Yes I do... Programme document

Yes I do...

Programme document

2

Content Section 1: Theory of Change

5

Introduction Shared goals

6 6

1.1 Strategy for result areas 1 and 4 of the Dutch SRHR policy Pathways of change Capacity development of Southern CSOs, L&A, Research and social marketing Correlation between capacity building and L&A in Yes I Do and Strategic Partnership

6 6 10 12

1.2 Strategy to ensure inclusivity , including gender equality

12

1.3 Countries

14

1.4 Risk Analysis

22

1.5 Roles

24

Roles of the Ministry and the Yes I Do Alliance Roles of the Alliance partners Governance Consultations between the Ministry and the Alliance members Consulation and coordination between the Child Marriage Alliance funded by MoFA Coordination of Research Agenda’s between the Child Marriage Alliances

Section 2: Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Approach Introduction

24 24 25 26 26 26

29 30

2.1 Monitoring

30

Planning Data collection for monitoring

33 33

2.2 Evaluation and learning

33

Operational research Learning agenda

34 34

Section 3: Budget

37

3.1 Budget

38

3.2 Hourly rate calculation by the different Alliance Members

43

3

I. Theory of Change

Programme Document SRHR Partnership Section 1 Theory of Change Introduction Millions of adolescent girls in developing countries suffer major right violations and have limited future perspectives because of child marriages, teenage pregnancies and Female Genital Mutilation/cutting (FGM/C).

These issues have common root causes, are mutually reinforcing and require a joint approach.

Child Marriage (CM), Female Genital Mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) & Teenage Pregnancies are human rights violations, and are manifestations of deeply rooted gender inequality and social norms, poverty and limited economic perspectives, inadequate access to (comprehensive sexuality) education and Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (ASRHR) services, and voiceless youth.

The Yes I Do Alliance partners and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) both acknowledge that CM, FGM/C & Teenage Pregnancies are interrelated issues that involve high health risks and all human rights violations of adolescent girls, and impede socio-economic development in a great number of developing countries.

Following lessons learnt from current programmes of the Yes I Do Alliance partners, as well as low and middle income countries evaluations and recommendations of international organisations like UNICEF/UNFPA and Girls Not Brides (GNB), the Yes I Do Alliance will address the issues of CM, FGM/C & Teenage Pregnancies with a programme, applying a mix of intervention strategies adapted to the specific contexts of the target countries.

Shared Goals From the five strategic goals described below of the Yes I Do programme, four align directly result area 1 (Young people know more and are thus equipped to make healthier choices about their sexuality), while one of our strategic goals aligns more with result area 4 (More respect for the sexual and reproductive rights of groups who are currently denied these rights) of the Ministry’s SRHR policy framework.

These goals will contribute to the programme’s overall goal that in 2020 girls can decide if, when and whom to marry and if where and with whom to have children, and are protected from FGM/C.

1.1 Strategy for result are 1 and 4 of the Dutch SRHR policy Pathways of change Strategic Goal 1: Community members and gate-keepers have changed attitudes and take action to prevent CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies Attitudes and behavior that perpetuate harmful practices like CM, FGM/C & Teenage Pregnancies are fed by deeply rooted social-cultural norms in the target communities in the selected countries. Transformation of such deeply rooted discriminatory gender norms and beliefs is a complex process.

The programme will support the building of a social movement aimed at transforming harmful social and gender norms and eradicating the harmful practices of CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancy. This movement will include community members across different generations and gatekeepers1 who will become aware of the benefits of changing norms and of alternatives to CM, FGM/C & Teenage Pregnancies. It is assumed that through a raised awareness on and gained knowledge about discriminative social norms, SRH rights and alternatives to harmful practices, this movement of community members and gate keepers will take action to

1 Gatekeepers: caretakers, health and social workers, teachers, traditional and religious leaders and peers, who influence girls’ situation in relation to CM, FGM/C and TP 6

change their social environment at different levels of their societies.

The social movement will emerge from established networks of change agents that promote social mobilisation in relation to CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies. We will stimulate that especially men and boys take active part in this to become allies in changing gender discriminative social norms.

We will enable boys and girls and local CBOs to engage in dialogue with their peers and with men and women of their communities to challenge the deeply rooted discriminative social norms and raise awareness on the harmful impact of CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies. We assume that through participating in the intergenerational dialogues, a number community members will emerge who want to be actively involved together with the capacitated adolescents to gradually form a network of change agents.

We will support adolescent girls and boys to improve their knowledge on their SRHR rights and needs and enhance their skills for influencing quality service provision on SRHR and specific child protection support. For this we will help create or strengthen the capacity of existing local CSOs to work with adolescent girls and boys, create an enabling environment for them in clubs in and out of school to learn in a safe space about their SRH rights and facilitate them with innovative CSE to increase their knowledge and skills and reach out to their peers.

We assume that when adolescent girls and boys have improved knowledge of their SRH rights and are invited to meaningfully participate in community dialogues their interest will grow to organize themselves in groups and networks with support of the local CBOs to be able to further share their knowledge and awareness with their peers and other members of the communities.

This pathway creates an enabling environment to support pathway 2 and 3.

Strategic Goal 2: Adolescent girls and boys are meaningfully engaged to claim their SRH rights In all countries where the alliance plans to implement the program, girls and boys lack voice, and a supportive environment, to break through norms and practices concerning CM, FGM/C and their SRHR in general. There are limited means and structures for youth to organize themselves in a meaningful way and to claim their rights – such as their right to participation and information - and influence decisions by parents, community leaders and other duty bearers.

For young people to be meaningfully engaged to claim their SRH rights, they need to be aware of their rights, and they need voice to claim their rights. At the same time, they need CSOs that involve young people in their programming. These changes can happen in an enabling environment of changing social and gender norms. CSOs can start engaging young people in a meaningful way, once they have the knowledge and capacity to work with young people. Through training and advice, CSOs will be capacitated to collaborate with young people. This will enable them to involve young people in a meaningful way in their organizational structure and programming. Adolescent boys’ and girls’ capacities are built so they have improved skills and knowledge on SR health and rights, awareness of gender and power relationships and (grass-roots) advocacy skills. This will support them to raise their voice in an effective way and demand quality service provision.

Furthermore, young people are enabled to effectively raise their voice towards parents, community leaders and other duty bearers, which is addressed through pathway 1 in the TOC. Strategic Goal 3: Adolescent girls and boys take informed action on their sexual health.

Child Marriage, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancy coupled with weak adolescent health and social services overall, as well as weak child protection systems, form a huge challenge protecting the SRHR of adolescents in our focus countries.

The right to education and health implies the right for adolescents to be able to take informed action on their sexual health. Furthermore international players, such as the WHO, recognise that men and boys should also be involved in SRH if some of the underlying harmful gender norms that contribute to FGM/C, CM and teenage pregnancies are to be successfully and sustainably addressed2. For adolescent girls and boys to take informed action on their SHR they need access to quality Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE), SRHR information and quality SRH services.

2 WHO / Engaging men and boys in changing gender-based inequity in health: evidence from programme interventions, 7

This pathway of change implicitly contains two mutually reinforcing strategies: 1: Improving access to ASRH information and CSE This pathway of change is based on the (evidence-informed3) assumption that adolescent girls and boys who have the skills and knowledge to make safe and informed decisions on SRHR can better resist Child marriage, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies. Furthermore it is assumed that through CSE adolescents will seek SRH services when needed and are more able to have safe, equal and pleasurable (sexual) relationships. In addition meaningful youth engagement (goal 2) is required for increased access and uptake of quality ASRHR services and information. A major precondition for ‘increased access to CSE and ASRHR information’ is to improve the quality of CSE and ASRHR information. This can be attained through adjusting and complementing existing evidence informed curricula. Gender transformative education and skills building will be integrated into CSE based on evidence that CSE which includes gender and power issues4 is five times more effective than CSE that does not. Through this, teachers, boys and girls will become allies in changing gender norms and challenge CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies.

A precondition for increased access to CSE and for quality CSE/information is that teachers and service providers are equipped with knowledge on effective CSE strategies5. Based on this, the Yes I Do Alliance will develop the capacity and attitude of teachers, peer educators, health staff and other relevant stakeholders to provide quality SRHR information and CSE. In addition, teachers, peer educators (and preferably school leadership) will go through a gender transformative process themselves so that they internalise equitable gender norms and become aware of the linkages with CM, teenage pregnancies and FGM/C. As a result of this strategy teachers, peer educators and educational institutions have rights-based, gender-transformative, positive attitudes and provide quality comprehensive SRHR information to adolescent girls and boys. This is an intermediate step to an increased quality of ASRH information and CSE, as well as an increased use of (and access to) SRHR information and education by adolescent girls and boys.

2: Increased access to ASRH services and child protection services Access for adolescent girls and boys to quality SRHR and child protection services is essential for taking informed action on their SR Health. Even though ‘Yes I Do’ is not focused directly on implementing services through partners, it does focus on strengthening existing services, both public and private.

Cooperation with private health sector, through social franchising and marketing, will increase access to quality and affordable health care for underserved communities.

In order to strengthen referral systems between ASRHR information and services the Yes I Do alliance will ensure that SRHR information and education includes referral to SRH and social services, including the strengthening of Child Protection systems. The evidence-informed6 assumption is that linking SRHR information and education and SRH services is essential to ensure that young people are able to use the information they have been given and access the services they need. As a result of this strategy, the alliance will ensure that young people are referred to the SRHR services they need and can take informed action on their sexual health.

Increased access to services within the Yes I Do TOC is furthermore based on the precondition and assumption that improving the quality of services and youth friendliness of services, combined with the strengthened voice of adolescents to demand quality information and services will lead to uptake of services.

The Yes I Do programme will develop the capacity of governmental- and private health care providers and social workers to deliver quality and Youth Friendly SRH Services (YFS). Gender transformative and YFS training will address the harmful gender norms and non-youth friendliness found with service providers. YFS provision in health facilities will also be strengthened creating YFS units and buddy systems between health facilities and youth clubs.

3 UNESCO / International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education: An Evidence-Informed Approach for Schools, Teachers and Health Educators. - Paris: UNESCO, 2009. Source: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001832/183281e.pdf 4 Haberland, Nicole / The Case for Addressing Gender and Power in Sexuality And HIV Education: A Comprehensive Review Of Evaluation Studies. - In: International Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2015, 41(1): p. 31–42.

5 IPPF. - IPPF Framework for Comprehensive Sexuality Education. - London: IPPF, 2010.

6 SRHR Alliance. - Empirical and theoretical exploration of how the PAMOJA TUNAWEZA alliance interventions have been implemented and complemented each other in Kilindi district, Tanzania. - Utrecht: SRHR Alliance, 2015 8

Strategic Goal 4: Adolescent girls have alternatives beyond CM, FGM/C and TP through education and economic empowerment Due to poverty and multiple barriers to girls’ education, employment opportunities and income , adolescent girls have no alternatives than CM and FGM/C and have no means to prevent teenage pregnancies.

This programme will stimulate alternatives to CM and FGM/C by improving the post primary education for girls and increasing employment opportunities. It is assumed that every extra year that girls stay in school will positively contribute to their opportunities to generate an income.

Increasing girls’ access to quality education is an effective strategy to reduce the prevalence of CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies. Research shows that education is the strongest predicator of the age a girl will marry and that girls with secondary schooling are up to six times less likely to marry as children when compared to girls who have little or no education.

Enrollment in secondary education is enhanced by sensitizing parents, teachers and communities that educating their girls will benefit the entire family and community. This sensitization in described in pathway 1.

Creating a safe and quality-driven school environment will help in convincing families to send their girls to school. The school environment will be improved through making it girls-friendly, creating safe spaces where girls receive information and education on SRHR. These interventions create trust for parents that teenage pregnancy and sexual violence will be prevented and equip girls with skills to claim their SRH rights preventing them from early drop out.

Besides economic empowerment through education, the programme will also directly work towards girls’ economic empowerment through increasing their access to credit and income generating activities. The programme will assist young women in acquiring entrepreneurial skills and access to financial and business advisory services to enable them to start a business. Through cooperation with private sector actors, the programme will provide opportunities to adolescent girls to get access to a business network. It is assumed that engaged private sector actors are willing to provide traineeships and jobs for girls. Market scans will be rolled out in collaboration with private sector to determine where the best employment opportunities lie. Stronger engagement of corporate ‘forerunners’ and convincing business cases in support of investing in girls and young women, will encourage a broader group of private sector actors to engage girls and young women in their companies.

Strategic Goal 5: Policy makers and duty bearers develop and implement laws and policies on CM, and FGM/C Legislation on CM and FGM/C is not always reflecting international human rights standards in the 7 selected countries. Most countries have policies and action plans related to CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies, however they are not always comprehensive. Implementation of policies and action plans is often inadequate, which is reflected in a lack of resource allocation to address CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies and inadequate structures for implementation. Systems to monitor the implementation of laws and policies are often absent or not functioning. Lack of a well-functioning birth and marriage registration system also hampers enactment of laws.

Laws on abortion in the 7 countries are restrictive, permitting abortion only to safe a women’s life (Indonesia and Malawi), when she has been raped ( Ethiopia), or allowing abortion to safe a women’s life in combination with physical health or other reasons.7 In quite a few countries local laws exist that force pregnant girls to discontinue their education.

A prerequisite for the development and implementation of laws and policies on CM and FGM/C is that policy makers and duty bearers have the political awareness and will to do so. The Yes I Do Alliance will motivate policy makers and duty bearers to put CM, FGM/C & adolescent SRHR issues in general high on the political agenda by increasing their awareness and understanding on these issues and their role as duty bearer.

A condition for enhancing political will is the establishment of a community driven social movement aimed at transforming harmful social and gender norms and eradicating CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies. This is

7 http://worldabortionlaws.com/map/ 9

based on the assumption that policy makers are as much influenced by social norms, as people in communities.

A precondition within the TOC for increased political awareness and political will is that CSOs and change agents hold policy makers and duty bearers to account. The Yes, I Do Alliance will support CSOs and change agents, including youth advocates, to lobby and advocate policy makers and duty bearers to follow though on their commitments related to CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies.

A precondition for CSOs and change agents to be able to hold policy makers and duty bearers accountable is the establishment of a network of change agents for social mobilization. The assumption is made here that change agents are willing to organize themselves to influence community members and to hold duty bearers accountable.

Greater accountability of government and policy makers will be supported by evidence based advocacy.

Research will be conducted on the underlying causes and impact of CM, FGM and Teenage Pregnancies and effective interventions to end these practices. Based on the findings recommendations for policy makers and duty bearers will be formulated.

The Yes I Do Alliance will strengthen the capacity of CSOs and change agents to lobby and advocate for the development and implementation of laws and policies. Advocacy messages will be based on already existing and newly collected evidence and will be communicated to policy-makers and duty bearers through various channels, including dialogues with policy makers and media campaigns. Young people and youth-led organizations will be empowered to transfer advocacy messages. We assume that when the voice of young people is heard, programs and policies can become more effective and can be adapted to the actual needs of young people. CSOs, including youth clubs, will conduct social audits of SRHR services.

Through engaging in policy monitoring and financial tracking, CSOs will also produce evidence to help them advocate for the development and implementation of laws and policies. In addition CSOs, including youth clubs, will conduct social audits of SRHR services which will provide them with evidence for advocacy for increased accessibility and quality of SRHR services.

Capacity development of Southern CSOs, L&A, Research and social marketing Capacity development of Southern CSOs Based on our experiences during MFS II implementation and the findings of the IOB evaluations (2011and 2015), the Yes I Do Alliance is regarding capacity development of southern CSOs as an endogenous process.

This means that the capacity development should be based on a clear demand and should respond to the priority needs of the requesting organisation/institution. In this process, ownership and leadership are essential, not as conditions for providing capacity development support, but as important aspects in the negotiation of agreements and capacity development support plans with potential partners. Capacity building of the actors in the programme aims to achieve individual and organizational performance improvement, but as well to be represented and accountable to their target group.

During the first phase, capacity of southern CSOs will be assessed, making use of different tools. Following on this phase, capacity building strategies and methodology will be determined, and tools will be adjusted to suit SRHR partners. During the implementation phase, capacity building is a core intervention in each pathway of the theory of change. Capacity building of local CSOs, organisations of girls and young women, boys and men, and change agents in communities will provide input to social norms change and meaningful youth engagement. Capacity building of health workers, health facilities and teachers will contribute to better quality and youth friendly SRHR services. For improved access to education and economic opportunities, we will build the capacity of teachers, provide safe learning spaces and engage private sector actors. Southern research partners will be trained on mixed methods research, data analysis and tools.

Capacity development is a continuous process whereby organisations develop ‘new’ or strengthen existing capacities through learning by doing and reflecting on the outcomes of its actions. This will be addressed in planning, monitoring and learning processes. During the process of capacity development, plans and methodologies can be reviewed and improved continuously on the basis of their proven effectiveness in practice.

10

Lobby and Advocacy Lobby and Advocacy is a core intervention that will be realized in the different pathways. As an intervention, lobby and advocacy is broader than promoting the development and implementation of legislation and policies, as described under goal 5. L&A will also be used to promote social norms change, through engaging with traditional and religious leaders, and through awareness raising on the benefits of norms change among the communities. The alliance partners will also engage in advocacy with public and private health service providers to promote youth friendly and quality service delivery. For the goal of economic empowerment, the alliance partners will engage with existing and new private sector partners to promote their commitment to providing economic opportunities and internships for adolescent girls.

Research The research component of the Yes I do programme will investigate the interlinkages between CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies, because these three issues are very much intertwined and are sometimes a cause or a consequence in relation to each other8. Operational mixed methods research is applied to look at what works, how and why in the specific country contexts.

The country ToCs (to be developed in the next phase) will help to develop a country research agenda. The research will focus on testing ToC pathways, underlying assumptions and interventions. It will look for mechanisms triggering change and enhancing program effectiveness. The exact research methodologies will depend on the research questions and may include literature reviews, case studies, cross-sectional studies with base - and end lines, participatory action research (including participation and leadership of young people), costing studies and policy analyses. Local researchers will be involved in the studies. Where possible collaboration will be sought with the other child marriage alliances funded by the Ministry.

The context-specific knowledge and insights generated in the 7 countries will be shared in countries and at a global level, aiming to validate the research findings. After a global synthesis of which contexts and mechanism have led to which outcomes, these will be validated, translated for the appropriate audiences and disseminated through dialogues and publications. The data will be used during lobby and advocacy initiatives towards gate keepers and decision-makers.

Social Marketing One of the new approaches is to engage the business sector in solutions to development issues, either through their CSR funds or by working in Private- Public-Partnerships. This requires a different type of engagement from CSOs with the private sector, and vice-versa. The Alliance partners will support both CSOs and private sector actors in working together towards a common goal.

The Alliance will work with both the public and private sector using, among others, private sector approaches, private sector channels and private sector mechanisms to promote healthy behaviours through products, services and information. Through applying social marketing and commercial franchising strategies to the health sector, quality health care will become affordable to underserved communities.

8 For example, some campaigns that have successfully reduced FGM/C have inadvertently heightened the fears of premarital sex which in turn can lead to increased pressure on girls to marry early to protect their families honor (World Vision UK , Exploring the links: Female genital mutilation/cutting and child marriages. Research Paper May 2014) 11

Correlation between capacity building and lobby and advocacy in Yes I Do and Strategic Partnership Plan, Amref and Rutgers are lead organisations of three different Dialogue and Dissent partnerships that are complementary to the Yes I do Alliance partnership. In 5 (out of 7) countries selected by the Yes I Do alliance, at least one alliance partner has a dialogue and dissent partnership.

The Girls Advocacy Alliance (GAA) led by Plan focuses on lobby and advocacy to eliminate Child Marriage and FGM/C. The GAA programme and the Yes I do programme will have a geographic overlap in Ethiopia and Kenya. In these two countries, The GAA programme and the Yes I do programme will be mutually reinforcing: L&A activities will have a catalyzing effect on the provision of and access to services and in changing norms to eliminate CM, FGM/C & Teenage pregnancies. Lobby and advocacy for both programmes will be combined where possible, which explains the lower budget for L&A under the Yes I Do Programme. Under both partnerships, capacity building is a key intervention area, but there is no or limited overlap since the capacity building has a different focus: while under GAA capacity building focuses on CSO’s capacity for lobby and advocacy, under Yes I Do capacity building focuses on strengthening the capacity of services providers and the capacity of CSOs to engage young people in its programming. The lobby and advocacy results of the GAA alliance at regional and international level will set changes at national level in motion, and will therefore boost the national interventions against CM, FGM/C & Teenage pregnancies of the Yes I Do alliance.

Amref is leading the Health Systems Advocacy for Africa (HSA4A) Partnership. This partnership focuses on two building blocks within the health system that are crucial in respect to SRH services. Country overlap between HSA4A and the current programme are Kenya & Zambia, and there is potential for expansion in Malawi and Ethiopia. The HSA4A partnership and the Yes, I Do Alliance will be mutually reinforcing in creating access to better quality SRH services. In addition, both programmes aim to build the capacity of their own organizations, CSOs and communities to lobby and advocate for SRH rights. The evidence gathered through implementation of the Yes, I Do programme can provide input for the lobby and advocacy work of the HSA4A Partnership. And the other way around, research on availability of SRHR commodities and human resources to deliver quality SRH services, can provide input for the Yes I Do programme to improve SRH services. Both programs work towards improving SRHR, but will use different approaches to realize that and therefore there will be no or limited overlap.

The Right Here Right Now Strategic Partnership (RHRN) led by Rutgers focuses on young people – emphasizing girls – as actors of the programme. The Right Here Right Now (RHRN) strategic partnership will lobby and advocate to protect, respect and fulfil young people’s SRHR. The RHRN Alliance and the ‘Yes, I Do Alliance’ have an overlap in Indonesia, Kenya and Pakistan and will be mutually reinforcing in these countries. Whereas the RHRN partnership will create access to better quality SRHR services, including CSE and YFS, the ‘Yes, I Do Alliance’ will among others provide these services. In addition, both programmes aim to build the capacity of country alliances to lobby and advocate for SRH rights of young people. This includes a strong focus on enabling and providing a space for young people to raise their voice themselves. However, capacity development in the two programmes has limited overlap. Whereas Yes I Do will mainly strengthening the capacity of services providers and the capacity of CSOs to engage young people in its programming, Right Here Right Now will mainly focus on capacity building of national platforms for lobby and advocacy at national, regional and international level. Evidence and lessons learned from the Yes I Do Alliance can be used for the international advocacy of the RHRN partnership.

1.2 Strategy to ensure inclusivity, including gender equality Social and economic exclusion of girls and young women are key drivers of child marriages, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies. Gender inequality and exclusion from access to SRHR services is enormous in the selected countries and severely affects disadvantaged young people, in particular girls. School drop-out and lack of economic opportunities for young people leave the families and girls with few options beyond child marriage, 12

teenage pregnancy and FGM/C, perpetuating poverty into the next generation. Young people have no power to break this cycle since they generally lack voice and are excluded from decision-making in programmes and policies that impact on their lives.

To effectively address the SRHR of adolescents in general – and for this program more specifically issues as child marriage, FGM/C and teenage pregnancy - it’s crucial that young people’s voices are heard and that they participate meaningfully. That is why the Yes I Do-Alliance supports and implements meaningful youth participation (MYP)9 as a cross-cutting strategy. Young people (aged 10-24) within the Yes I Do Alliance’s program are not only seen as a target group, beneficiaries and users, but are also important autonomous and sexual rights-holders and actors of change within our alliance and program.

To assure meaningful youth participation at program level, the Yes I do Alliance will partner with youth-led organizations and initiatives in country. Yes I do will increase the capacity of the youth organizations in the selected countries in order to enhance their active participation to the full program cycle: From design to evaluation.

Promoting girls’ empowerment is another key intervention strategy ensuring inclusivity. Girls will be empowered to gain control over their lives. We will achieve this through strengthening individual girls’ skills and networks, but also strengthen the actors in their circle, who are their families and communities to girls’ empowerment. And thirdly, though advocacy toward authorities, the programme promotes frameworks and structures for girls’ empowerment.

Gender-transformative thinking as a strategy seeking to reshape gender relations to be more gender equitable, largely through approaches that free both girls/women and boys/men from the impact of destructive gender and sexual norms’10. Gender inequality is not only linked to FGM/C, CM and Teenage Pregnancies, but is also one of the root causes of vulnerability and marginalization. Through gender transformative programming the alliance aims to create critical awareness amongst all stakeholders at all levels on the health and social costs of harmful gender norms and replace these harmful norms with ones that promote inclusion, equality and human rights. Engagement of men and boys is part of this strategy, so that boys and men are no longer seen as the problem, but as part of the solution.

At programme level, inclusion of girls and young women is ensured at different levels: Girls and women-led CBOs will be included during the detailed programme development in the countries. These groups will be consulted at community level and some of the groups will also participate in the programme development workshops of the alliance. In each of the Yes I Do programme countries, girl panels will be set up to provide feedback and input to the programme implementation and discuss how the programme is affecting girl’s lives.

They will contribute to identify issues, to setting objectives and to assess the direction/strategy to address the issues of child marriage, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies As we have seen above Men and Boys engagement will be a core focus of the program. There is a lack of attention to boys’ and male youths’ sexual and reproductive health needs in research, policies and programming despite the fact that they have specific needs and experiences. Programmes that traditionally tend to focus on girls, such as adolescent pregnancy prevention programmes, may benefit from greater involvement of boys as they are causal participants in pregnancies and fatherhood has an impact on their lives as well as on the lives of girls. Research gaps remain in areas such as better understanding of the emotional aspects of young men’s sexuality, or tracing the evolution of power within relationships from early adolescence through young adulthood.

9 ‘Meaningful youth participation’ is the participation of young people in all stages and at all levels of those decision-making processes that influence their lives. This includes their participation in the design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of policies, programs and campaigns concerning the SRHR of young people at the international, regional, national, provincial, local and program-level. Participation is meaningful when young people participate on equal terms, through the access to accurate information and training. A balanced representation of diverse young people should be 10 Dworkin et. al. / The promises and limitations of gender-transformative health programming with men: critical reflections from the field. - In: Culture, Health & Sexuality: An International Journal for Research, Intervention and Care, 2015 13

To ensure engagement of men and boys at programme level, the Alliance members will enhance their participation to the design and the implementation of the programme. The ambition is to highlight the importance of the dialogue in their relations with the girls. Both the girls and the boys should talk about their rights, expectations and enjoy their rights. To achieve this, the programme will bring the girls and the boys in the same platforms.

1.3 Countries The Yes I Do alliance has selected seven focus countries, namely Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique, Pakistan and Indonesia. The main criteria for selection were: prevalence of Child Marriage and/or FGM/C and/ or Teenage Pregnancies; track record and current programmes that the Yes I Do programme can build on; number of alliance members that work in the country, and intended programmes of other alliances. The regional focus will enable the programme to link, learn and exchange best practices including follow up of lobby and advocacy results achieved at regional level.

Ethiopia Country selection criteria • High prevalence Child Marriage (41% before 18)11 • High prevalence FGM/C (74%)12 • High prevalence Teenage Pregnancies (22%)13 • Low ranking gender inequality index (121)14 • Low secondary education rate for girls and boys (16%)15 • Stable economic growth (9.9% growth in GDP in 2014)16, but high poverty rates among majority of population • Low level of access to ASRHR services and information17

Summary actor analysis (see Appendix for full overview) In Ethiopia, government sector offices at federal, regional, zonal and Woreda level are working to eliminate CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies in partnership with NGOs and UN agencies like UNICEF and UNFPA. Since 2013, Ministries, UNICEF and a number of (I)NGOs work together in the National Alliance to end Child Marriage. There is a wide variety of initiatives of NGOs, including Pathfinder, Save the Children, Care, Organization for Development of Women and Children in Ethiopia (ODWaCE), African Development Aid Association (ADAA), Kembatti Mentti Gezzimma (KMG) Ethiopia and Ogaden Welfare and Development Association (OWDA). Main NGOs working on increasing access to SRHR services for young people include Marie Stopes, Engender Health, Family Guidance Association of Ethiopia (FGAE)and Ipas.

Added value to activities done by other actors: The Yes I Do Programme is unique compared to other programmes for its integrated approach of Child Marriage, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancy. In terms of methodology, the alliance adds value by engaging community and religious leaders, supporting meaningful youth engagement, promoting gender transformative thinking and men and boys engagement. Since all alliance partners have presence or track records in Ethiopia, the alliance can cover multiple areas in the country, including the most remote areas. The alliance partners are well embedded in Ethiopia’s CSO networks. Plan is managing a fund of the Dutch Embassy to improve the link-

11 Ethiopia Democratic and Health Survey 2011. http://data.unicef.org/child-protection/child-marriage.html 12 http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/fgm/prevalence/en/ 13 Ethiopia Democratic and Health Survey 2011. UNFPA (2013), Adolescent Pregnancy: A Review of the Evidence.

14 http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-4-gender-inequality-index 15 Ethiopia Democratic and Health Survey 2011. http://data.unicef.org/education/overview.html 16 http://data.worldbank.org/ 17 http://www2.pathfinder.org/site/DocServer/Bringing_Youth-Friendly_Services_to_Scale_in_Ethiopia.pdf?docID=19921 14

ing and learning of child marriage initiatives in Ethiopia, including strengthening the National Alliance on CM and FGM/C. Through this initiative, the Embassy will have a coordination function and of all initiatives in the country. Therefore the alliance has access to most information on child marriage initiatives in the country. Due to the long-time presence in the country, there are also well established partnerships with local communities including traditional and religious leaders, traditional birth attendants and youth clubs. Alliance partners also have good relationships with the government at different levels, including national parliament. KIT has a strong collaboration and partnership with local researchers and institutes and universities, such as the Addis Abeba University.

The Yes I Do programme builds on and aligns with various programmes: • Girl Power, implemented by Plan and other partners (MoFA funded, 2010-2015) • Embassy Child Marriage Fund implemented by Plan (MoFA funded 2015-2018)) • Human Rights Programme on FGM: Obligation to Protect, implemented by Plan (MoFA funded 2014-2017) • Girls Advocacy Alliance, implemented by Plan and other partners (MoFA funded, 2016-2020) • Project of the Ethiopian Youth Empowerment Alliance, implemented by Amref Health Africa, TaYA (CHOICE partner) and other partners (DFID funded 2015-2018) • Unite for Body Rights (UFBR) programme, implemented by Amref and CHOICE with other partners (MoFA funded 2011 – 2015) • Access, Services and Knowledge (ASK) programme, implemented by Amref and CHOICE with other partners (MoFA funded 2011- 2015) • World Starts With Me programme implemented by Amref and DEC (partner of Rutgers) with other partners (MoFA funded 2013 - 2015)FP7 • Reachout: reaching out and linking in: Health systems and close-to-the-community services in low and middle-income countries implemented by KIT (EU funded 2013 – 2018) • Plan: GAA Strategic Partnership on CM and FGM/C • Amref: HSA4A Strategic Partnership on SRH services and commodities (probably in a second phase)

Feasible opportunities to achieve results • Integrated approach of CM, FGM/C and Teenage pregnancies • Promote access to ASRHR services and information and promote service delivery by public and private sector health actors • Challenge norms around child marriage, FGM/C and gender inequality; • Promote girls’ access to education and stimulate economic empowerment among young women; • Revise and extend existing CSE curricula to include child marriage, FGM/C and teenage pregnancy, and assist schools in reaching their CSE targets.

• Promote comprehensive policies and legislation on CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies, and its dissemination and implementation.

• Facilitate and encourage meaningful youth participation among CSOs and empower young people to claim their rights.

• Introduce men engagement around CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancy

Kenya Country selection criteria • Child marriage and FGM/C are not among the highest (2618 and 27 %19) but there are large regional differences, with pockets of prevalence as high as 98% • High prevalence Teenage Pregnancies (26%)20 • Low ranking gender inequality index (122)21

18 Kenya Democratic and Health Survey 2008 – 2009. http://data.unicef.org/child-protection/child-marriage.html 19 http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/fgm/prevalence/en/ 20 Kenya Democratic and Health Survey 2008 – 2009. UNFPA (2013), Adolescent Pregnancy: A Review of the Evidence.

21 http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-4-gender-inequality-index 15

• Stable economic growth (5.3% growth in GDP in 2014)22, but high poverty rates among majority of population • Low level of access to ASRHR services and information23

Summary actor analysis (see Appendix for full overview) For Kenya, a varied landscape of actors work in the programme’s key fields of CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies. These include NGOs and INGOs, Inter Governmental Organisations, and Kenyan state agencies. Several of these already collaborate directly with partners of the Yes, I Do Alliance . Very relevant for the programme Yes I Do alliance is the Kenyan Anti-FGM board, a state agency specifically set up to eradicate FGM/C in Kenya.

This agency already collaborates with Plan and Amref Health Africa in Kenya. The good relationships already established with this agency will be very valuable in further developing, planning and implementing the programme.

Other key players include UNESCO, UNICEF and UNDP who all have multi- year programmes focused on general SRHR topics including FGM/C, CM and SRH rights advocacy. UNFPA and UNICEF have a joint anti-FGM/C project and collaborate in Plan’s Obligation to Protect programme. International organisations in Kenya active on the topic of FGM/C include World Vision and ActionAid. There is a wide variety of initiatives with a national scope (NGOs and networks) focusing on child protection and education generally, and CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies in particular.

Added value to activities done by other actors In Kenya, the alliance will approach all three issues, CM, FGM/C and Teenage Pregnancies, in an integrated way, which adds value to single issue initiatives. Further, the alliance adds value in terms of methodology like the Alternative Rites of Passages, development of by-laws, engaging boys and men, and promoting gender transformative thinking and private sector engagement. The alliance can build on an extensive track record of ASRHR programmes in general, and programmes on FGM/C and child marriage specifically. Alliance partners gained long-term experience and trust with local communities, also in remote areas. Close partnerships have been established with local and national CSOs, and with government at different levels, including national parliament, and with local research institutes .

The programme will build on and align with various programmes of the alliance members: • Human Rights Programme on FGM: Obligation to Protect, implemented by Plan (MoFA funded 2014-2017) • Girls Advocacy Alliance, implemented by Plan and other partners (MoFA funded, 2016-2020) • Unite for Body Rights (UFBR) programme, implemented by Amref, CHOICE and Rutgers with other partners (2011 –2015) • Youth Empowerment Alliance, implemented by Amref Health Africa CHOICE partner, Rutgers and other partners (DFID funded, 2013-2015) • Alternative Rites of Passage programme implemented by Amref (2013 – 2016) • Improving sexual health and well-being of young males though an MI+ approach led by KIT and implemented by AMREF Kenya (MoFA funded 2013 – 2016) • FP7 Reachout programme on health systems and close-to-the-community services implemented by KIT (EU funded 2013 – 2018) • Plan: GAA Strategic Partnership on CM and FGM/C • Amref: HSA4A Strategic Partnership on SRH services and commodities • Rutgers: RHRN Strategic Partnership to fulfil young people‘s SRHR

Feasible opportunities to achieve results • Integrated approach of CM, FGM/C and Teenage pregnancies • Promote access to ASRHR services and information; • Challenge norms around child marriage, FGM/C and gender inequality and promote alternative rites of passage;

22 http://data.worldbank.org/ 23 http://www.prb.org/pdf13/kenya-policy-assessment-report.pdf 16

• Promote girls’ access to education and stimulate economic empowerment among young women; • Revise and extend existing CSE curricula to include child marriage, FGM/C and teenage pregancy.

• Promote comprehensive policies and legislation on FGM/C and child marriage, and its dissemination and Implementation.

• Facilitate and encourage meaningful youth participation among CSOs and empower young people to claim their rights.

• Introduce men engagement around CM, FGM/C and teenage pregancy

Malawi Country selection criteria • High prevalence Child Marriage (50 % before 18)24 • High prevalence Teenage Pregnancies (35%)25 • Low ranking gender inequality index (131)26 • Low secondary education rate for girls and boys (10%)27 • Low level of access to ASRHR services and information28

Summary actor analysis (see Appendix for full overview) For Malawi, a varied landscape of actors working in the programme’s key areas of CM and TP has been mapped (see table attached). These include NGOs and INGOs, Inter Governmental Organisations, and Malawi state agencies. Several of these already collaborate directly with partners of the Yes, I Do Alliance, amongst others in the SRHR Alliance. The Girls not Brides partnership also operates in Malawi.

Added value to activities done by other actors The added value of the Yes I Do alliance to other activities in Malawi is that this programme directly engages young people, as well as boys and men to promote change. Further, the programme approaches the issues of child marriages and teenage pregnancies in an integrated way. The added value of the alliance also lies in its used methodologies, such as work with secret mothers and ambassadors in communities and capacity building of CSOs to conduct social audits of health facilities. Partners have developed close working relationships with local communities, local researchers and consultants and the government at different levels.

Through the established cooperation with SADC and the AU, there are multiple opportunities for regional cooperation and linking & learning. The programme will build on and align with various programmes of the alliance members: • Staying Alive programme implemented by Amref (2013 – 2015) • Unite Against Child Marriage programme, implemented by Amref, CHOICE and Rutgers with other partners (MoFA funded 2014 – 2015) • Unite for Body Rites Programme implemented by Rutgers and CHOICE with other partners , (MoFA funded 2011 – 2015) • FP7 Reachout programme on Health systems and close-to-the-community implemented by KIT (EU funded 2013 – 2018) • A situation assessment and formulation of policy documents on vulnerable children in Malawi (KIT, UNICEF and other partners)

Feasible opportunities to achieve results • Promote access to ASRHR services and information; • Challenge norms around child marriage and gender inequality; • Promote girls’ access to education and stimulate economic empowerment among young women;

24 Malawi Demographic and Health Survey 2010. http://data.unicef.org/child-protection/child-marriage.html 25 Malawi Demographic and Health Survey 2010. UNFPA (2013), Adolescent Pregnancy: A Review of the Evidence.

26 http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-4-gender-inequality-index 27 Malawi Demographic and Health Survey 2010. http://data.unicef.org/education/overview.html 28 http://www.safaids.net/files/MALAWI_Implementation_of_MPoA_SRHR_services_final.pdf 17

• Make CSE curricula gender transformative and include CM and teenage pregancy; • Promote implementation of comprehensive policies on child marriage, and harmonisation of legislation within SADC region.

• Facilitate and encourage meaningful youth participation among CSOs and empower young people to claim their rights.

• Introduce men engagement around CM and teenage pregancy

Zambia Country selection criteria • High prevalence of child marriage (42%)29 • High prevalence of teenage pregnancies (34%)30 • Low ranking gender inequality index (135)31 • Stable economic growth (6.0% growth in GDP in 2014)32, but high poverty rates among majority of population • Low level of access to ASRHR services and information33

Summary actor analysis (see Appendix for full overview) In Zambia, various actors work in the field of child marriage and Teenage Pregnancies. These include different local NGOs, many of them work together through the Children in Need Network (CHIN). UNICEF and UNFPA are also key players in the field, focusing on various strategies to eliminate CM and teenage pregnancies, including Lobby & advocacy and research. The International Center for Research on Women (ICRW) is also a key player in the field of research. And the government of Zambia, through various Ministries, is also a key player, among others by mean of its National Campaign against Child Marriage.

Added value to activities done by other actors The added value of the Yes I Do alliance to other activities in Zambia is that this programme directly engages young people, as well as boys and men to promote change. Further, the programme approaches the issues of child marriages and Teenage Pregnancies in an integrated way. In Zambia, the Yes I Do alliance will use social marketing to increase demand and quality supply of ASRH services. The present Yes I Do alliance members have strong linkages with (networks of) CSOs in Zambia, like CHIN, the Girls Guides Association of Zambia, and the Child Participatory Initiative. At government level, the Yes I Do alliance members have established cooperation with various Ministries and with the Parliament. This enables the Alliance to channel up issues from the communities to the government, and to disseminate information on laws and policies to the communities. KIT has a strong collaboration and partnership with local researchers and institutes and universities, such as the University of Zambia.

Through the established cooperation with SADC and the AU, there are multiple opportunities for regional cooperation and linking & learning. The Yes I Do Programme builds on and aligns with various programmes of Plan and CHOICE: • Girl Power, implemented by Plan and other partners (MoFA funded, 2010-2015) • No I Don’t (child marriage) , implemented by(Plan and Choice (MoFA funded 2014-2015) • HSA4A (Strategisch on SRH services and commodities Amref)

Feasible opportunities to achieve results • Promote access to ASRHR services and information, among others through social marketing; • Make CSE curricula gender transformative and include CM and of teenage pregnancies;

29 Zambia Demographic and Health Survey 2007. http://data.unicef.org/child-protection/child-marriage.html 30 Zambia Demographic and Health Survey 2007. UNFPA (2013), Adolescent Pregnancy: A Review of the Evidence 31 http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-4-gender-inequality-index 32 http://data.worldbank.org/ 33 http://countryoffice.unfpa.org/zambia/drive/UNFPAZambiaNewsletter_JantoMar2013.pdf 18

• Promote girls’ access to education and stimulate economic empowerment among young women; • Challenge norms around child marriage and gender inequality; • Promote comprehensive legislation on child marriage, its dissemination and implementation, and harmonisation of legislation within SADC region.

• Facilitate and encourage meaningful youth participation among CSOs and empower young people to claim their rights.

• Introduce men engagement around CM and of teenage pregnancy

Mozambique Country selection criteria • High prevalence of child marriage (48%)34 • High prevalence TP (42% = top 10)35 • Low ranking gender inequality index (146)36 • Low secondary education rate for girls (22%)37 • Stable economic growth (7.4% growth in GDP in 2014)38, but high poverty rates among majority of population • Low level of access to ASRHR services and information39

Summary actor analysis (see Appendix for full overview) Different types of actors are addressing the child marriage rates in Mozambique. Various NGOs work together against child marriage through the Coalition to Ending Child Marriage (CECAP). UNICEF works closely together with the juridical sector against child marriage and UNFPA runs programmes on SRHR in a broader sense.

The Ministry of Gender, Child and Social Affairs (MGCAS) is also active in this field via its National Strategy to Prevent and End CM via campaigns against CM.

Added value to activities done by other actors In relation to other actors in Mozambique, this programme is unique since it engages not only CSOs, public service providers and communities, but also the young people themselves, private sector and government, including parliament. Engaging young people, as well as men and boys, is a central element of the programme.

Through the established cooperation with SADC and the AU, there are multiple opportunities for regional cooperation and linking & learning. The alliance is well-embedded in local CSO networks, among others through CECAP (Coalition to Ending Child Marriage),which makes part of Girls Not Brides Mozambique. The Yes I Do programme will build on the results of the ‘No I don’t’ programme on Child Marriages of Plan and CHOICE, and links to the Embassy funded programme on SRHR working with PSI. A strong link can be made with the Plan’s Mother and Child Health programme, since this programme can provide big share of the service delivery. KIT has a network of local researchers, for example from the Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, with whom the alliance can collaborate for their research.

The programme will build on and align with various programmes of the alliance members: • No I Don’t (child marriage) , implemented by(Plan and Choice (MoFA funded 2014-2015) • FP7 Reachout programme on health systems and close-to-the-community, implemented by KIT (EU funded 2013 – 2018)

Feasible opportunities to achieve results • Challenge norms around child marriage and gender inequality; • Promote girls’ access to education and stimulate economic empowerment among young women;

34 35 36 37 38 39

Mozambique Demographic and Health Survey 2011. http://data.unicef.org/child-protection/child-marriage.html Mozambique Demographic and Health Survey 2003. UNFPA (2013), Adolescent Pregnancy: A Review of the Evidence. http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-4-gender-inequality-index Mozambique Demographic and Health Survey 2011. http://data.unicef.org/education/overview.html http://data.worldbank.org/ http://www.oecd.org/derec/denmark/Sexual_and_Reproductive_Health_web.pdf 19

• Promote access to ASRHR services and information, among others through social marketing; • Make CSE curricula gender transformative and include CM and TP; • Promote comprehensive legislation on child marriage, its dissemination and implementation, and harmonisation of legislation within SADC region.

• Facilitate and encourage meaningful youth participation among CSOs and empower young people to claim their rights.

• Introduce men engagement around CM and teenage pregnancy

Pakistan Country selection criteria • Child marriage is not among the highest (21 %)40 but there are large regional differences and absolute numbers are very high • Teenage Pregnancies is not among the highest (10.2%) however in top 5 in absolute # of teenage pregnancies: UNFPA41 • Low ranking gender inequality index (127)42 • Low secondary education rate for girls (38%)43 • Low level of access to ASRHR services and information44

Summary actor analysis (see Appendix for full overview) For Pakistan, a varied landscape of actors working in the programme’s key areas of CM and TP has been mapped (see table below). These include NGOs and INGOs, Inter Governmental Organisations, and Pakistani state agencies. Several of these already collaborate directly with partners of the Yes, I Do Alliance, amongst others in the SRHR Alliance. Very relevant for our programme is the National Commission on the Status of Women, the main advisory body for government. Furthermore the Girls not Brides network operates within Pakistan with over 60 member CBOs and NGOs.

Added value to activities done by other actors In Pakistan, alliance members Plan and Rutgers have well-established relations with CBOs, large CSOs health service providers and government actors. This enables the alliance to implement a broad and multi-stakeholder programme in an environment that can be challenging for other (I)NGOs with less established relations. Plan and Rutgers work together with the Alliance against Child Marriage in Pakistan, and it is within the scope of the yes I Do programme to support this Alliance to transform into Girls not Brides Pakistan.

The programme will build on and align with various programmes of the alliance members: Girl Power, implemented by Plan and other partners (MoFA funded, 2010-2015) • Youth Empowerment Alliance, implemented by Amref Health Africa CHOICE partner, Rutgers and other partners (DFID funded, 2013-2015) • Empowering Girls Transforming Communities Project, Right Here Rights Now, Get up Stand Up and Prevention • FLOW programme of Rutgers (MoFA funded 2016-2020).

Feasible opportunities to achieve results • Challenge norms around child marriage and gender equality; • Introduce men engagement around CM and teenage pregnancy; • Promote girls’ access to education and stimulate economic empowerment among young women; • Promote implementation of child rights policies, among others through operationalization of reporting mecha-

40 Pakistan Demographic and Health Survey 2012-2013. http://data.unicef.org/child-protection/child-marriage.html 41 Pakistan Demographic and Health Survey 2007. UNFPA (2013), Adolescent Pregnancy: A Review of the Evidence.

42 http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-4-gender-inequality-index 43 Pakistan Demographic and Health Survey 2012-2013. http://data.unicef.org/education/overview.html 44 http://www.plan-uk.org/assets/Documents/pdf/Adolescent-voices.pdf 20

nism on child marriage; • Make CSE curricula gender transformative and include CM and teenage pregnancy; • Promote access to ASRHR services and information.

• Facilitate and encourage meaningful youth participation among CSOs and empower young people to claim their rights.

Indonesia Country selection criteria • Child marriage is not among the highest (17 %)45 but there are large regional differences and absolute numbers are very high • High numbers of teenage pregnancy (top 5 in absolute # of women aged 20-24 who gave birth by age 18 , UNFPA 2013)46 • The total prevalence of FGM/C is 51% of all girls under the age of 12 (UNICEF, 2015)47 • Low ranking gender inequality index (103)48 • Stable economic growth (5.0% growth in GDP in 2014)49 • Low level of access to ASRHR services and information50

Summary actor analysis (see Appendix for full overview) For Indonesia, a range of actors work on CM, TP and FGM/C has been mapped (see table below). These include NGOs and INGOs, Inter Governmental Organisations, and Indonesian state agencies. Several of these already collaborate directly with partners of the Yes, I Do Alliance, amongst others through the MenCare+ Alliance through Rutgers Indonesia and with Plan Indonesia. The Girls Not Brides international partnership also is active in Indonesia.

Added value to activities done by other actors Through the Yes I Do programme, the alliance will approach child marriage, Teenage Pregnancies, and also FGM/C in an integrated way. The alliance has well established relations with government at different levels.

Plan has been an advisory partner of the government on child protection, Rutgers has a strong track record on sexual health and men and boys engagement, and CHOICE’s partner is a leading youth-led advocacy organization on SRHR issues for young people. The alliance is well-embedded in networks of local CSOs, due to amongst others the collaboration with Right Here Right Now, Get up, Speak Out (SRHR partnership Rutgers) and other partnerships.

The programme will build on and align with various programmes of the alliance members: • FP7 Reachout programme on health systems and close-to-the-community services,implemented by KIT (EU funded 2013 – 2018) • Youth Empowerment Alliance, implemented by Amref Health Africa CHOICE partner, Rutgers and other partners (DFID funded, 2013-2015)

Feasible opportunities to achieve results • Challenge norms around child marriage, FGM/C and gender inequality; • Engagement of religious leaders and increased collaboration with the Education and Religious Affairs Offices • Promote girls’ access to education and stimulate economic empowerment among young women; • Promote comprehensive legislation child marriage, its dissemination and implementation; • Promote access to Comprehensive Sexuality Education, including components on Child Marriage, and ASRHR services and information

45 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey 2012. http://data.unicef.org/child-protection/child-marriage.html 46 Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey 2007. UNFPA (2013), Adolescent Pregnancy: A Review of the Evidence 47 http://data.unicef.org/corecode/uploads/document6/uploaded_country_profiles/corecode/222/Countries/FGMC_IDN.pdf 48 http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/table-4-gender-inequality-index 49 http://data.worldbank.org/ 50 http://arrow.org.my/publication/country-profile-universal-access-to-sexual-and-reproductive-rights-profile-on-indonesia/ 21

• Facilitate and encourage meaningful youth participation among CSOs and empower young people to claim their rights. • Introduce men engagement around CM and teenage pregnancy

1.4 Risk Analysis All partners within the Yes I do Alliance are experienced in working on the sensitive themes of Child Marriage, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies. Risk mitigating techniques concerning the social level include strategies that have been used during earlier programs and that have proven to be effective in handling resistance and safeguarding programme beneficiaries.

The Alliance also has measures in place to mitigate risks on the organisational level, to ensure the quality of their financial and administrative systems to reduce the risk of mismanagement and misuse of funds. Each Alliance member has an adequate and transparent planning and control cycle, technical and financial reports and demonstrate due attention to budget control. Each Alliance member has separate anti-corruption and sanction policies and procedures in place, incorporated into different documents; and each Alliance member has sanctions included in contracts with local partners. The overarching coordination mechanism will ensure that risks can be mitigated effectively so that the programme at large will not be affected.

As a newly formed alliance, importance is placed on facilitating alliance building in The Netherlands as well as in the target countries. All the alliance members are experienced with operating in different alliances such as those formed under the MFSII programme. In addition, several organisations have been or are currently working together in other alliances such as Strategic Partnerships, the SRHR Alliance and MoFa’s Child Marriages fund. Lessons learned are integrated in the governance structure as well as in the process in which this Alliance is being formed.

Risk

Countries Kenia

Mitigation Strategy Ethiopia

Malawi

Zambia

Mozambique

Pakistan

Indonesia

Probability/ Potential Impact Social Resistance to change among communities

High/ High

High/ High

High/ High

High/ High

High/High

High/ High

High/High

Key change agents & gate keepers are involved to play a leading role in the change

Programme activities increase vulnerability of girls

Middle/ High

Middle/ High

Middle/ High

Middle/ High

Middle/High

Middle/ High

Middle/ High

Maintain open dialogue with parents & key stakeholders before and during the activities for girls through close monitoring

Low/ High

Low/ High

Put mechanisms in place to monitor the implementation of fraud & corruption policies, including regular internal and external monitoring.

Low/ Medium

Low/ Medium

Formulation of common vision, expectations and realistic goals with partners in The Netherlands and in target countries.

Regular coalition and partner meetings

Organisational Fraud and corruption by partners

medium/ High

Low/ High

Low/ High

Low/ High

Low/ High

Partnership Alliance members have different priorities

Low/Medium

Low/Medium

Low/ Medium

Low/ Medium

Low/Medium

22

Risk

Limited understanding among local partners on project approach

Countries

Mitigation Strategy

Kenia

Ethiopia

Malawi

Zambia

Mozambique

Pakistan

Indonesia

Low/Medium

Low/Medium

Low/ Medium

Low/ Medium

Low/Medium

Low/ Medium

Low/ Medium

Programmes are developed and implemented in collaboration with local partners

Programme Management High turnover of (trained) key stakeholders

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Spread risk by working with multiple groups/individuals within the various stakeholder groups

Challenges to meaningfully engage young people at country level (among program staff and local partners) due to cultural norms and resource constraints

Medium / Medium

Medium / Medium

LowMedium / Medium

LowMedium / Medium

Low- Medium / Medium

LowMedium / Medium

LowMedium / Medium

Allocate sufficient budget and time to strengthen capacity of local staff, partners and young people on MYP and include young people at country level at earliest stage possible (design of the programme)

Elections or political unrest affect project implementation

LowMedium / High

LowMedium / High

LowMedium /High

LowMedium /High

Low- Medium /High

Medium / High

LowMedium / High

Alliance partners working in instable countries have a security policy in place.

Maximum flexibility is built in, so that activities can be modified

(Increased) government restrictions on lobby and advocacy

High/ High

Medium/ High

Medium/ High

Medium/ High

Medium/ High

Medium/ High

Medium/ High

Build on existing relationships with the government, emphasize joint objectives, support and collaborate rather than oppose

Lack of political will to combat CM, FGM/C & Teenage Pregnancies

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Low/ Medium

Low/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Medium/ Medium

Keep close ties with relevant government departments and continue to lobby for budget allocations for the themes

Political

Dutch government / MoFA The Alliance may disagree with MoFA on some issues addressed and strategies used

Low/ Medium

Regular dialogue with MoFA and Embassies to align strategies and if needed resolve disagreements

23

1.5 Roles Roles of the Ministry and the Yes I Do Alliance The Yes I Do alliance partners envisage to collaborate with various departments of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at various levels. At the central level, the alliance partners will engage primarily with the department of social development, but also with the Human Rights Department, the Gender Tasks Force and regional departments to mutually support each other in realizing result areas 1 and 4 of the Dutch SRHR policy and the Sustainable Development Goals 3 and 5. At local level, the alliance will work together with the permanent missions in New York and Geneva, and with the embassies to share our experiences with the decision makers to influence their policies at the global level.

With all these stakeholders, there will be exchange of information and know-how on programmes combating child marriage, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies. This information mainly include, but is not limited to knowledge exchange, lessons learned and sharing of expertise, methodologies, and research agenda’s.

With the Department of Social Affairs and the embassies, we foresee our collaboration in the form of a strategic partnership: besides information exchange, we foresee to hold strategic sessions on a regular basis (2-4/Y), wherein we share lessons learnt and research data, identify areas for improvement, and discuss and plan how we can jointly improve results of our interventions in the area of CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies in the programme countries.

The main ambition is to make this partnership mutually strategic, long-lasting and the impacts sustainable in the area of SRHR and empowerment of young people. The Ministry and the Yes I Do Alliance both support and aim to create evidence based, youth centered investments that empower young people with the information, skills and services they need to be educated, healthy, and safe.

The Yes I do Alliance sees a strong added value of engagement with the Ministry and embassies to strengthen the outcomes of its programmes in the following 5 areas: 1. This Alliance and the Ministry play complementary roles in influencing national governments, and international decision making bodies. The alliance will support civil society not only to advocate for adolescent SRHR and elimination of CM and FGM/C, but also to engage in direct advocacy campaigns and initiatives.

The Ministry, directly and through its embassies and Permanent Missions, will encourage governments to improve and implement legislation and policies.

2. This Alliance focuses on increasing knowledge on SRHR, creating demand of relevant SRHR services, and on sensitising communities on the importance of girls’ education. The Ministry and the UN and government organisations that the Ministry works with, such as UNFPA, work on the supply side of SRH services and education. The embassies can facilitate collaboration with other relevant international partners and INGOs, such as Ipas and corporate partners.

3. Support in youth-led advocacy on issues related to CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies can be strengthened in collaboration with embassies. At different levels, they can play a role in facilitating access to important platforms, initiating and maintaining dialogues with influential bodies where youth can raise their voices and bring their SRH rights to the table.

4. Evidence from research on approaches to eliminate CM, FGM/C and reduce teenage pregnancies and impact evaluations will be shared by the Alliance, in collaboration with other research institutes (eg. UVA, PopCouncil, ICRW) for the Ministry and the Girls Not Brides network to lobby for international appeals to scale up ASRH services and information and to eliminate FGM/C and CM. 5. A specific effort will be made by the Alliance to support and advocate for safe abortion services and information. Together with embassies and the Ministry, diplomatic approaches and strategies will be developed to address this culturally sensitive SRHR issue, which helps to reduce the number of teenage mothers and child marriages and contributes to the achievement of result area 4 of the Dutch SRHR policy.

Roles of the alliance partners In all countries, the components of the ToC will be covered by the different partners to create maximum synergy in terms of interventions and expertise. Plan Nederland’s role and responsibilities are mainly in social and economic empowerment of adolescent girls and inclusive community mobilisation. Amref will play its main

24

role in facilitating access of adolescents to better quality SRHR services (including safe abortion) and information, as well as in creating awareness and establishing & reinforcing social movements to end CM, FGM/C & Teenage Pregnancies (amongst others through its Alternative Rites of Passage approach) and lobby and advocacy. Rutgers will play a main role in Gender Transformative Programming and the engagement of boys and (young) men, as well as the design of CSE modules that address CM, TP and FGM/C. Rutgers will also play a role in lobby and advocacy. CHOICE will take leadership in meaningful participation of youth throughout the programme and governance structures. CHOICE will train and consult partners on MYP and advise how to ensure MYP during the full programme cycle. To ensure sustainability in-country, CHOICE will collaborate and train local youth-organisations and build their capacities on (youth-led) advocacy. KIT is mainly responsible for research on root causes of CM, FGM & Teenage Pregnancies, testing the assumptions of the TOC, and for measuring effectiveness of strategic interventions on CM, FGM & Teenage Pregnancies. KIT will through their network of alumni and affiliates closely collaborate with local researchers and capacitate local research and knowledge management capacity. KIT will also lead on the validation and dissemination of research outcomes, developing M&E tools, indicators and analysing M&E data for lessons learned and measuring outcomes and overall impact of the Yes I do Alliance. Technical partner PSI will contribute by improving the service delivery by private and public sector.

Governance The alliance has a governance structure enabling strong technical input, clear decision-making, accountability, flexibility, and on-ground effective coordination.

The board of directors (BoD) takes strategic decisions, approves financial reports and represents the alliance at the highest level. The Programme Committee (PC) consists of technical experts of alliance members tasked with operational management. The PC prepares the process of strategic decision taking by the BoD and is responsible for all programme-related communication to the Ministry.

Regional Programme Teams (RPT’s), composed of technical staff of alliance members, are responsible for coordinating annual plans and promoting synergy. The regional programme teams are located in the Netherlands, and have no hierarchic relation to the programme committee. The technical staff in the PC are the same persons as the technical staff in the RPTs. The Country Programme Teams bring together partners of alliance members, and coordinate their activities.

The alliance desk is a support structure to the Alliance and ensures a coherent approach and programme progress. The alliance desk is composed of a coordinator, a PME officer, a finance officer and a communications officer.

STRATEGIC LEVEL

Governance of the Yes I do Alliance

RPT Asia

OPERATIONAL LEVEL

Africa 2

Ad Hoc

RPT

Finance team

Technical

RPT

Africa 1

TACTIC LEVEL

Programme Committee

Committee

ALLIANCE DESK

Board of Directors

Programme

CPT

CPT

CPT

Index

25

RPT= Regional Programme Team

Netherlands Level

CPT= Country Programme Team

Country Level

Consultations between the Ministry and the Alliance Members Collaboration with MoFA, Dutch Embassies, international and national platforms and relevant in-country stakeholders will consist of regular exchange of information on programmes combating child marriage, including knowledge exchange, lessons learned and sharing of expertise, methodologies, and research agenda’s. As a basis, the Alliance foresees two meetings per year, one after submission of the annual report and one after submission of the annual plan and budget. In addition, meetings can be scheduled to exchange other information than the basic programme information.

In the Netherlands, the steering group of the various Child Marriage Alliances will hold meetings with a rotating chair on a tri-annual basis in The Hague. MoFA and organisations such as GnB and UNICEF will be invited to be a member of the steering group.

Consultation and coordination between the Child Marriage Alliances funded by MoFA In the Netherlands, the steering group of the various Child Marriage Alliances will hold meetings with a rotating chair on a tri-annual basis. MoFA and organisations such as GNB and UNICEF will be invited to be a member of the steering group. The three child marriage alliances are currently preparing a GNB partnership in the Netherlands. Once established, which is foreseen for 2016, other NGOs active in the field of child marriage can also join. The GNB partnership can function as the coordination platform for all initiatives in the field of child marriage.

At country level, where applicable and possible, a coordination role may be played by Dutch Embassies, either with/without an SRHR expert.

Coordination in the Netherlands and at country level will focus on the programmes’ progress, collaboration with alliance members, respective partner organisations, and other relevant stakeholders such as GNB, UN agencies and authorities in the field of CM. Where possible and feasible, the Child Marriage Alliances will coordinate field visits to and in-country, as well as research studies to ensure efficient programming and optimize collaboration.

Coordination of Research Agenda’s Between the Child Marriage Alliances The CM Alliances will establish a broad ‘child marriage related research agenda’ which will include research themes and questions, methodology, comparability of research data, etc. Although per alliance the respective TOCs will be leading, indicators will be aligned as far as possible. To prepare for this shared agenda, an orientation meeting between the three research institutes (KIT, UvA, PopCo) of the Child Marriage Alliances is planned in December 2015, with follow-up in January 2016 in anticipation of baseline studies’ preparation. By sharing our respective research agendas, we aim to, where possible, reach agreement on outcome level indicators, research methodology and sharing of results. The three Child Marriage Alliances aim to commence the baseline studies in February/ March 2016. Baseline results may be shared in May/June 2016, whereby the final baseline reports will be shared with MoFA by 30 June 2016. MoFA, GnB and UNICEF will be informed and consulted during this process in the steering group meetings.

The three Child Marriage Alliances will ensure coordination to allow for clear geographical demarcation (safeguarding control groups) in the countries where implementation of more than one Child Marriage Alliance programme takes place or where it is agreed that only one research institute is engaged for efficiency reasons. This will also be applied where Strategic Partnership Dialogue and Dissent research agendas are being implemented, such as that of Plan.

26

27

II. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Approach

Section 2 Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Approach Introduction The Yes I do alliance has a monitoring, evaluation and learning framework which originates from its overall Theory of Change. The overall Theory of Change and general formulised indicators will serve as a guidance for seven country context specific ToCs. These seven ToCs will be further developed during the start-up phase of the programme, with the engagement of counterparts and country offices of the Yes I do alliance and constitute as frameworks for monitoring and evaluation.

The yes I do MEL approach contributes to the following three purposes: 1. It assesses the outputs and outcomes of our programme and reflects and refines the ToCs 2. It abstracts lessons and learning with partners and relevant stakeholders from the experiences gained and 3. It should lead to an increased accountability towards our strategic partners, donors, and the girls, boys and their communities who face the consequences of child marriage, FGM/C and teenage pregnancies directly in their lives.

Some of the key principles where this MEL approach is built upon are: 1. A bottom up approach to be able to collect qualitative and quantitative data, should be built for the partners, and target groups to understand and give meaning to the data collection.

2. Regular assessment of evolution of the ToCs, its underlying assumptions and the risks mitigation strategies, if they are still valid or need to be adjusted.

3. A continuous process of adjusting interventions to realize the positive (un) expected outputs and outcomes, to avoid negative outcomes/impact and the flexibility to adjust MEL frameworks.

4. Regular reflection sessions, whereby learning outcomes are connected to decision-making processes.

5. Inclusion of key stakeholders, like young people, in the development, implementation and information collection processes and M&E reflection and learning events.

6. Regular assessment of the implementation of the cross-cutting issues within the programme; gender transformative programming, girls empowerment, meaningfully engagement of youth, and engagement of men and boys.

7. All involved partners have an overview of the roles and responsibilities of joint activities and the MEL approach, eg. (bi-) annual programme reviews, operational research and learning activities.

2.1 Monitoring All the combined strategic goals of the Yes I do programme will contribute to both results area 1 “better information and great freedom of choice for girls and boys about their sexuality” and to results area 4 towards “more respect for the sexual and reproductive rights of specifically girls and boys, who are currently denied these rights.”

The following table describes the specific goals and related outcome indicators of the Yes I do alliance, and makes a distinction of which strategic goals will contribute towards results area 1 and 4 of the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs its SRHR Theory of Change.

30

Impact

Impact Indicators

Possible negative impacts/risks

Adolescent girls can decide if, when and whom to marry and if, when and with whom to have children, and are protected from female genital mutilation.

• Percentage of girls and women aged 20-24 who were married or in a union (i) before age 18 and (ii) before age 15 (i.e. child marriage) • Reduction in (% of) women pregnant before age 18 • Reduction in (reported) cases of FGM/C • Reduction in (reported) cases of CM • Number of girls who leave school due to early marriage, pregnancy and/or consequences of FGM/C

(decisions made to undergo FGM/C /TP by girls themselves)

Goals contributing to SRHR Result area 1 of the MoFA: Better information and greater freedom of choice for girls and boys about their sexuality Strategic Goal

Outcome Indicators

1. Community members and gate-keepers have changed attitudes and take action to prevent CM, FGM/C and TP.

• Percentage of community mem- • Reduction of FGM/C does lead to more TP or CM bers and gatekeepers taking public action against CM FGM/C • Increase of stigmatization rate of girls with FGM/C and TP • Increase of stigmatization rate of • Increased rejection of CM, girls facing TP FGM/C at community level in % of the targeted communities • Increase of community members with more gender equitable attitudes which helps preventing CM, FGM/C and TP • Increase of community member with a positive attitude towards young people’s SRHR • Degree of support for gender equitable norms about education and income generating activities for girls and young women

3. Adolescent girls and boys take informed action on their sexual health

• Percentage of adolescents girls and boys with access to and making use of SRHR services which include adequate information • Girls and boys have more knowledge, changed attitudes and relevant skills, enabling them to make informed decisions on SRHR issues • Number of boys/men describing their ideal potential marriage partner above 18 and uncircumcised • Number of (government + private) health facilities and trained staff that provide youth friendly SRHR services according to standards

31

Possible negative impacts/risks

4. Adolescent girls have alternatives beyond CM, FGM/C and teenage pregnancy through education and economic empowerment

• Percentage of girls (married and unmarried) who participated in income generating activities • Girls’ and boys’ retention and graduation rate at (lower)-secondary school • Drop-out rate of girls - primary and secondary school • Percentage of girls that have a child and follow education • Percentage of adolescent girls that have skill sets and opportunities to gain equal access to economic opportunities

• Changing behavior between school going girls and boys (new transition period with more risk behavior which can increase TP & sexually Transmitted Diseases)

5. Policy makers and duty bearers • National and local law (incl bylaws) and policies prohibiting CM adjust laws and implement policies and FGM/C to eradicate CM and FGM/C and • Budget allocated to implement prevent TP laws and policies prohibiting CM and FGM/C • Number of FGM/C and child marriage cases reported and actions taken by duty bearers against CM and FGM/C Goals contributing to SRHR Result area 4 of the MoFA: : More respect for the sexual and reproductive rights of groups who are currently denied these rights 2. Adolescent girls and boys are meaningfully engaged to claim their SRH rights

• Age of girls undergoing FGM/C is • Number of girls and boys who decreasing as a result of alternaare empowered to claim their tive rites passages SRH rights in a gender transfor• FGM/C practice is done more mative way secretively • Number of partner organizations that are capable and willing to meaningfully engage girls and boys in activities and programs that address SRHR, FGM/C, child marriages and teenage pregnancies.

Cross cutting goals

Outcome Indicators

The Yes I do alliance and its partners have the knowledge and skills to implement gender transformative programmes

• Increased capacity of alliance, partners and stakeholders that apply gender transformative programming, in planning and implementation regarding CM, TP and FCM/C

Girls are empowered to stand up for their rights and needs throughout the programme

• the number of participating girls that have the knowledge, skills and confidence to participate and the number that take leadership roles throughout the programme

Men and boys are successfully and actively engaged to reduce CM, TP and FGM/C

• Number of men and boys that are actively engaged in strategies reducing FGM/C, CM and TP

Adolescent girls and boys are meaningfully engaged throughout the governance and PMEL structure of the programme

• Youth and youth-led organisations have an increased capacity, knowledge and skills to influence decision taking within all the specific phases of the Yes I do programme.

• The Yes I Do alliance and its partner organisations have functional structures in place for the meaningful involvement of young people on organizational and at programmatic level

32

Planning Monitoring of programme implementation will look at the following issues: • When and where? Are activities being implemented at the right time within the budget?

• What and who? What happened and who was involved? Did the activities lead to the expected outputs, and did the expected outputs contribute to achieving the outcomes, and how were outcomes achieved?

• Why? Why is the change relevant (in light of our strategic goals, in light of local context, target group), and for whom?

• How? How did the project support the change and are the results sustainable?

Data Collection for Monitoring The 5 strategic goals of the Yes I do alliance described above are fundamental to deliver impact to reduce FGM/C , child marriages and teenage pregnancies. The context and levels will require specific applicable, measurable and qualitative M&E approaches and tools, that will guide the data collection methodologies in the seven countries. Overall the following steps will be taken to be used to acquire the data.

Frequency All partners will report quarterly on expenditures and implemented activities. Output data will be collected by partners on a daily basis. Means of verification are developed by KIT in consultation with the alliance and implementing partners. Alliance partners will verify collected data (financial and implementation at output level) bi-annual through reporting and field visits. Progress on achievements at outcome level will be done through a midterm review and endline evaluation.

Tools Monitoring tools will be developed and be based on an evaluation matrix (including questions related to the ToC). The existing tools of the (local) partners will be included as much as possible further adapted to this programme in consultation with partners by KIT. Analysis Collected data will be analysed bi-annual and will be used to adapt the programme. The analysis will focus on the pathway of change: how the activities lead to expected outputs, and contributed to achieving the outcomes.

Reporting and IATI All partners will report on activities, outputs and finances to the ministry of foreign affairs. The progress reporting will be published according to the IATI standard. This will be done quarterly. IATI is a new reporting method for all participating organisations, and will require extra co-ordination and training within the alliance to adjust to this new reporting method.

2.2 Evaluation and Learning To be able to measure change, the yes I do alliance will set up baseline and end line studies, a mid-term evaluation and end line evaluation. The baselines for the strategies on result area 1 and 4 will consist of the problem and context analysis that underlie the theme-specific strategies and assumptions. This will be done both in countries and at a global level where a synthesis analysis will be made in line with the global ToC as well as the result areas of the Ministry.

In line with the goals and target of the interventions, the baseline and end line studies in the seven countries will use a mixed method comparison with a quasi-experimental design of similar formats. To be able to measure and describe the effect and value of the interventions, we will use methods like existing large scale data sets, surveys, diaries, systematic observations, in-depth and semi structured interviews and focus group discussions.

Midterm qualitative trajectories will be implemented to yield rich case studies. All the acquired data will provide information on the effectiveness, efficiency, relevance, sustainability of the Yes I do interventions, what works in 33

which context, and why and under which conditions. The Yes I Do programme proposes to add the evaluation criteria of Participation & Leadership of adolescents and youth51. Young people will be meaningfully engaged in the operational research and evaluation process.

Operational Research Overall operational research within the Yes I do alliance, is conducted to use the results to improve programmes for the reduction of FGM/C, Child marriages and teenage pregnancies and increase the choice and voice of girls and boys in relation to their sexuality. Therefore the operational research data will be used for MEL purposes, but has also it stand-alone function to be used for advocacy purposes, and informing other design processes of programmes on FGM/C, child marriages and teenage pregnancies. A plan will be developed of how particularly girls and boys, and primary change agents will participate in the data collection process and in reflection and analysis spaces. Analysis, synthesis and write shops will be held to report, share and translate the knowledge and to draw lessons learned and inform policy and practice.

Our operational research will focus on: 1. Developing case studies and studies on the general ToC, to improve the SRHR of girls and boys and prevention and mitigation of child marriages, FGM/C and teenage pregnancy.

2. Testing and validating the underlying assumptions and pathways of the seven ToCs; this will be done at country level and later synthesis and analysis will be done on global level 3. Life history and most significant change stories will be generated to illustrate gender transformative changes related to the Yes I do programme.

4. Studies that contextualize and produce knowledge that helps to answer emerging research questions in countries which are identified in the initial assessments and stakeholder consultations.

5. Studies gaining better insight in context specific strategies: which contexts, mechanisms and outcomes yielding results within the Yes I do programme.

Learning Agenda Learning is an inclusive and continuous process for the Yes I do Alliance, during the design and execution of the programme. The complex and unpredictable nature of our programme requires continuous learning and reflection about successful and unsuccessful approaches and strategies at different levels. In addition to our focus on measuring pre-set indicators, we will also actively pay attention to unplanned and unforeseen changes (both negative and positive) resulting from our programme. Managing risks proactively and mitigating its effects will be part of the learning agenda.

The learning agenda is centered around the Theories of Change. Based on monitoring and operational research outcomes, and testing of the assumptions behind the Theories of Change, regular reflection sessions among the Yes I do partners and stakeholders will be required to know if the seven TOCs and therefore its M&E framework are on the right track to bring sustainable change, and where adaptation is further required.

To be able to deliver the envisioned impact, the alliance will develop main learning questions, that will guide and support staff, partners and key stakeholders in the implementation of the programme. Every year the alliance and its partners will discuss progress with regard to M&E and research, and identify areas for adjustment of interventions and improvement of MEL. During these annual workshops, one specific intervention, identified as having potential for scale-up, will be selected and discussed as case to identify learning points for the alliance, partners and relevant stakeholders. Short communication briefs and other products on lessons learned will be developed, and published in the IATI database. Also these learning points can be used for technical input and advocacy. The Yes I do alliance, will disseminate and collaborate with the embassies, and international and national networks of organisations that work on eliminating CM and FGM/C, to exchange our learning agenda, develop a joint research agenda, and to share experiences and lessons learned.

51 Criteria applied by KIT for UNFPA and Danida evaluations 2014 34

35

III. Budget

Section 3 Budget 3.1 Budget 2016-2020 per country52 and outcome 2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Totals

Country 1 - Kenya Administration and PME

€ 109.293

€ 157.109

€ 170.771

€ 136.617

€ 109.293

€ 683.084

Social movement

€ 105.650

€ 151.872

€ 165.079

€ 132.063

€ 105.650

€ 660.315

Engagement/empowerment young people

€ 58.290

€ 83.792

€ 91.078

€ 72.862

€ 58.290

€ 364.312

Access to SRHR info and services

€ 233.159

€ 335.167

€ 364.312

€ 291.449

€ 233.159

€ 1.457.246

Economic empowerment

€ 131.152

€ 188.531

€ 204.925

€ 163.940

€ 131.152

€ 819.701

Knowledge and research

€ 73.520

€ 51.689

€ 64.210

€ 51.689

€ 79.941

€ 321.050

Lobby & Advocacy sub Total

€ 18.580

€ 26.709

€ 29.031

€ 23.225

€ 18.580

€ 116.124

€ 729.646

€ 994.869

€ 1.089.406

€ 871.845

€ 736.067

€ 4.421.832

Country 2 - Ethiopia Administration and PME

€ 109.503

€ 157.411

€ 171.098

€ 136.879

€ 109.503

€ 684.394

Social movement

€ 116.803

€ 167.905

€ 182.505

€ 146.004

€ 116.803

€ 730.020

Engagement/empowerment young people

€ 58.402

€ 83.952

€ 91.253

€ 73.002

€ 58.402

€ 365.010

Access to SRHR info and services

€ 226.306

€ 325.315

€ 353.603

€ 282.883

€ 226.306

€ 1.414.414

Economic empowerment

€ 126.206

€ 181.421

€ 197.197

€ 157.757

€ 126.206

€ 788.787

Knowledge and research

€ 83.587

€ 58.767

€ 73.002

€ 58.767

€ 90.887

€ 365.010

Lobby & Advocacy

€ 18.358

€ 26.390

€ 28.685

€ 22.948

€ 18.358

€ 114.740

€ 739.165

€ 1.001.160

€ 1.097.343

€ 878.239

€ 746.466

€ 4.462.374

sub Total Country 3 - Malawi Administration and PME

€ 88.715

€ 127.527

€ 138.617

€ 110.893

€ 88.715

€ 554.467

Social movement

€ 90.430

€ 129.993

€ 141.297

€ 113.037

€ 90.430

€ 565.186

Engagement/empowerment young people

€ 53.229

€ 76.516

€ 83.170

€ 66.536

€ 53.229

€ 332.680

Access to SRHR info and services

€ 183.344

€ 263.557

€ 286.474

€ 229.180

€ 183.344

€ 1.145.898

Economic empowerment

€ 106.458

€ 153.033

€ 166.340

€ 133.072

€ 106.458

€ 665.360

Knowledge and research

€ 59.254

€ 41.659

€ 51.750

€ 41.659

€ 64.429

€ 258.751

Lobby & Advocacy

€ 36.751

€ 52.830

€ 57.424

€ 45.939

€ 36.751

€ 229.696

€ 618.180

€ 845.115

€ 925.072

€ 740.316

€ 623.355

€ 3.752.039

Administration and PME

€ 85.138

€ 122.386

€ 133.028

€ 106.422

€ 85.138

€ 532.112

Social movement

€ 96.000

€ 138.000

€ 150.000

€ 120.000

€ 96.000

€ 600.000

Engagement/empowerment young people

€ 34.055

€ 48.954

€ 53.211

€ 42.569

€ 34.055

€ 212.845

Access to SRHR info and services

€ 170.276

€ 244.772

€ 266.056

€ 212.845

€ 170.276

€ 1.064.225

Economic empowerment

€ 102.693

€ 147.622

€ 160.458

€ 128.367

€ 102.693

€ 641.834

Knowledge and research

€ 64.989

€ 45.691

€ 56.759

€ 45.691

€ 70.665

€ 283.793

Lobby & Advocacy

€ 22.786

€ 32.755

€ 35.603

€ 28.482

€ 22.786

€ 142.411

sub Total Country 4 - Pakistan

sub Total

€ 575.937

€ 780.179

€ 855.115

38

€ 684.376

€ 581.613

€ 3.477.220

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Totals

Country 5 - Indonesia Administration and PME

€ 91.508

€ 131.542

€ 142.981

€ 114.385

€ 91.508

€ 571.924

Social movement

€ 97.913

€ 140.750

€ 152.990

€ 122.392

€ 97.913

€ 611.958

Engagement/empowerment young people

€ 61.005

€ 87.695

€ 95.321

€ 76.257

€ 61.005

€ 381.283

Access to SRHR info and services

€ 170.815

€ 245.546

€ 266.898

€ 213.518

€ 170.815

€ 1.067.591

Economic empowerment

€ 128.512

€ 184.736

€ 200.800

€ 160.640

€ 128.512

€ 803.201

Knowledge and research

€ 80.329

€ 56.476

€ 70.156

€ 56.476

€ 87.344

€ 350.780

Lobby & Advocacy

€ 27.603

€ 39.679

€ 43.129

€ 34.504

€ 27.603

€ 172.518

sub Total

€ 657.685

€ 886.425

€ 972.275

€ 778.171

€ 664.700

€ 3.959.255

Country 6 - Mozambique Administration and PME

€ 66.983

€ 96.288

€ 104.660

€ 83.728

Social movement

€ 75.556

€ 108.612

€ 118.057

€ 94.446

€ 75.556

€ 472.228

Engagement/empowerment young people

€ 44.655

€ 64.192

€ 69.774

€ 55.819

€ 44.655

€ 279.095

Access to SRHR info and services

€ 116.103

€ 166.899

€ 181.411

€ 145.129

€ 116.103

€ 725.646

Economic empowerment

€ 77.043

€ 110.750

€ 120.380

€ 96.304

€ 77.043

€ 481.522

Knowledge and research

€ 64.744

€ 45.518

€ 56.545

€ 45.518

€ 70.398

€ 282.723

Lobby & Advocacy

€ 29.675

€ 42.658

€ 46.367

€ 37.094

€ 29.675

€ 185.468

sub Total

€ 474.759

€ 634.916

€ 697.194

€ 558.038

€ 66.983

€ 480.414

€ 418.642

€ 2.845.322

Country 7 - Zambia Administration and PME

€ 71.001

€ 102.064

€ 110.939

€ 88.751

€ 71.001

€ 443.756

Social movement

€ 83.260

€ 119.687

€ 130.094

€ 104.075

€ 83.260

€ 520.377

Engagement/empowerment young people

€ 47.334

€ 68.043

€ 73.959

€ 59.167

€ 47.334

€ 295.837

Access to SRHR info and services

€ 132.535

€ 190.519

€ 207.086

€ 165.669

€ 132.535

€ 828.344

Economic empowerment

€ 80.468

€ 115.672

€ 125.731

€ 100.585

€ 80.468

€ 502.923

Knowledge and research

€ 61.356

€ 43.137

€ 53.586

€ 43.137

€ 66.715

€ 267.931

Lobby & Advocacy

€ 23.311

€ 33.509

€ 36.423

€ 29.138

€ 23.311

€ 145.692

sub Total

€ 499.265

€ 672.630

€ 737.818

€ 590.523

€ 504.623

€ 3.004.859

Netherlands/International Administration + PME NL

€ 42.900

€ 61.669

€ 67.032

€ 53.625

€ 42.900

€ 268.127

Alliance coördination

€ 165.870

€ 165.870

€ 165.870

€ 165.870

€ 165.870

€ 829.350

Knowledge and research

€ 57.250

€ 40.250

€ 50.000

€ 40.250

€ 62.250

€ 250.000

Linking & Learning

€ 59.942

€ 86.166

€ 93.659

€ 74.927

€ 59.942

€ 374.635

sub Total Grand Total Liquidity Prognose in %

52

€ 325.962

€ 353.955

€ 376.561

€ 334.672

€ 330.962

€ 1.722.112

€ 4.620.599

€ 6.169.250

€ 6.750.784

€ 5.436.181

€ 4.668.199

€ 27.645.012

22,3%

24,4%

16,7%

The Yes I Do Programme had three budget categories: high, medium and low: High: Kenya and Ethiopia.

Medium: Malawi, Pakistan and Indonesia Low: Zambia and Mozambique 39

19,7%

16,9%

100,0%

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

Totals

% verdeling

Totalen per Outcome Administration and PME

€ 665.041

€ 955.996

€ 1.039.126

€ 831.301

€ 665.041

€ 4.156.505

15%

Alliance coördination

€ 165.870

€ 165.870

€ 165.870

€ 165.870

€ 165.870

€ 829.350

3%

Social movement

€ 665.614

€ 956.819

€ 1.040.021

€ 832.017

€ 665.614

€ 4.160.085

15%

Engagement/empowerment young people

€ 356.970

€ 513.144

€ 557.765

€ 446.212

€ 356.970

€ 2.231.061

8%

Access to SRHR info and services

€ 1.232.538

€ 1.771.773

€ 1.925.841

€ 1.540.673

€ 1.232.538

€ 7.703.363

28%

Economic empowerment

€ 752.532

€ 1.081.765

€ 1.175.832

€ 940.666

€ 752.532

€ 4.703.328

17%

Knowledge and research

€ 545.029

€ 383.186

€ 476.008

€ 383.186

€ 592.629

€ 2.380.038

9%

Lobby & Advocacy

€ 177.064

€ 254.529

€ 276.662

€ 221.330

€ 177.064

€ 1.106.649

4%

Linking & Learning

€ 59.942

€ 86.166

€ 93.659

€ 74.927

€ 59.942

€ 374.635

1%

sub Total

€ 4.620.599

€ 6.169.250

€ 6.750.784

40

€ 5.436.181

€ 4.668.199

€ 27.645.012

100%

3.2 Hourly rate calculation by the different Alliance Members Hourly rate calculation Plan 1.1 Productive Hours Amounts in â‚Ź Productive hours Plan Employees Assumptions 1,0 FTE Working week

35

hour

Hours of leave

175

hour

Normative Absenteeism

4% Àverage absenteeism Netherlands

Public holidays Productive hours Absent

48 hour (average 5 year period) 1.820,0 per year (5*7*52) -73

Hours of leave

-175 (25*7)

Public Holidays

-48

Declarable hours 1,0 Fte

(5 days 7 hour)

1.525

1.2 calculation standard hourly rate Calculation Example Monthly salary 1 FTE

3.500,00

Monthly

Standard rate Annual salary

42.000

Holiday allowance

3.481

8%

Charges Social Security

8.013

19%

Pensions

4.936

12%

Other staff costs

5.999

14%

Direct staff costs

64.429

53%

Declarable hours

1.525

Uur

Standard Rate

42,26

1.3 Calculation add-up integral hourly rate Costs add up Integral Hourly rate/hour

FTE

Costs

Fundraising

10,8

901.907

Programme management

12,8

1.122.702

Comnmunication

1,0

59.609

Product development

1,2

205.830

Total Costs IP

25,9

2.290.047

Correction non declarable time FTE

-5,3

Total Costs IP

20,6

Overhead allocated to IP

2.290.047 1.520.978

41

Costs add up Integral Hourly rate/hour

FTE

Costs

Integrated costs

3.811.024 73.808

Integral Hourly rates Declarable hours

1.525

Overhead increment per FTE

48,40

1.4 Calculation Integral Hourly Rate Monthly salary 1 Fte

3.500,00

Standard Hourly Rate

42,26

Add Up Integral Hourly rate/Hour

48,40

Integral Hourly Rate

90,66

1.5 Integral Hourly Rates NLNO Rate NLNO Management Staff

120,00

Rate NLNO Technical Staff

95,00

Rate NLNO Support Staff

82,50

42

hour

Integral cost tariff methodology Rutgers General Rutgers is a non-profit organisation with limited financial reserves and limited sources of unrestricted funding.

Rutgers is an institute with specialized SRHR staff. The employees at the head office in The Netherlands consist of a considerable number of Technical Advisors with specific and unique knowledge. This means that gross salaries are relatively high compared to other NGO’s whith only coordinating programme activities. Rutgers has developed a model in which a hourly rate is calculated based on the full costs per employee. The annual rates per function are determined in the budget cycle.

Assumptions general salary costs In the calculation of the hourly rate per Rutgers employee, the following costs have been taken into account: a. gross salary; b. holiday allowance (obligatory according collective labour agreements); c. year end allowance (obligatory according to collective labour agreements); d. employer premiums for retirement and survivors’ pension, disability, early retirement, disability pension including the extra-legal part (obligatory according to collective labour agreements).

These costs all fall under the Collective Labour Agreements that Rutgers is obliged to comply with.

In our standard principle, salary cost is normalized per function. This normalization means that 95% of the maximum scale amount (as for CLA Mental Health), which is about two thirds of the total number of steps in the scale, is used for the basis of the rate for the corresponding function.

Assumptions billable hours The hourly rate is based on the Rutgers standards. For our Technical SRHR staff we use a standard of 1216 produktive-billable hours per year. These are based on a 36-work week, 52 weeks per year minus sick days standard/vacations days/bank holidays and indirect hours. Indirect hours are hours not directly spent on programmes-projects but needed to maintain and improve our expertise. As highly qualified SRHR specialists we need to continuously invest in training and in the working hours necessary for this purpose. Departmental and organisation meetings are also included in the indirect hours. These hours are not always attributable to existing projects and are therefore indicated as non-productive indirect hours.v Weeks

52

Hours per week

36

Hours per year (A)

100%

1.872

Non workable hours Holiday

196

Public holidays

64

Special Leave (eg funerals, family care leave, wedding etc.)

16

Sick leave

81

Total non workable hours (B)

19%

357

indirect hours (incl hours needed for acquisition) ( C )

16%

300

direct (produktive) hours (A-B-C=D)

65%

1.216

43

Direct cost mark-up This relates to the investment in training and commuting expenses of the direct programme staff and is calculated per department.

Indirect cost mark-up The mark-up per hour is pre calculated in the budget cycle. This mark up relates to the cost recovery for indirect costs which includes the organisation costs and the salary costs of indirect staff. Organisation costs include costs such as: housing and accommodation expenses, ICT expenses, advise and administration costs and travel not related to projects.

The salary costs for indirect staff include the salary costs of following departmanrs: • Management (incl Director) and secretariat; • Human Resources; • Corporate Marketing and Communication; • Resource Mobilisation The mark up is calculated using the following formula: (total organisation costs + indirect staff salary costs)/total billable hours budgeted The total billable hours are based on the billable hours budgeted, this also includes the billable hours budgeted but not raised yet. So this includes the acquisition targets of Rutgers.

The mark up in the 2016 budget is € 36,37 per hour.

CHOICE calculates its integral hourly rate this way: • First, all direct personnel expenses are accumulated. This includes salaries, social security, and pensions.

• Then all indirect personnel expenses are calculated: personnel insurances of all staff, arbo-costs, training expenses etc.

• Then all office expenses are added. This includes accommodation, ICT, energy, write-offs on office equipment etc.

• Then all general costs are added; typically these do not amount to very much.

• The staff members are divided into two categories; those who are directly involved in the objectives of the foundation, and those who are involved indirectly. Program managers are typically categorized as ‘direct’; fundraisers and office/finance are ‘indirect’.

• The indirect personnel, office and general costs are allocated to the personnel who are categorized as direct pro person.

• Likewise, the direct personnel expenses of the personnel who are categorized as indirect are allocated to the direct personnel pro person • The available hours of all personnel categorized as direct are adjusted for FTE percentage, expected sickness/holiday etc.

• The chargeable percentage per person is calculated, based on previous time-sheets and current workload. All CHOICE staff (both indirect and direct) are required to write their hours on timesheets Typically, for a junior officer this will write around 80% on programs, and a senior officer will write around 70% on programs.

• The total costs of the personnel categorizes as direct (which includes the additions of indirect costs and indirect personnel) are divided by the chargeable hours of the personnel categorized as direct. The outcome is an integral hourly rate, which is than rounded off. Typically, a junior officer will costs € 70 - € 75; a senior officer € 80 - € 90 and a director around € 110,-.

• As a basic check, the total of rounded off hourly rates multiplied by the total of chargeable hours is sett of against the total of all personnel, office and general expenses: these two amounts should be the same.

44

This method of calculation is bi-annually checked by an independent accountant. Then the actual expenses and the actual chargeable hours are taken into account.

Yearly hours

1872

Holidays/feasts

230

Special leave & other

46

Illness

84

Hours available

1512

Productivity

Salary

Indir pers

Office

Tariff

Director

20%

€ 70

€ 15

€ 20

€ 105

Senior program manager

70%

€ 55

€15

€ 20

€ 90

Senior program manager

80%

€ 40

€ 15

€ 20

€ 75

Integrated cost price 2016 KIT Integrated cost price 2016 KIT Gross salary

€ 42.000

Holiday allowance

€ 3.360

8%

Fringe benefits

€ 7.258

17%

Pension

€ 7.862

19%

Housing

€ 2.419

6%

€ 30.845

73%

Other overhead Total costs

€ 93.744

180 billable days per year Rate per day

€ 521

Rate per hour

€ 65

45

Calculation hourly rate 2015 AMREF Flying Doctors Nederland VG = vaste gegevens, vlgs. wet- en regelgeving, arbeidsvoorwaarden CB = (jaarlijks) vast te stellen conform begroting VAR = variabel per werknemer Functie: Manager, 75% van schaal 13 gegevens

uren

fulltime werkweek (VG):

37,5

uren per week (VAR):

37,5

1.950,00

verlofweken per jaar (VG):

5

187,50-

verlofuren

feestdagen per jaar (VG):

7

52,50-

feestdagen in uren

ziekteverzuimpercentage (VG):

3%

58,50-

ziekte-uren

improductieve uren (VAR):

35%

contracturen per jaar

1.651,50

te werken uren

578,03-

improductieve uren (overleg, scholing, algemeen)

1.073,00

productieve uren

gemiddeld aantal productieve uren per week: 21 gemiddeld aantal productieve uren per maand: 89

Functie: Manager, 75% van schaal 13 tarief maandsalaris (parttime) (VAR): vakantiegeld (VG):

€ 5.628

€ 34,63

8%

€ 2,77

uurloon

28%

€ 10,46

sociale lasten, ziekengeldverzekering, pensioenen

€ 47,86

kosten per uur

€ 86,98

kosten per productief uur

€ 32,65

overhead per productief uur

vakantiegeld

€ 37,40 opslag overige personeelslasten (CB):

kosten overhead per fte (CB)

€ 35.037

€ 119,63 3,45

uurtarief x het uurloon

afgerond

werkuren per dag (VG):

7,5

€ 120,00

per uur

€ 900,00

per volledig bestede dag (7,5 uur)

€ 2.480,00

per week (rekening houdend met niet-productief)

€ 10.750,00

per maand (rekening houdend met niet-productief)

zonder overheadopslag € 87,00 werkuren per dag (VG):

7,5

€ 652,50

per uur per volledig bestede dag (7,5 uur)

€ 1.800,00

per week (rekening houdend met niet-productief)

€ 7.800,00

per maand (rekening houdend met niet-productief)

46

Berekening in totalen Salaris

67.536,72

Vakantiegeld

5.402,94 72.939,66

Overige personeelslasten

20.387,91 93.327,57

Overhead kosten

35.037,47 128.365,04 Controles

Totaalbedrag bij uurtarief:

128.760,00

Totaalbedrag bij dagtarief:

128.760,00

Totaalbedrag bij weektarief:

128.960,00

Totaalbedrag bij maandtarief:

129.000,00

Functie: Medewerker, 75% van schaal 10 gegevens

uren

fulltime werkweek (VG):

37,5

uren per week (VAR):

37,5

1.950,00

verlofweken per jaar (VG):

5

187,50-

verlofuren

feestdagen per jaar (VG):

7

52,50-

feestdagen in uren

3%

58,50-

ziekte-uren

ziekteverzuimpercentage (VG):

improductieve uren (VAR):

20%

contracturen per jaar

1.651,50

te werken uren

330,30-

improductieve uren (overleg, scholing, algemeen)

1.321,00

productieve uren

gemiddeld aantal productieve uren per week: 25 gemiddeld aantal productieve uren per maand: 110

Functie: Medewerker, 75% van schaal 10 tarief maandsalaris (parttime) (VAR): vakantiegeld (VG):

€ 3.830

€ 23,57

8%

€ 1,89

uurloon vakantiegeld

€ 25,46 opslag overige personeelslasten (CB):

28%

€ 7,12

kosten overhead per fte (CB) € 35.037

sociale lasten, ziekengeldverzekering, pensioenen

€ 32,57

kosten per uur

€ 48,08

kosten per productief uur

€ 26,52

overhead per productief uur

€ 74,60

uurtarief

3,17

x het uurloon

afgerond € 75,00 werkuren per dag (VG):

€ 562,50

47

per uur per volledig bestede dag (7,5 uur)

Functie: Medewerker, 75% van schaal 10

7,5

€ 1.910,00

per week (rekening houdend met niet-productief)

€ 8.280,00

per maand (rekening houdend met nietproductief)

zonder overheadopslag € 48,00 werkuren per dag (VG):

€ 360,00

per week (rekening houdend met niet-productief)

€ 5.290,00

per maand (rekening houdend met nietproductief)

€ 360,00 € 1.220,00 € 5.290,00

Berekening in totalen 45.962,64

Vakantiegeld

3.677,01 49.639,65

Overige personeelslasten

13.875,15 63.514,80

Overhead kosten

35.037,47 98.552,27 Controles

Totaalbedrag bij uurtarief:

99.075,00

Totaalbedrag bij dagtarief:

99.075,00

Totaalbedrag bij weektarief:

99.320,00

Totaalbedrag bij maandtarief:

99.360,00

per volledig bestede dag (7,5 uur)

€ 1.220,00

7,5

Salaris

per uur

48