Transforming Lives in the East and Horn of Africa Region through Evidence-based Advocacy and Campaigning for Peaceful Change
Project Name: Transforming Lives in the East and Horn of Africa Region through Evidence-based Advocacy and Campaigning for Peaceful Change
Target Location: Horn and East Africa
Project Goal: African civil societies interact efficiently with institutional stakeholders in Africa, Europe, and America in protection of human right, peace and stability in the Horn of Africa region.
Project Outcomes:
Targeted Participants and Scope:
Consortium partners: American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), All-Africa Conference of Churches (AACC), Europe External Programme with Africa (EEPA)
Project Period: Feb 1, 2021 - Jan. 31, 2024
Baseline purpose:
The purpose of the baseline study is to determine quantitatively and qualitatively the current situation in the Horn of Africa related to the main elements of the project (peacebuilding, evidence-based advocacy, promotion of non-violent approaches, migration trends and effects of conflict, local CSO relationships with regional-level bodies, and CSO capacity to advocate) and establish a baseline for the project´s key indicators against which to measure performance during the project’s life.
Primary methods: Desk review, interviews (focus group and individual), surveys
Baseline dates: May 5th – 10th June 2021
Baseline report due date: June 10th, 2021
Implemented by a consortium comprised of the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), the All-Africa Conference of Churches (AACC) and the Europe External Programme with Africa (EEPA), the “Transforming Lives in the East and Horn of Africa Region through Evidence-based Advocacy and Campaigning for Peaceful Change” program aims to strengthen African civil societies’ capacity to interact efficiently with institutional stakeholders in Africa, Europe, and America in protection of human rights and peace and stability in the Horn of Africa region.
The program, based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, will target the greater Horn and East African countries including, Djibouti Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Uganda.
The consortium will meet this overall goal by establishing a hub for coordinated advocacy initiatives by civil society organizations (CSOs) towards the Africa Union (AU) and the Africa Union Commission (AUC) to amplify peacebuilding, divest from conflict systems and militarism, and promote non-violent approaches to instability. The program also aims to enhance constituents’ and CSOs’ capacity to advocate towards the power centers and decision-makers (such as AU, IGAD, EU, USA and UN) to influence policy making processes on the Horn of Africa and beyond in an efficient and coherent manner. In the process, the program hopes that policymakers, organizations and the public are influenced by evidence-based advocacy and research on peace and conflict issues, human rights violations, and factors related to instability.
AFSC is a Quaker organization that promotes lasting peace with justice as a practical expression of faith in action. Drawing on continuing spiritual insights and working with people of many backgrounds, AFSC nurtures the seeds of change and respect for human life that transform social relations and systems. To that end, AFSC works with constituencies that have suffered exclusion and marginalization. Through its Africa Regional Office in Nairobi, AFSC promotes projects in Kenya, Somalia, Burundi and Zimbabwe, with a perspective of expanding its activities to the Horn of Africa region.
The AACC is a continental ecumenical body that accounts for over 200
million Christians across the continent. AACC is the largest association of Protestant, Anglican, Orthodox and Indigenous churches in Africa and is a member of the worldwide ecumenical network. AACC is a fellowship of 204 members comprising of Churches, National Councils of Churches (NCCs), theological and lay training institutions and other Christian organizations in 43 African countries.
The EEPA is a Belgium-based non-governmental organization that aim to encourage the EU’s involvement in human rights particularly in the Horn of Africa.
AFSC has decades of experience in leading advocacy, evidence-based research and civil society strengthening programs around the world. Every year, AFSC brings thousands of global South leaders together to learn and exchange ideas. Due to the challenging situation in the Horn, AFSC took the strategic decision to focus more strongly on this region, to link up with existent civil society networks and contribute with its specific expertise.
The AACC through its AU Liaison Office, follows the ambition of its strategic plan 2019-2023 for a strong political engagement at AU level.
Meanwhile, EEPA (current project “Europe-Africa Response to Human Trafficking and Mixed Migration Flow” has developed a key role in the region as an information broker, serving as a hub for transferring information from a wide range of sources to policy makers, organizations and experts. EEPA is unique in linking direct support for refugees en route and in camps (particularly psychosocial support), on-the-ground research on migration routes and human trafficking, and efficient advocacy work in Europe and towards the UN. EEPA has also developed expertise on digitalization and data protection, which helps to effectively exchange data, particularly as the travel situation with COVID-19 remains uncertain.
While there have been positive strides made in a number of African countries in strengthening democracy, civil war and violence continue in several countries in the Horn of Africa. Somalia and South Sudan are notorious for their violent conflicts, Eritrea has one of the most suppressive regimes, and Sudan has just come out of decade long armed conflict, though with an uncertain future.
In November 2020, tensions between the Ethiopian federal government and the Tigray Peoples Liberation Front escalated. The conflict has a high risk of causing further ethnic tensions, violence and displacements in Ethiopia and in the wider region. With the human trafficking networks continuing to operate ever more dangerous routes towards Europe and elsewhere, human traffickers take advantage of such destabilization. Ethiopia is considered a key actor for peace and stability in the Horn. The country has a complex history of changing relations with its neighbors. In the context of the so-called war against terrorism and as a contributor to UN missions, it used to receive Western support without being pressured to comply with universal human rights standards.
The crisis in Ethiopia demonstrates once again the limitations of the African Union (AU), challenging their capabilities of bringing enemies to the negotiating table. African institutions need to lead international efforts to mediate conflicts in the region but actors such as the UN also need to come in.
Such factors show the need for civil society to operate regionally and internationally to advocate and build peace. Civil society has brought forth many dedicated faith-based and secular actors that work on peace building on various levels. What appears to be lacking is a certain critical mass of well-connected organizations, which make themselves heard in all areas of advocacy work, from confidential conversations with policy makers to concerted campaigns, which raise awareness and foster non-violence attitudes towards conflict resolution in the broader public sphere.
Furthermore, the global aspects of regional conflicts require a strengthened international cooperation including actors in Europe, America, and Asia. This is especially important, as civil society organizations have been affected by shrinking civic space, growing authoritarianism, and challenging bureaucratic restrictions in the name of counterterrorism, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to closure of borders, travel restrictions, lockdowns, and constrained social security.
The purpose of the baseline study is to determine quantitatively and qualitatively brief current situation in relation to the main elements of the project (peacebuilding, evidence-based advocacy, promotion of non-violent approaches, migration trends and effects of conflict, local CSO relationships with regional-level bodies and capacity of CSOs to advocate) amongst the target CSOs and institutions in Djibouti, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Kenya, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan and Uganda.
The survey will establish the baseline for the project´s key indicators (please see methodology section for more information), and constitute the basis to measure the project performance. Even though the baseline study is intended primarily to facilitate the project monitoring and evaluation, it will also be used as an evidence-based lobbying and advocacy tool (with the possibility of publishing a summary of the findings).
The study design and methodology will be discussed and agreed with the project team and with the implementing partners at the beginning of the consultancy.
The consultant will use different data collecting methods: desk review, quantitative survey, interviews, and focus group discussions, to establish a baseline for the project’s key indicators. The indicators were designed in an open-ended manner and could change based on results of the baseline. The indicators were developed by consortium but have not been validated by civil society partners.
Please see indicators below, with a brief explanation of what needs to happen during the baseline study.
Objectives
Overall Goal
African civil societies interact efficiently with institutional stakeholders in Africa, Europe, and America in protection of human right, peace and stability in the Horn of Africa region. **
Key questions for the baseline
In what capacity are civil societies in the Horn of African currently interacting with global stakeholders in the region, in Europe or in the U.S. on the subject of human rights, peace, and stability?
Objective 1
The newly established support structure serves CSOs as a hub for coordinated advocacy initiatives towards the AU and AUC, to amplify peacebuilding, divest from conflict systems and militarism, and promote non-violent approaches to instability.
Indicator 1.1
By the end of the project period, at least 50 CSOs / CSO groups have used the structure for their advocacy work towards the AU/AUC and expressed their satisfaction.
Key questions for the baseline
What is the capacity of CSOs in terms of policy advocacy? Do Cos think there is coordinated advocacy with other institutions?
Do CSOs work in coalitions when it comes to advocacy?
What spaces are there for CSOs to influence?
Indicator 1.2
By the end of the project period peacebuilding-related advocacy initiatives have been undertaken by concerted and coordinated actions of newly established alliances.
Key questions for the baseline
What is the capacity of CSOs in terms of peacebuilding-related advocacy? What have been some recent peacebuilding-related policies produced by the AU or AUC that were heavily influenced by CSOs? Are their gaps or bottlenecks that CSOs face when they work in peacebuilding advocacy?
Objective 2
Constituents’ (Faith Based Organisations and other networks) and civil society’s’ capacity to advocate towards the power centers/decision makers (such as AU, IGAD, EU, USA and UN) to influence policy making processes on the Horn of Africa and beyond in an efficient and coherent manner is enhanced.
Indicator 2.1
Two priority issues raised by constituents and civil societies influence policy reform at the AU, IGAD, EU and USA.
Key questions for the baseline
What is the current capacity of CSOs and constituents to advocate towards power centers such as AU, IGAD, EU, USA, and UN?
What have been some recent policies produced by the AU, IGAD, EU, USA or UN that were heavily influenced by CSOs? Do these policies address peacebuilding, divesting from conflict systems and militarism or promoting non-violent approaches to instability?
Indicator 2.2
At least 80% of trained participants confirm that their newly acquired skills and knowledge resulted in advocacy initiatives, which are characterized by higher levels of expertise, cooperation and access to policy makers.
Key questions for the baseline
Do CSOs feel that they are trained in policy advocacy? If not, what kinds of advocacy capacity do they need?
Objective 3
Policy makers, organizations and the public are influenced by evidence-based advocacy and research on peace and conflict issues, human rights violations and factors related to instability.
Indicator 3.1
Documents and oral statements used in the coordinated advocacy work in Africa, Europe and the USA reproduce the evidence collected in 9 research activities.
Key questions for the baseline
Are there advocacy documents on peace and conflict, human rights violations, and factors related to instability? – are they based on research produced from the region?
What are the possible gaps?
The methodology will follow the following steps:
Consultant will gather key documents of the project, review all documentation, and prepare a workplan. The consultant will also finalize the methodology of the study, including but not limited to the finalization of the sample size (determine how many people for the quantitative surveys), the development of the questionnaires for the focus group discussions and qualitative interviews (focus groups and individual qualitative interviews with key informants) and the finalization of the questionnaire for the quantitative survey.
The methodology will need to be validated by the project team.
Consultant will outline this when finalizing the methodology including how to collect, analyze, and present data. Consultant will determine if they need data collectors for field work. Keep in mind that data analysis will be done in collaboration with the data collection team (as necessary) and the program team. The project team includes Centre Director, Consortium members (AFSC, AACC, EEPA). The consultant will be supervised by Program Manager at AFSC offices
The consortium members will provide all the necessary background documents prior to the commencement of the consultancy. This will include:
Baseline study activities will commence on 5th May 2021 – 10th June 2021. The final report including all the comments from consortium members should be received not later than this date.
Final Report that includes:
o Methodology and its limits
o Analysis of the main results (per indicator)
o An updated project monitoring and evaluation matrix with a summary of each indicator’s baseline data
o Conclusions and recommendations
Be flexible, responsive to changes and demands and open to feedback.
They should demonstrate alignment with Consortium members agreed values.
This vacancy is archived.