Search Results: 서귀포출장오피㎋ bamje˛cθｍ 서귀포출장오피❄서귀포키스방 서귀포출장오피㎋ 서귀포후불출장 서귀포키스방
“FUTURE FOR YOU(TH): YOUNG PEOPLE AS LEADERS OF LIFE SKILLS EDUCATION IN THE BALKANS”
The final evaluation of the “Future for You(th): Young people as Leaders of Life Skills Education in the Balkans” was conducted between December 2023 and March 2024. This end-term evaluation has addressed the full period of the project implementation (March 2021 – February 2024). Its scope covered all four target countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Kosovo and Albania) and main project beneficiaries (partner organizations, institutional representatives, teachers, youth, parents, movement leaders, etc.).
The evaluation process employed a mixed-methods approach with a non-experimental design. Its purpose was to assess the intervention's impact on advancing gender equality, examining shifts in cultural norms, behaviors and attitudes, and power dynamics, along with changes in participation, access to resources, and policy adjustments. It also aimed to summarize the main findings, conclusions and recommendations to inform the project's design and implementation phase.
The evaluation process was based on OECD-DAC evaluation criteria, but the priority was given to relevance, effectiveness, (immediate) impact and sustainability of the intervention. The rest of the criteria were not prioritized considering the given time frame, budget and purpose of the evaluation.
The project evaluation has embedded gender-responsive approaches and human rights frameworks from its inception. This approach was instrumental in establishing a holistic evaluation framework, with the aim of ensuring that these aspects were not treated as peripheral concerns but rather integral components of the project's core objectives and activities.
The data collection process comprised a desk review of relevant documents, semi-structured interviews with key informants, focus groups involving young individuals, and validation sessions to confirm clarity and authenticate key findings with project partners and other stakeholders. Data triangulation involved consolidating various methods and sources, thereby enhancing credibility through cross-referencing information from diverse origins.
Key limitations in the evaluation included a lack of representation from policymakers in some countries, restricted involvement of young individuals not engaged in BMCs and limited participation of young law offenders and professionals from youth at risk centers in the evaluation process. Related findings from the informants were cross-referenced with other information extracted from reviewed documents to mitigate potential bias.
Young men and women who participated in a greater number of project activities, including workshops or events related to campaigns, demonstrated more gender-equal attitudes towards gender roles and norms, violence, gender equality. All young people have increased their knowledge in sexual and reproductive health. Parents of BMC members have confirmed that the BMC program serves as a vehicle for continuous and holistic personal growth of their children, positively impacting diverse aspects of their lives.
School staff and professionals from juvenile correctional centers have gained qualitative content and the necessary competencies to effectively present crucial topics to youth in a non-formal manner that aligns with the needs of young people.
BMCs have progressed to comprehensive resource centers, providing safe spaces where young individuals can openly discuss their most sensitive concerns and receive professional referrals to address their diverse needs.
The project has managed to reach out to a remarkable number of people. The partners organized campaigns at the local level, resulting in the implementation of 35 school-based initiatives that reached 9,356 young individuals, and conducted 68 community-based campaigns, engaging with 20,218 citizens spanning across youth and adults alike, significantly increasing awareness on promoting peaceful masculinities, gender equality, and addressing hate speech and intolerance within the targeted demographics.
Despite challenges, such as navigating political instability, the project demonstrated resilience and effectiveness, significantly influencing community attitudes on social issues. It made a substantial impact on policy and practice regarding life skills education, underscoring its commitment to gender equality. Read More...
The evaluation process employed a mixed-methods approach with a non-experimental design. Its purpose was to assess the intervention's impact on advancing gender equality, examining shifts in cultural norms, behaviors and attitudes, and power dynamics, along with changes in participation, access to resources, and policy adjustments. It also aimed to summarize the main findings, conclusions and recommendations to inform the project's design and implementation phase.
The evaluation process was based on OECD-DAC evaluation criteria, but the priority was given to relevance, effectiveness, (immediate) impact and sustainability of the intervention. The rest of the criteria were not prioritized considering the given time frame, budget and purpose of the evaluation.
The project evaluation has embedded gender-responsive approaches and human rights frameworks from its inception. This approach was instrumental in establishing a holistic evaluation framework, with the aim of ensuring that these aspects were not treated as peripheral concerns but rather integral components of the project's core objectives and activities.
The data collection process comprised a desk review of relevant documents, semi-structured interviews with key informants, focus groups involving young individuals, and validation sessions to confirm clarity and authenticate key findings with project partners and other stakeholders. Data triangulation involved consolidating various methods and sources, thereby enhancing credibility through cross-referencing information from diverse origins.
Key limitations in the evaluation included a lack of representation from policymakers in some countries, restricted involvement of young individuals not engaged in BMCs and limited participation of young law offenders and professionals from youth at risk centers in the evaluation process. Related findings from the informants were cross-referenced with other information extracted from reviewed documents to mitigate potential bias.
Young men and women who participated in a greater number of project activities, including workshops or events related to campaigns, demonstrated more gender-equal attitudes towards gender roles and norms, violence, gender equality. All young people have increased their knowledge in sexual and reproductive health. Parents of BMC members have confirmed that the BMC program serves as a vehicle for continuous and holistic personal growth of their children, positively impacting diverse aspects of their lives.
School staff and professionals from juvenile correctional centers have gained qualitative content and the necessary competencies to effectively present crucial topics to youth in a non-formal manner that aligns with the needs of young people.
BMCs have progressed to comprehensive resource centers, providing safe spaces where young individuals can openly discuss their most sensitive concerns and receive professional referrals to address their diverse needs.
The project has managed to reach out to a remarkable number of people. The partners organized campaigns at the local level, resulting in the implementation of 35 school-based initiatives that reached 9,356 young individuals, and conducted 68 community-based campaigns, engaging with 20,218 citizens spanning across youth and adults alike, significantly increasing awareness on promoting peaceful masculinities, gender equality, and addressing hate speech and intolerance within the targeted demographics.
Despite challenges, such as navigating political instability, the project demonstrated resilience and effectiveness, significantly influencing community attitudes on social issues. It made a substantial impact on policy and practice regarding life skills education, underscoring its commitment to gender equality. Read More...
Who pays to deliver vaccines? An Analysis of World Bank Funding for COVID-19 Vaccination and Recovery
The World Bank is one key source of funding in the global push to vaccinate 70% of the world’s population against COVID-19. Many actors point to this as the funding that will cover any additional delivery needs for COVID-19 vaccines that national governments cannot meet. With $5.8 billion in funding already approved out of a $20 billion commitment, the World Bank funding is an important part of the picture, but the World Bank alone cannot cover the full gap in vaccine delivery needs.
Reviewing 60 funding agreements from the World Bank on COVID-19 vaccination and recovery shows the following insights.
• There is still a gap in delivery funding. The World Bank is currently funding $1.2 billion in vaccine delivery—10% of the total funding allocated for COVID-19 recovery. If that trend applies to the rest of the $20 billion commitment, World Bank funding will cover a between $2 and $4 billion—well below the $9 billion that ACT-A estimates as the lowest possible investment to vaccinate 70% of the world’s population. In contrast, $3.1 billion is going to purchase vaccines.
• Health workers remain underfunded. Only 15 of 60 agreements, just 25% detail provisions to pay health workers. Of those, 7 explicitly fund surge capacity, 3 provide for ongoing salaries, and 4 allow for hazard pay to health workers.
• Countries are taking on debt to rollout COVID-19 vaccinations. 86% of the funding in this analysis is in the form of loans. That gives countries debt that may weaken future pandemic preparedness rather than reinforcing health systems.
• All funders should adopt the World Bank’s commitments to investments in gender equality. 90% of the agreements in this analysis refer to gender inequality and many make corresponding investments—like requiring that 60% of vaccine leadership positions are women—to overcome these barriers. Earmarking exact funds going to advance gender equality would provide further transparency. Nevertheless, this consistent and concrete commitment is commendable, and all actors should strive to replicate it.
Read More...
Reviewing 60 funding agreements from the World Bank on COVID-19 vaccination and recovery shows the following insights.
• There is still a gap in delivery funding. The World Bank is currently funding $1.2 billion in vaccine delivery—10% of the total funding allocated for COVID-19 recovery. If that trend applies to the rest of the $20 billion commitment, World Bank funding will cover a between $2 and $4 billion—well below the $9 billion that ACT-A estimates as the lowest possible investment to vaccinate 70% of the world’s population. In contrast, $3.1 billion is going to purchase vaccines.
• Health workers remain underfunded. Only 15 of 60 agreements, just 25% detail provisions to pay health workers. Of those, 7 explicitly fund surge capacity, 3 provide for ongoing salaries, and 4 allow for hazard pay to health workers.
• Countries are taking on debt to rollout COVID-19 vaccinations. 86% of the funding in this analysis is in the form of loans. That gives countries debt that may weaken future pandemic preparedness rather than reinforcing health systems.
• All funders should adopt the World Bank’s commitments to investments in gender equality. 90% of the agreements in this analysis refer to gender inequality and many make corresponding investments—like requiring that 60% of vaccine leadership positions are women—to overcome these barriers. Earmarking exact funds going to advance gender equality would provide further transparency. Nevertheless, this consistent and concrete commitment is commendable, and all actors should strive to replicate it.
Read More...