces

Baseline survey

Establishment Expenditure

Operational Expenditure

2016-17Till April’17

Purchase of Physical Assets

Figure 4: Internal Expense and Outsource services share of expense

34%

66%

Total for Out sourced services

Total Internal Expense/Purchases Department

28 | P a g e


3.2.2 ADP ALLOCATION VS. ACTUAL RELEASES VS ACTUAL EXPENDITURES

Table 7: ADP Yearly Allocation (Till April’17) YEAR

PSDP ALLOCATION Million PKR

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 TOTAL

20 30.71 9.912 71.599 60 40

ACTUAL RELEASES Million PKR 5.888 5.256 12.996 38.002 37.063 27.449 126.654

ACTUAL EXPENDITURE Million PKR ( Till April’17)

4.95 5.245 12.958 37.939 37.033 24.047 122.172

ADP Allocation vs. Actual Releases & Actual Expenditures (till April'17) 80 70

Rs. in Millions

60 50 40 30 20 10 0

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

2016-17

Sum of PSDP ALLOCATION

20

30.71

9.912

71.599

60

40

Sum of ACTUAL RELEASES

5.888

5.256

12.996

38.002

37.063

27.449

Sum of ACTUAL EXPENDITURE

4.95

5.245

12.958

37.939

37.033

24.047

Figure 5: ADP Yearly Allocations

29 | P a g e


3.3.3 PROCUREMENT

AND

PHYSICAL

VERIFICATION

OF

PROCURED

ITEMS

AND

COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED VS. ACTUAL COST Procurements are within estimate in PC-1 and Physical verification of the following items has been done and pictures attached in Anx-07

Table 8: Procurement and Physical Verification

Suzuki Cultus

3

Honda Motor Cycle

4

Laptops

5

HP Printer

6

HP Printer

7

HD Camera

8

Photocopier Machine

VXRI Model 2012 CG-125 HP ProBook 4530s HP M1212NF HP Laser Jet P2055 Olympus Camera (VR370) Ricoh MP 5000

Variance Amount

2

Actual Cost in Rs.

2012

No. of Items

Toyota Hilux 4*2 Single Cabin

Actual Rate per Item

1

Total PC 1 Estimate

Model

PC-1 Estimate

Item

No. of Items (PC-1)

Sr. No.

WFCL Physical Assets

1

2,239,200

2,239,200

1,699,000

1

1,699,000

540,200

1

945,000

945,000

945,000

1

945,000

0

5

94,000

470,000

94,000

5

470,000

0

8

96,019

768,152

82,775

8

662,200

105,952

4

41,681

166,724

29,400

4

117,600

49,124

2

29,406

58,812

29,406

2

58,812

0

5

16,263

81,315

13,900

5

69,500

11,815

1

85,410

85,410

85,410

1

85,410

0

1

74,887

74,887

0

0

0

74,887

1

38,932

38,932

26,932

1

26,932

12,000

0

0

0

25,000

9

LED

10

UPS

11

Water Dispenser

1

25,000

25,000

12

Furniture & Fixture

1

18,894

18,894

13

Ceiling Fan

1

3,160

3,160

3,160

1

3,160

0

14

Air Cooler

1

11,114

11,114

11,114

1

11,114

0

15

UPS (200 V)

1

13,624

13,624

13,624

1

13,624

0

16

Battery

2

13,846

27,692

13,846

2

27,692

0

17

Executive Table

2

43,403

86,806

43,403

2

86,806

0

18

Office Table

4

20,408

81,632

20,408

4

81,632

0

19

Executive Chair

6

13,697

82,182

13,697

6

82,182

0

20

Office Chairs

6

5,773

34,638

5,773

6

34,638

0

21

File Cabnit

N-165 AGS Size 1400*750*760 MM Size 1600*800*760 MM(H) MOD 0.36 R Fully Cushioned MOD 0.30 with Arms Cane MOD 0.17 WF 1155*435*1420 MM (H)

6

16,052

96,312

16,052

6

96,312

0

22

5 Seater Sofa Set Fully Cushioned

MOD 045/0.46

1

76,616

76,616

76,616

1

76,616

0

4,648,230

837,872

1000 Watts

5,486,102

0

30 | P a g e


3.4

PROJECT PLANNED DURATION

Project initial gestation period was 60 months (November 2011 – November 2016) and later on it was extended to 72 months (November 2011 – November 2017) as per revised PC-I approved dated January 18, 2017. As project has already enrolled children more than double of target so department is positive to deliver project with in extended time i.e. November, 2017 and there will be no need for further extension. 3.5

INPUT, OUTPUT AND PROCESS ANALYSIS

Population Proportion sampling technique used on Unit of Analysis/outcome in both NFE and ALCS with 95% Confidence Interval and 5% Margin of Error

Sampling Technique

Population Proportion Sampling

Unit of Analysis

Children in LCSC and NFE Centers

Formula (Population proportion Sampling )

Confidence Interval

95%

Margin of Error

5%

ALCS Total Population

3751

NFE Total Population

4672

Sample Size NFE

356

Sample Size LSTCs

349

Tool for Children Assessment

Question Papers (Annexure 08)

Tools for Input and process ( Teachers and Questioners and Interviews ( Annexure Facility )

09)

31 | P a g e


3.5.1 ENROLLMENT STATUS

Enrollment Status - NFE Centres 5,000 4,500

Number of Enrollment

4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0

Layyeaha

Jhang

Jhelum

Chakwal

Grand Total

500

500

500

500

2,000

1,170

1,262

1,121

1,119

4,672

234.00%

252.40%

224.20%

223.80%

233.60%

Target of Enrollment Total No. of Enrollment %age Achieved

Figure 6: Enrolment Status - NFE Centers

Enrollment Status - LCSCs 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0

Chakwal

Jhang

Jhelum

Layyeaha

Total

Sum of Total No. of Enrollment

750

1025

985

991

3751

Sum of Target of Enrollment

500

500

500

500

2000

Figure 7: Enrolment Status –Literacy cum Skills Training Centers (LSTCs)

32 | P a g e


3.5.2 CHILDREN ASSESSMENT

Assessment of Children Enrolled at NFE Centres 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 10.00 5.00 0.00

Jhang

Jhelum

Layyah

Average of St. Name Obt. Marks

1.00

1.00

0.76

Average of Eng. Obt. Marks

6.37

5.85

6.33

Average of Gen.Kg Obt. Marks

3.66

3.60

3.83

Average of Urdu. Obt. Marks

3.20

3.44

3.76

Average of Math Obt. Marks

3.65

3.56

3.54

Average of Isl. Obt. Marks

2.68

4.00

2.00

Average of Total Marks

25.00

25.00

25.00

Average of Obtained Marks

20.56

21.44

20.22

Figure 8: Non Formal Education Centers (NFE)

Assesment of Children Enrolled LSTCs Centres 12.00

Axis Title

10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00

Jhang

Jhelum

Layyah

Average of Q1 Obt. Marks

1.99

2.00

1.91

Average of Q2 Obt. Marks

1.99

2.00

1.91

Average of Q3 Obt. Marks

1.95

1.98

1.77

Average of Q4 Obt. Marks

2.00

1.95

1.84

Average of Q5 Obt. Marks

1.53

2.00

1.70

Average of Total Marks

10.00

10.00

10.00

Average of Obtained Marks

9.46

9.93

9.13

Figure 9: Assessment of Children at Literacy cum Skills Training Centers (LSTCs)

33 | P a g e


3.5.3 CENTER’S ASSESSMENT

Assessment of NFE Centres 9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00

ALC

ALC

ALC

Jhang

Jhelum

Layyah

Average of Attendance Register

0.67

1.00

1.00

Average of Black Board

0.83

1.00

1.00

Average of Dari/Mat/Chairs

1.00

1.00

1.00

Average of Text Book

0.83

1.00

1.00

Average of Approach of Center

1

1

1

Average of Learning Enviroment

3.67

3.20

2.75

Average of Marks

8.00

8.20

7.75

Figure 10: Assessment Non Formal Education Centers (NFE)

Marks

Assessment of LSTCs 10.00 9.00 8.00 7.00 6.00 5.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 0.00

Jhang

Jhelum

Layyah

0.71

1.00

1.00

Average of Black Board

1

1

1

Average of Dari/Mat/Chairs

1

1

1

0.86

1.00

0.50

Average of Approach of Center

1

1

1

Average of Learning Enviroment

3.57

3.80

3.25

Average of Total Marks

8.14

8.80

7.75

Average of Attendance Register

Average of Text Book

Figure 11: Assessment of Literacy cum Skills Training Centers (LSTCs)

34 | P a g e


3.5.4 TEACHERS ASSESSMENT

Teacher Assessment NFE Centers 3.5 3

Axis Title

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

Jhang NFE

Jhelum NFE

Layyah NFE

Count of Category A

2

1

1

Count of Category B

3

2

2

Count of Category C

0

1

0

Figure 12: Teachers Assessment of NFE Centers

Teacher Assessment LSTCs 3.5 3 Axis Title

2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

NFE

NFE

NFE

Jhang

Jhelum

Layyah

Count of Category A

2

1

1

Count of Category B

3

2

2

Count of Category C

1

Figure 13: Teachers Assessment of LSTCs

35 | P a g e


3.6

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS (SWOT) ANALYSIS

Strengths             

The WFCL project philosophy is to eliminate the child labour and also enhance the public private partner’s ship concept in the communities. Establishment of 120 NFECs& Enrolled the above 4000 targets children in Non- Formal Education centers based on Rapid Assessment survey Non-Formal Curriculum as per approved Govt. of Punjab Employment and teacher training opportunities especially for females of remote areas Possible link with higher education Flexible time table of education /Skill Free of cost education to the enrolled children Provision of PEC exam to the enrolled learners Development of Adult literacy Cum Skill Training Centers Learner chooses or skill of interest through Training Need Assessment (TNA) Theoretical & Practical Courses/Curriculum as per approved District Industrial Home (SANAT ZAR) Provision of Tools kits to the Passed Graduate Establishment of model work places to raise awareness on occupational, safety health Equal opportunity of learning and employment of females skill learners

Opportunities 

Active Volunteer parents committees

Nationally recognize Certificate of LSTC Graduate signatory by District Government official.

Many target children siblings were join the NFECs/LSTC. District Coordination Committee constituted headed by DCO and paly vital role to the intervention of the project activities.

Establishment of Model Work Places to eliminate the hazardous condition at un-healthy working

place

Weaknesses 

Short training time for Skill Training

Low wages to the teachers (PKR 4000-5000) effects quality

Lack of employment and business opportunities and in target districts

Reluctance of employer towards change

Limited learning tools and material as per Implementing partners financial proposal/bid

Lack of education opportunity to link up with the higher education

Threats 

Lesser job opportunities

in the informal sector of

selected districts and communities 

Drop-out ratio

Lack of opportunities for self-employment

Low Levels of innovation at district levels

Low income areas/non consumer societies

36 | P a g e


3.7

DAC- OECD: CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE

As it midterm evaluation at this point we can’t measure impact Table 9: DAC- OECD: Criteria For Evaluating Development Assistance Non-Formal Education Efficiency

Literacy cum Skill Training

120 centers covered 4677 children in four 40 centers in 04 cycles (six months each) districts.

Model Work Places 

covered 3751 children in four districts

WFCL project established 5 model work places in each districts

The centers were established at the locations where the child labour due to lower income and 

community below poverty line Add in Relevance

This concept of model workplace spread awareness of low cost technologies and techniques for

Locally resident teachers

addressing the safety, health and environmental

Free Learning material (Books, notebooks & Stationery)

problems faced by workers and community Add in Parents/CMC (Center Management Committee) established for the supervision and mobilization

relevance

Recruitment of approximately 120 male and female teacher Employment opportunities for females in remote areas. Add in sustainability Relevance

Children age 5 year to 14 years are direct Children Age 14 to 18 years, enrolled are 

Hazards are part of labour especially working with

beneficiaries of the project

un-trained and unskilled labour

direct beneficiaries of the project,

Children directly involved in worst form of child labour and the siblings of the child laborers.

Deals directly with the vulnerable segment of the society i.e. adolescent workers.

Children disengaged from the child labour and These were disengaged from the labour and 

It was very much necessary to equip them and

enrolled in NFECs.

sensitize the workers and employers on the safety at

enrolled in LSTCs.

work place

37 | P a g e


Effectiveness

Education alternatives to the children that These children were working on cheap labour, Step toward improved health & safety workplace cannot be part of formal schoolings otherwise

lacking of any skilled labour and formal Workplace Safety awareness among the workers and learning

employers.

This idea was much needed to flourish in the community so that the child labour can be

This concept motivated the surroundings of Model Work

eliminated with such measures.

Places.

Children became part of mainstream education opportunity to learn the skills of self- Reduce chances of workplace accidents after getting basic education from the NFECs.

employment at their in their locality without any cost

They are motivated, economically active and encouraged enough to make their life better.

Sustainability These centers are located in the target These centers are located in the target Follow

ups

can

ensure

sustainability

of

model

community with the involvement of the key community with the involvement of the key workplaces. stakeholders so these are owned and continue stakeholders. Few of these are may continue to benefit the children involved in labour.

to benefit the children involved in labour

The enrolled children after passing PEC These children are skilled labour Toolkits examination will be mainstreamed into formal provided by the project will be a source to schools for completing their education.

earn at their own level in their locality

Motivated parents and children also joined Certificate is recognition for them as skilled formal schools after enrolling NFECs.

labour in any private organization

38 | P a g e


3.8

MODEL WORK PLACES(OSH) VISITS

Under the WFCL Project Occupational, Safety & Health had been an emerging thematic area although its target had been (20 model work places, 05 each district) only. Total 4 model workplaces visited in each district and found satisfactory environment in terms of occupational, safety & health for adolescent workers. Some glimpses of visited model work places are in Annexure 06

4

OBSERVATIONS 

Resources were underestimated and set targets very low in PC1 design, i.e. number of children in NFE & LSTCs total 4000 whereas even 6 month prior to finishing of project about 8428 children passed out/transferred to main stream

Currently three main positions (BPS-17) of professional project staff are filled with additional charge and one (BPS-16) is vacant (Annexure 03) , dedicated Human Resource and rotation effected project continuity and implementation

It was observed that during project design and development it had been mentioned to conduct “baseline survey/ research assessment” through the same organizations who were hired for execution of the project interventions

It was also observed that findings of “baseline survey/ research assessment” in all respective districts. But, neither it was disseminated through print/electronic nor on official web portal

WFCL website is neither being updated frequently and nor linked with any other resource sites

No partnership strengthened among project management unit, other line departments (education, health) and implementing partners on the basis of stakeholders analysis as per C-2 of revised PC-1

No satisfactory evidence of health screening of children verifiable indicator (Annexure G-2, Component C 2 of Revised PC-I).

District Coordination Committees on Child Labour (DCC-CL) had been established and notifications issued but after implementation of new Local Government Ordinance new notification yet to be issued for effective monitoring and evaluation of project interventions

As no database had been developed so traceability and follow up of children enrolled/pass out (both at NFE/LSTC) was not uniform in all four district/ implementing partner

Research, publications and mass awareness is partially achieved but not reported

Reporting and documentation of project interventions, inputs, processes, outputs, outcomes and lesson learned is limited and need improvement by developing and implementing project software as well as in hard

Public outreach, mass awareness efforts through print, electronic and social media was not enough effective and unable to raise awareness on elimination of worst form of child labour at community level

39 | P a g e




WFCL Management Information System (MIS)/Database of the project are neither updated nor much resourceful. Even no formats developed for reporting and documentation (in soft format) of project interventions, inputs, processes, outputs and outcomes and on official web portals.

40 | P a g e


5 RECOMMENDATIONS 

There should be more effective and define internal monitoring framework and can get help from new technologies e.g. monitoring can be android base & link up with GIS system for NFE & LSTCs Centers

Responsibilities/Terms of References of District coordination Committees should be reviewed and updated after amended Local Government Ordinance implemented in Punjab

It is seriously recommended to consider and avoid “conflict of interest” during designing and developing implementation strategy of project interventions in PC-I

Report of baseline survey/ research assessment of respective districts should be copy right by Directorate General Labour Welfare, published and uploaded on the official web portals of Department of Labour & Human Resources and WFCL as well as of implementing partners

PMU-WFCL must sign MOUs with other departments, civil society organizations and stakeholders for strengthening district based child monitoring mechanism

After PAIMAN case in Chakwal, there is a serious need to review the whole process of outsourcing project interventions and selection of implementing partners. There should be maintained a list of reserved organizations in the case the selected organization gets dysfunctional.

Uniform reporting and documentation formats (both in soft and hard) should be developed with technical assistance of ILO and understanding with implementing partners

Updated record of all direct beneficiaries (the children enrolled at NFEs and the adolescents at LSTCs) should be easily accessible for monitoring & evaluation through WFCL MIS/Database and for all other stakeholders through project website

Every beneficiary’s name, Father’s name (if child as per child’s Birth Registration certificate and if adolescent as per CNIC), Adolescent’s and Father’s CNIC number, Father/guardian’s contact number, beneficiary’s picture, age, sex and other necessary details should be available in WFCL MIS/Database as per approved and prescribed formats

Status of each and every direct beneficiary (children enrolled at NFE) should be updated in WFCL MIS/Database real time after health screening, mainstreaming (passing PEC exam/enrollment at public school) or dropout for progress review, monitoring & evaluation purposes

Similarly status of every direct beneficiary (adolescent enrolled at LSTCs) should be updated in WFCL MIS/Database in real time after completion of training, provision of tool kits for progress review, monitoring & evaluation purposes 41 | P a g e


Up to date back up of all above mentioned and other necessary data (both in hard/soft format through WFCL MIS/Database) should be maintained and ensured for monitoring & evaluation before completion of the project

PMU-WFCL team should arranged Stakeholders Dialogues at all respective project districts and finally at Lahore to review project progress, analyses the challenges and way forward with massive media coverage

Research, publication and mass awareness component should be emphasized and effectively implemented by completion of the project

PMU-WFCL should commission and complete research studies (as per PC-I) in all project districts

PMU-WFCL should focus on promotion of project achievements through print and social media to raise awareness of stakeholders on child labour especially worst form of child labour

The data of child labour inspections reported by the Labour inspector /Officers in WFCL Project districts should be updated in WFCL MIS/Database on regular basis

42 | P a g e


ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1: ILO C 182 WORST FORM OF CHILD LABOUR C182 - Worst Forms of Child Labour Convention, 1999 (No. 182) Convention concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour (Entry into force: 19 Nov 2000) Adoption: Geneva, 87th ILC session (17 Jun 1999) - Status: Up-to-date instrument (Fundamental Convention). Convention may be denounced: 19 Nov 2020 - 19 Nov 2021 There are total 16 Articles and Article 3 clearly defines the term the worst forms of child labour in detail Article 1 Each Member which ratifies this Convention shall take immediate and effective measures to secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour as a matter of urgency. Article 2 For the purposes of this Convention, the term child shall apply to all persons under the age of 18. Article 3 For the purposes of this Convention, the term the worst forms of child labour comprises: (a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict; (b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances; (c) The use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties; (d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children. Full article Details on below link source: http://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C182

43 | P a g e


ANNEXURE 2: CHAKWAL DISTRICT IMPLEMENTING PARTNER (PAIMAN) ISSUE The Government of Punjab is implementing an ADP Scheme titled as “Combating Worst Forms of Child Labour in 4 Districts of Punjab”. This scheme is being executed under the administrative control of Labour and Human Resource Department. The project activities have been outsourced through NGOs/CSOs as per PC-I and these Implementing partners have been hired under Punjab Procurement Rules (PPRA) 2009 (Amended), section 36 sub section (b(ii) Single Stage Two Envelops bidding procedure. In this regard, the project signed contract agreements with selected organizations on 14.02.2014, for the following districts as: Sr. No.

Organization Name

District

Paiman Alumni Trust (PAIMAN)

Chakwal

National Rural Support Programme (NRSP)

Jhelum

Awam Dost Foundation (ADF)

Jhang

Society for Human Empowerment & Rural Development (SHER)

Layyah

PAIMAN ALUMNI TRUST (NGO), hereinafter referred to as PAIMAN, has been hired as Implementing Partner of Labour & HR Department to conduct baseline survey/rapid assessment survey and to execute the Non-Formal Education and Literacy cum Skill Training Components of Combating Worst Forms of Child Labour Project in District Chakwal. On 15th July, 2016, PAIMAN has been asked by District Government Chakwal to stop its activities with reference to letter No. SO (IS-II)3-2/2009(NGO)(Part-3)-2 dated 27th June 2016 received from Home Department, Government of the Punjab, wherein the PAIMAN has been banned in all Punjab till further orders. On the direction of EDO (Community Development), Chakwal vide its letter No. EDO(CD)/2016/1371, all on-going activities of WFCL-Project have been suspended by PAIMAN on 18 th July, 2016 The Worthy Director General, Labour Welfare, Punjab directed the Programme Manager WFCL on 29th March 2017 to mainstream all learners of NFECs into Formal Schools of School Education Department and Non Formal Basic Education Schools of Literacy & NFBE Department in district Chakwal and released all the arrears of PAIMAN till October 2016 to the Project Staff of the organization while release all salaries of NFECs’ Teachers from August 2016 to March 2017 and LSTCs’ Skill Trainers from August 2016 to October 2016. After mainstreaming of all children and clearance of all pending payments, the contract agreement of the PAIMAN should be revoked. Details of the case reviewed by DGM&E team and copies can obtain from department

44 | P a g e


1

Position

Project

Director

(ex-officio

Director labour Welfare)

posts

Sr.

No. of

ANNEXURE 03: PROJECT STAFF VACANT POSTS MAY’2017

BPS

Part/full time

19/20

Part time

1

19

Full time

1

Remakes

Vacant 2

Programme Manager

Through Additional Charge

3

Manager M&E

17

Full time

1

4

Manager Admin & Accounts

17

Full time

1

Vacant Through Additional Charge

5

Database Administrator

17

Full time

1

6

Field Officer

17

Full time

4

01 Vacant Through Additional Charge

7

Assistant Manager Accounts & Admin

16

Full time

1

8

Driver

5

Full time

2

9

Naib Qasid

1

Full time

2

Vacant

45 | P a g e


ANNEXURE 4: TOOLKITS

46 | P a g e


ANNEXURE 5: MAIN STREAM RECORD SPECIMENS

47 | P a g e


ANNEXURE 6: MODEL WORK PLACES

48 | P a g e


ANNEXURE 7: PHYSICAL ASSERTS

49 | P a g e


ANNEXURE 8: ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR OUTPUT /UNIT OF ANALYSIS

50 | P a g e


ANNEXURE 9: ASSESSMENT TOOLS INPUT AND PROCESS

51 | P a g e


52 | P a g e


Š Directorate General of Monitoring and Evaluation, Planning and Development Department, Govt. of Punjab

(JUNE, 2017) Soft form of the report and corresponding MOM may download from www.dgmepunjab.gov.pk

53 | P a g e


Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.