1. Strengths and Challenges in the
Implementation of Women’s Justice and
Empowerment Initiative (WJEI)
Evaluation Team:
Suzanne Maman, PhD
Shelah Bloom, ScD
Elly Arnoff, MPH
Lauren Hill

2. Presentation Summary
 Introduction
 Gender-Based Violence Context
 Project Implementation
 Evaluation Methods
 Findings & Recommendations for Kenya and
Benin
 Overarching Recommendations
 Next Steps

3. Introduction
WJEI
 3 year program in Kenya,
Benin, South Africa & Zambia
 Objectives
1) Awareness-raising
2) Legal system support
3) Care & support of survivors
Evaluation Aims
 Assess WJEI strategies in
each country
 Identify best practices &
lessons learned across
countries
 Recommendations for
replication

4. Before the Initiative: Gender-
Based Violence Context
South
Africa
Zambia Kenya Benin
Programmatic
• Existing
national
network of
one-stop shop
centers
• Extensive
research on
GBV
• Existing one-
stop models
from pilot
project
• Existing small-
scale efforts by
local
organizations
focusing on
awareness
• Very few prior
GBV programs
and none on a
national level
• Limited
research on
GBV
Legal
• Rape and
marital rape
illegal
• Sexual
harassment
illegal
• Extra-marital
rape illegal,
but not other
types of GBV
• Sexual assault
illegal, but not
marital rape
• Domestic
violence illegal
• Rape illegal, but
with weak
enforcement

5. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

6. South Africa
Thuthuzela Care Centers
 Implementing partner: RTI
International
 Dates: 2009-2012
 Geographic scope: national, 9
provinces
Activities
 Awareness-raising
 Focus on promoting TCC services
 Legal system support
 Strengthening the dedicated Sexual
Offences Courts and building capacity
of the judiciary
 Care & support of survivors
 Technical assistance to 23 new and
existing TCC sites
 Grants to NGOs for psychosocial
services and follow-up support

7. Zambia
A Safer Zambia (ASAZA)
 Implementing partners: CARE
International & World Vision
Zambia
 Dates: 2008 – 2011
 Geographic scope: 7 districts in 5
out of 9 provinces
Activities
 Awareness-raising
 Mass media campaign
 Training & community events
 Legal system support
 Promoted GBV law
 Trained paralegals
 Care & support of
survivors
 Established coordinated
response centers (CRCs)

8. Kenya
Sita Kimya (we will not be silent)
 Implementing partner: Pathfinder
International & Population
Services International
 Dates: 2009 - 2011
 Geographic scope: Kibera slum in
Nairobi
Activities
 Awareness-raising
 Community awareness sessions
in Kibera
 Promoted locally-branded slogan
 Legal system support
 Sensitized police
 Gender-desk at local police station
 Care & support of survivors
 Community-based services
 Strengthening health services at
Kenyatta National Hospital’s GBV
Recovery Centre

9. Benin
EMPOWER
 Implementing partner: CARE
International
 Dates: 2007 – 2012
 Geographical scope: national with
focus in 56 provinces
Activities
 Awareness-raising
 Mass media campaigns
 Sensitization sessions
 Legal system support
 Advocacy trainings
 Promoted GBV law
 Care & support of survivors
 Referral mechanism

10. EVALUATION METHODS

11. Key Research Questions
 Broader environment of program
implementation
 Key project design decisions
 Strengths and challenges
 Perceived change in gender norms and
attitudes
 Sustainability

12. Field Data Collection Methods
 Developed semi-structured
interview guide
 Trained research assistants
 Conducted face-to-face in-
depth interviews & focus
group discussions
 Interviews/discussions were
audiotaped, transcribed and
translated for analysis

13. In-depth Interviews (IDIs) & Focus
Group Discussions (FGDs)
 Respondent types
 Funder
 Host government partners
 NGO & CBO implementing
partners
 Community-based project
agents
 Program beneficiaries
 Service providers
 Judicial system/police
 Non-WJEI stakeholders

14. Qualitative Analyses
 Read for content
 Topical and thematic coding
 Double-coding
 Identify emerging themes
 Summarize data
 Interpretation

15. FINDINGS &
RECOMMENDATIONS

16. KIBERA, KENYA

17. Findings: Awareness-raising
Strengths
 Strong communications
approach
 Facilitator training
 Audience-tailored messaging
 Branded messaging
 Locally produced film
 High community
engagement
 Mobilization
 Ownership
 Capacity-building
 Perceived changes
 Knowledge and awareness
 Attitudinal & behavioral
changes
 Breaking the silence

18. Findings: Awareness-raising
Challenges
 Facilitation difficulties
 Multi-sectoral knowledge base
 Compensation
 Venues
 Limited branding materials
 Messages not always
acceptable
 Some schools
 Dissenting opinions & attitudes
 Limited population reach
 Limited time-frame
 Male engagement
 Community turnover

19. Recommendations:
Awareness-raising
 Effective messaging around GBV
 Tailored to specific audiences
 Raise rights-consciousness
 Offer points of services
 Locally-branded slogan
 Target entire population
 Contextually specific approaches to reach men
 Multi-media strategies
 Support community-based project agents
 Follow up sessions with participants

20. Findings: Legal Strengths
 Community holding
perpetrators
accountable
 Judiciary
 Adjudication of child
sexual abuse cases
increasing
 Police
 Gender desk helped
reduce bribery/corruption
 Local leadership
 High involvement
 Increased support

21. Findings: Legal Challenges
 Judicial barriers
 Lengthy process
 Witnesses
 Cases dropped
 Community-handled justice
 Police difficulties
 Lack of coordination with
health sector
 Perception as unsupportive
 Staff shortages and turnover
 Lack of coordination with
DOJ’s legal activities
 Marital rape not in GBV law
 Perceived government
corruption

22. Recommendations: Legal
• Identify gaps in national GBV and gender-related
policies
• Promote coordination of health and legal
authorities
• Strengthen the evidence chain for GBV cases
• Support advocacy efforts of local change agents
• Support community-based legal assistance

23. Findings: Care & Support
Strengths
 Health services
 Increased hospital support
 Increased hospital staff
sensitization
 Equipment & personnel
support
 Increase in cases handled
 Community-based
services
 Capacity building
 Effective case management
 Sustainability

24. Findings: Care & Support
Challenges
 Health services
 Incomplete one-stop shop
model
 Personnel issues
 Cost of services
 Project provider selection
 Community-based
services
 Lack of resources
 Community perception of
violence as a domestic
issue
 Case follow-through

25. Recommendations: Care &
Support
 Better alliances with
existing health service
providers
 Support sustainable
community-based
systems of care and
support

26. BENIN

27. Findings: Awareness-raising
Strengths
 High awareness
coverage
 Diverse communication
strategies
 High awareness of the project
and GBV laws
 Survivors aware of reporting
and support resources
 Effective messaging
 Focus on community benefits of
preventing GBV
 Happy families and households
 Economic benefits of girls’ education
 Rights emphasis
 Positive rather than punitive
message

28. Findings: Awareness-raising
Challenges
 Did not engage all
populations
 Isolated communities
 Men and boys
 Cultural barriers
 Incongruence between
messages and community
values
 Local leader opposition
 Lack of facilitator
compensation

29. Recommendations:
Awareness-raising
 Consider norms around family structure and divorce
which the project may affect
 Project implications for stability of traditional family structure
 Norms around formal law enforcement and attitudes toward forces of law
 Consider how to engage men not only as project agents
but as beneficiaries as well
 Make discussion of gender more inclusive (i.e. not just women’s rights)
 Promote male-positive messages

30. Findings: Legal Strengths
 Law seen as milestone in GBV legislation
 Unanimously voted in by legislators
 High awareness and appreciation of the new GBV
law

31. Findings: Legal Challenges
 Police difficulties
 View that police deal with perpetrators
heavy-handedly
 Case processing can be very slow
 Corruption
 Survivors discouraged and drop cases
 Cultural barriers to law
enforcement
 Persistent informal reconciliation
 Views that incarceration disrupts family
stability

32. Recommendations: Legal
 Consider multiple primary points of contact to
access the legal system
 Levels of comfort with different actors may vary by
context
 Promote norm-transformative communication
activities to encourage the acceptability and
enforcement of new laws

33. Findings: Care & Support
Strengths
 Strengthening of existing government services
through provider capacity building
 Survivors aware of services and points of contact
 Trust in project agents as survivor advocates

34. Findings: Care & Support
Challenges
 Service coordination
issues
 Lack of reliable communication
channels
 Lack of clear referral mechanism
 Gaps in survivor support
 Referrals a barrier to continued
care
 Medical certificates only available
in larger towns
 No housing for displaced survivors
 Lack of women’s
economic empowerment

35. Recommendations: Care &
Support
 Provide for comprehensive care and support of survivors
to promote case reporting and improve health
 Lodging
 Support of survivor and women’s financial autonomy
 Direct funds for costs of care
 Consider access to services in remote areas
 Ensure close integration of health and complementary
services
 Make medical certificates accessible at a more local level

36. OVERARCHING
RECOMMENDATIONS

37. Overarching Recommendations
Awareness-raising
Audience-tailored messages for entire population with emphasis
on men and boys
Legal
Address bottlenecks in medical and legal services essential for
GBV justice
Care & support
Promote locally-based systems of comprehensive care and
support

38. NEXT STEPS

39. Final Report
 Rich descriptions from field research
in Kenya & Benin
 Project Implementation
 Case reporting issues
 Community perceptions on GBV
 Analysis on projects South Africa & Zambia
 Desk review & interviews with partners

40. Thank you!

41. MEASURE Evaluation is a MEASURE project funded by the
U.S. Agency for International Development and implemented by
the Carolina Population Center at the University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill in partnership with Futures Group International,
ICF Macro, John Snow, Inc., Management Sciences for Health,
and Tulane University. Views expressed in this presentation do not
necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the U.S. Government.
MEASURE Evaluation is the USAID Global Health Bureau's
primary vehicle for supporting improvements in monitoring and
evaluation in population, health and nutrition worldwide.