Annex 7 – Country Report Serbia By Dragiša Mijačić and Jim Newkirk  This report comprises one of the five country reports which together make up the detailedcommentary from the Evaluation of Sida’s Support to the Western Balkans 2005‐2009. Thereportdescribes the situation in Serbia at thebeginningof theperiod inquestion, changesofimportance during the five years and the situation currently, including comments andreflections fromcivilsocietyandotheractorsonthesituationat thetimeof theevaluation, inJune 2010. The report then discusses the approach and work of each of the frameworkorganisationswhohavebeen responsible forproviding Sida’s civil society supportduring theperiod. This discussion follows 5 key development assistance criteria of relevance, efficiency,effectiveness,impactandsustainability.ThereportthenlooksatthedeliverymodalityforSida’sassistance inSerbia–theapproachofusingthree,SwedishNGOsas implementingpartnerstodetermine program priorities (within the Sida strategic framework) and to determine grantrecipientsandprocesses–andcommentsontheefficacyof theapproach.ThethreeNGOsaretheOlofPalmeInternationalCentre,CivilRightsDefendersandKvinnatillKvinna. The fieldworkof theevaluation included fivedaysof interviewsand focusgroupdiscussionswith representatives of framework organisations, cooperation partners of frameworkorganisations,boundarypartners(people/organisationswithadirectorindirectrelationshiptofunded organisations/ projects) and external experts/ observers. The complete list ofintervieweesisfoundattheendofthereport.Thereportistobetreatedasoneoffivecountryinputstotheoverallreport.Conclusionscanbedrawnmainlyontheoveralllevelasthecountrysample was very limited (only two or three organisations per FO) and not completelyrepresentative of the FO intervention in Serbia. The conclusions and recommendations in thecountryreportaretobeseenaspointsforfurtherinvestigation.

1. Context Analysis  1.1 Governance and democracy.  Serbiangovernance throughout thisperiod is a study inweak (albeit stable) government andlack of politicalwill and capacity – in parliament and in government institutions. ‘In Serbia anumberoflaws,inaccordancewithEuropeanstandards,havebeenpassedduringthelastthreeyears.Thegovernmenthas,however,shownnowilltoactuallyimplementtheselaws.’1‘SerbianowbelongstothisgroupofyoungdemocraciesinSouthEasternEurope.Ithasabsolveda series of free and fair elections, alternated governments, established other basic pillars ofdemocratic governance andopenedup its economy.While the recent financial crisiswill alsoshow its effects in Serbia, it will not change the fact that foreign direct investment has beenboomingand theeconomyexpandingover the lastyears.TheSerbiaof2008 isverydifferentfrom theSerbiaof themid‐1990s.However,despiteall the changes inpolitical, economicandsociallife,therearestillanumberoflegaciesoftheMilosevicerathathauntthecountryasitisstrugglingtobecomeastableandprosperousdemocracy.’2According toFreedomHouse,Serbia isconsideredas free in termsofcivilandpolitical rights,with a rating of 2.5 in 20093 just like in 2008.’4 As with other countries in the region,participationlevelsinthedemocraticprocessareworryinglylow.The2003electioncouldnot

1 CRD Plan of Action Western Balkans 04-06 2 Ex-post Evaluation of the Palme Center’s Serbia Programme – 12 November 2008 3 The rating is based on a scale where the averages are calculated in the following manner: 1.0 to 2.5 is considered as Free, 3.0 to 5.0 as Partly Free, and 5.5 to 7.0 Not Free. 4 CRD Update Plan of Action 2010

becalledduethelackofturn‐out.Whilethishasnothappenedagainsince,voterparticipationremainslow,withhighlevelsofcynicismanddistrustprevalent.Onecriticalcurrentpriorityrelatestothepublicadministration.‘Serbiahasgoodcapacityintheareaofpublicadministration.Howeverthepaceofpublicadministrationreformhasbeenslow.Theactionplan for implementationof thepublicadministrationreformstrategyhasyet tobeadopted. Themerit system provided for in the amended Law on Civil Servants has not beenimplemented. Transparency in the public administration has to be improved and greaterpriority should be given to fighting corruption and effectively supporting the work ofindependentbodies.’5Asecondcurrentpriorityisinrelationtotheruleoflaw–notdevelopingnew laws appropriate to a European nation – but to actually implement the new lawswhichhavealreadybeendevelopedandpassed. 1.2 Gender equality Serbiancivilsocietyhasalongandstronghistoryofactivismandimpact,givenimpetusduringthelaterpartoftheMilosevicerawhentheNGOcommunitywasaverysignificantplayerinthemovement which eventually drove the Milosevic regime from office. This strong historyhoweverhasnotleadsubsequentlytoastructuralchangeofmoresignificancethaninSerbia’sBalkanneighbours.WhileontheonehandtheLawonGenderEqualityandtherelatedNationalStrategyhavebeenformallyacceptedbytheParliament,andtheNationalActionPlanforGenderEqualityhasbeencompletedandiscurrentlygoingthroughtheprocessofformalacceptancebyGovernment, the equal reality is that ‘Without changes on the political level, few long‐termimprovements on gender equality and women’s situation in the society will occur.’6 ‘Thenationalstrategytoimprovethepositionofwomenandpromotegenderequalitywasadoptedin February 2009, identifying the six most critical areas: (1) improvement of the economicposition,(2)health,(3)representationinpublicandpoliticallife,(4)equalityineducation,(5)suppression of violence and (6) elimination of gender stereotypes in the media. Legislationprohibitsdiscriminationbasedongender,althoughSerbiademonstratesacapacity toprepareandpass legislationbutnotthecapacityto implement it.Thelevelofviolenceagainstwomen,includingdomesticviolenceremainsaseriousconcern.’7Capacity building within the Gender Equality Directorate remains a key issue, as does theeffectiveness of the relationship and cooperation between the Directorate and civil societyorganisations.Thereisastrongviewwithinthewomen’smovementthattoomuchemphasisisnow placed on ‘gender equality’ and gender mainstreaming (referred to as ‘the gendermachinery’) to thedetrimentof ‘women’shuman rights’, and that this imbalance is drivenbydonorpriorities,asopposedtoprioritiesasseenlocally,andthatthelossofastronglinkbacktograssroots women’s organisations in the design of EU‐funded grant programs means theprogramsloseimpactinrelationtowomen’shumanrights.1.3 Human Rights In 2004 it was the view of Civil Rights Defenders thatmany ‘media outlets display a lack ofknowledgeon localandinternationalcodeofethics,andoperatewith inadequateprofessionaladvice.Mostindividualjournalistsseemtobeunawareoftheresponsibilitytheycarryforwhattheywrite,andundervaluetheimportanceofmediainthedevelopmentofahealthydemocraticsociety.’8 ‘TheOSCEmissioninSerbiaandMontenegroholdstheupperhandinwhatconcernsinitiativesfurtheringtheruleoflaw.Theirworkismostlyaimedatjudicialreform,penalreform,andanti‐corruptionactivitiesandatestablishinganOmbudsmaninstitution.’9There ‘aresome

5 http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2009/sr_rapport_2009_en.pdf 6 KtK Annual Request 2005 7 http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2009/sr_rapport_2009_en.pdf 8 CRD Plan of Action Western Balkans 04-06 9 CRD Plan of Action Western Balkans 04-06

breachesofespeciallyminorityrights.Romapeopleinbothofthememberstatesareconstantlydiscriminatedagainstwithoutarealchanceforeducationandpersonalimprovement.Morethana fewcasesof traffickingofhumanbeingsbearswitness to the fact thatnoteverybody in thecountryhavetheirrightsprotected.Socialandeconomicalrightsareconstantlyoppressedinthecountrybutthatiscloselyconnectedwiththepooreconomicalsituationinthecountryasintheregionasawhole.PeoplethatbelongtoGBLTgroupshavenochanceofexpressingthemselvesfreely.OtherhumanrightsinSerbiainMontenegroaremostlyprotectedbutthereisstillalotofspaceforimprovement.’10Sincethattimethe‘mainprobleminregardtotheroleofcivilsocietyinSerbiaisthefactthatthewatchdogandmonitoringactivitieswerenot followedbyproper follow‐upactivities thatwill contribute to the improvement of situations in different areas. The majority of theconductedresearchandanalyseswerepresentedwithoutreactionsofrelevantdutyholders.’11‘There has been progress in the reform of the judicial system, which is a key priority of theEuropeanPartnership.Thelegalandinstitutionalframeworkfortheobservanceofhumanrightsisinplaceandsomeprogresshasbeenmadeonimprovingobservanceofinternationalhumanrights law. The newMinistry for Human andMinority Rights is playing an important role inpromoting such rights. Further efforts are needed to increase understanding of relevantinternational standards in this area. New anti‐discrimination legislation introduced a ruleprohibiting hate speech. However, in spite of the legal framework, incidents involving hatespeech,threatsandphysicalattacksagainstjournalists,humanrightsdefendersandthelesbian,gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) population have not been properly investigated andperpetratorshavenotbeenbroughttojustice.’12Themajor issuesatthemomentare increasingpublicawarenessandincreasingpublicdebateon issues of ‘discrimination, transitional justice, corruption, lustration, judiciary, violence,relations between state and church’.13 ‘More concerted efforts need to be made to raiseawareness of the situation of vulnerable groups of children and ensure that their rights areprotected. Inpractice, there isongoingdiscrimination, inparticularagainstvulnerablegroupssuch as Roma, persons with disabilities, and the LGBT population. All these groups arefrequently victims of intolerance and hate speech. There is little support for victims ofdiscrimination and there is a need for greater commitment on the part of all involved – thepolice, the prosecution service and the judiciary – to make sure that the legislation is fullyenforced.’14 1.4 Civil society role and capacity In 2004, Serbia was ‘the last country in the region that has not established a new legalframeworkforNGOs.WhiledifferentversionsofanNGOlawhavebeencirculatingoverthelastyears and were repeatedly passed by the council of ministers, the parliament has not yetadopted sucha law. Serbia thus relies still on laws fromsocialist times,whichare clearlynotadequate.’15Sincethentherewere‘improvementswithintheSerbianadministrationtocooperatewithcivilsociety.However,cooperationremainsmainlyadhocandselective.NGOs,inparticularhumanrights defenders, were once again victims of threats and verbal abuse for holding divergingviewson issuessuchasKosovoandthe fightagainst impunity.’16The ‘sectorasawholehasa

10 OPC Application 2005 11 CRD Serbia Update Plan of Action 2010 12 http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2009/sr_rapport_2009_en.pdf 13 CRD Serbia Update Plan of Action 2010 14 http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2009/sr_rapport_2009_en.pdf 15 Ex-post Evaluation of the Palme Center’s Serbia Programme – 12 November 2008 16 http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2009/sr_rapport_2009_en.pdf

substantial image problem. Serbian civil society is still largely lacking membership and stillsuffers from a negative image in the public opinion. The Pontis foundation in its analysis ofSerbian civil society points out that there are components of Serbian civil society that havebecome isolatedandare seenas traitorsbya largepartof thepopulationand that thewholecivilsocietysectorisaffectedbythis.’17‘Therearefourmajorproblemsforcivilsocietyandtheseincludethenon‐existenceofalegalframeworkforcivilsociety,lackofstablefinancialresources,citizens’lackingconfidenceinthecivilsocietyandtheavoidanceofdirectpoliticalactivities.Thelatter problem has led to civil society organisations only involving themselves in “expert”activitiesratherthanintherealissuesthatimpactoncitizens’everydaylife.After almost ten years of draft proposals andunsuccessful attempts, the LawonAssociationswasadoptedinJuly2009intheSerbianParliamentandcameintoforceon22October.Althoughthisisjustafirstofseveralnecessarystepstowardscreatingbettergroundfortheworkofcivilsocietyitisalsoagoodsignthatthestateisfinallyreadytoestablishbettercommunicationwithcitizens’ associations. ‘However, in other areas of law, particularly those concerning tax andfiscalmeasures, laws continue to offer no specific allowances for not‐for‐profit organisations,treatingCSOsasiftheweresmallormediumsizedprofit‐makingenterprises.’18Creatingasituationwherecitizensareabletoinfluencethelocalpoliticalagendawhenelectedrepresentatives are more accountable both involves monitoring of political representatives,linkingthemwithrelevant(organised) interests insocietyaswellas improvingthe legitimacyandmobilisingpotentialofSerbiancivilsociety.’19ThereisarecenthistoryofCSOparticipationin the work of Government in Serbia. Good examples of civil society participation in andinfluenceondiscussionswithandwithinGovernment include thePovertyReductionStrategy,the National Youth Strategy, the Social Protection Development Strategy, the Law onProfessionalRehabilitationandEmploymentofPersonsWithDisabilities.GovernmentsupportforNGOsandpublicinvolvementincivilsocietyhasincreased‐accordingtoUSAID’s 2008NGO Sustainability Index, Serbia ‘saw an improvement as amore stable andresponsivegovernmentassumedofficeinthesecondhalfoftheyear,creatingamoresupportiveenvironmentforNGOcampaignstopromoteSerbia’sintegrationwiththeEU.’20TACSOreportsthat,basedon2007figures,‘officialgovernmentspendingoncivilsocietyfromtheStateBudgettotalled60millionEUR,havingrisenroughlyfourfoldsince2003.RealsupportofCSOsislikely,however, to be considerably lower, as an unknown proportion of the 60 million was alsoallocated to the support of sports and religious organizations, as well as political parties.’21TACSOalso reports that anumberofMinistries (specifically theMinistryofYouthandSportsandtheMinistryofLabourandSocialPolicy)areactivelysupportingCSOs.According to TACSO, the ‘main CSO database of CSOs active in Serbia,maintained by CRNPS,indicates that, countrywide, civil society retains a traditional focus on social and communityservices and charitable activities. The dominant means of action in these areas is servicedelivery, particularly in the areas of social protection, health, education and the law.’ Thestructureof fundingdictatesthatallbutthefewprofessionalNGOswhichhaveobtainedlong‐term institutional funding (usually from an international donor) and those community‐basedself‐help groups, whose activities do not require material investments, are more or lessdependentonshort‐termprojectfunding.’22

17 OPC Serbia Assessment 2008 18 Serbia Needs Assessment Report – Technical Assistance to Civil Society Organisations in the IPA Countries TACSO, SIPU International, Sweden, 2010 19 OPC Serbia Program 2010-2011 20 http://www.usaid.gov/locations/europe_eurasia/dem_gov/ngoindex/2008/complete_document.pdf 21 Serbia Needs Assessment Report – Technical Assistance to Civil Society Organisations in the IPA Countries TACSO, SIPU International, Sweden, 2010 22 Serbia Needs Assessment Report – Technical Assistance to Civil Society Organisations in the IPA Countries TACSO, SIPU International, Sweden, 2010

Prioritiesatthemomentincludetheinvolvementofcitizensinpublicdebateonpoliticalissues,CSO participation in the EU integration process, increasing accountability of politicalrepresentativesandthestructuralrelationshipbetweengovernmentandtheNGOcommunity.The Government has recently established the Government Office for Cooperation with CivilSociety,butitisyettobefunded,staffedortooperate.AccordingtoTACSO,importantgapsexistincivilsocietyactivity inSerbia intheareasofoversightofpublicadministration, theworkofparliamentariansandlocalassemblies,monitoringpoliticalprocesses,watchdogactivitiesintheimplementationof lawsandstandardsofservicedelivery,overseeingbudgetprocessesand intheallocationofpublicresourcesandthefightagainstcorruption.231.5 Sida priority areas according to strategy FollowingareSweden'sobjectivesforthesector:

• Democratic governance:Effectiveanddemocraticnationalgovernmentadministrationintheserviceofcitizensatboththecentralandlocallevel.Supportwillbegivenforadministrativereforms,developmentassistancecoordination,decentralisationandstatistics.Swedishinitiativeswillsupportincreasedcitizenparticipationin,andinfluenceon,nationalgovernmentadministration.Projectstocompilegender‐disaggregatedstatistics,aswellasinitiativesagainstcorruptioninnationalgovernmentadministration,shouldbesupported.Supportwillbechannelledthroughafewministriesinordertostrengthentheircapacityandincreasedemocraticdialoguebetweenthestateandcitizens.SupportshouldbeavailabletoimprovetheSerbianadministration'sabilitytoreceiveadditionalfundingfromtheInstrumentforPre‐AccessionAssistance(IPA).SupportinbuildingupaDecentralisedImplementationSystem(DIS)shouldbeoffered.

• Human rights and gender equality:Greaterrespectfor,andcompliancewith,humanrightsandgenderequality.Supportforhumanrightswillincludebothcooperationwithstateinstitutionsandstrengtheningofcivilsociety.Theinteractionamongtheseactorswillalsobestrengthened.Swedishinitiativeswillsupportactivecivilsocietythatenablescitizenparticipationin,andinfluenceon,thedevelopmentofsociety.Thefocuswillbeoncivilandpoliticalrights,particularlygenderequalityandtheparticipationofminoritiesinthedevelopmentofsociety.Sweden,whichhasaleadingrolewithrespecttogenderequality,willsupporttheimplementationofSerbia'sgenderequalitystrategythroughtheSerbianGenderEqualityDirectorate.SpecialsupportwillbegivenforimplementationofnationalactionplansforRomarights.Theroleofcivilsocietyinmonitoringgenderequalityandotherhumanrights–includingthoseofchildren,theLGBTcommunityandminorities,particularlytheRoma–willbestrengthenedbysupportthroughSwedishNGOsandotherorganisations.

2. Kvinna till Kvinna  2.1 Background and History ThemandateofKvinnatillKvinnais:

• Tocarryoutprojectsinareasofwarandconflictwhichpromotewomen’sself‐relianceandself‐esteem,andwomen’spsychosocialand/orphysicalhealth,orwhichcontributetopromotingwomen’sparticipationinthedevelopmentofademocraticciviliansociety.

• Topromotestudiesandresearchconcerningtheeffectsofwarandarmedconflictsforwomen.

• Topublicizefactsandinformationconcerningtheeffectsofwar,andtoraisepublicopinioninfavourofthepeacefulsolutionofconflictsusingnon‐militarymethods.

23 Serbia Needs Assessment Report – Technical Assistance to Civil Society Organisations in the IPA Countries TACSO, SIPU International, Sweden, 2010

KvinnatillKvinna(KtK)hasworkedsince1993intheBalkans,andinSerbiasince1994,largelybecause it sees change as a long‐term and demanding process. KtK established a permanentpresenceinSerbiain2001,wheretheprogramiscarriedoutbytwo,full‐timecoordinators,whohave also been responsible for KtK’swork inMontenegro. They are supported by a full‐timecoordinatorinStockholm.KtK approaches its work from the perspective of the two‐way development of trust andunderstandingbetween theorganisation’s field staff andpartnerorganisations.KtK insists oninternational(Swedish)staffasfieldrepresentatives,toensuretheneutralityoftheirapproach.Theyemphasiseadeepunderstandingofthecountryinwhichtheywork,aswellastheregion,particularlyintermsoftheconditionsofwomen.TheKtKapproachislong‐term,andtheyfundpartner organisations not just for a number of years but alsowith core funding, allowing thepartnersnotjusttheabilitytogrowandstrengthenwithoutconstantfundingissues,butalsotoallow partners to emphasise their own agendas. Further, networking, both nationally andregionallyisaparticularfocusofKtK’sapproachtoitdevelopmentwork,asnetworkingisseenas ‘an important method for sharing experiences, increasing the impact of advocacy andlobbying,andmakingpeoplemeetacrossbordersofethnicityornationality.’AccordingtoKtK’s2008–2011ProgramProposalforSerbia,KtK’sprogramobjectivesforthisperiod,specifiedinsix,keyareas. Women in the peace process 

Women’sinterestsaretakenintoaccounttoagreaterextentinthepost‐warrebuildingprocess,exconstitution,reformofthesecuritysectoretc.

Womendemandtheirrighttoparticipateinpeacebuildingandstatusnegotiations.

Theroleofwomenintheanti‐warmovementbecomesmorevisibleandvalued. Women’s organising 

Astrongerandmorevisiblewomen’smovement.

Animprovedconstructiveandcriticaldialoguebetweenstateinstitutionsandwomen’sorganisations.

Improvedknowledgeofandcooperationwithwomen’smovementswithintheEU.

Increasedunderstandingfortheroleandfunctionofcivilsociety. Women’s participation in decision making processes 

Increasednumberofpoliticallyactivewomen.

Improvedandsystematicco‐operationbetweenwomen’sorganisationsand(women)politicians.

Improvedconstructiveandcriticaldialoguebetweenwomen’sorganisationsandrelevantEUbodies.

Changedattitudestowardswomenpoliticiansfromthegeneralpublic. Women’s human rights 

Discriminationagainstwomen(esp.Romawomenandlesbianwomen)isseenassevere.

Morewomenareawareoftheirrightsanddaretodemandthem.

Genderequalitylawsareadopted,followedandgendermechanismsareinplace.

Itispossibletocriticisethestatewithoutriskingone’spersonalsecurity.

 Women’s work against violence and sexual abuse 

Deepenedknowledgeofmen’sviolenceagainstwomenamongrelevantinstitutionsandincreasedprofessionalismamongrelevantinstitutions.

Men’sviolenceagainstwomenisseenbythegeneralpublicasacrimeandnotasaprivateproblem.

Theissueofmen’sviolenceagainstwomenisestablishedonthepoliticalagenda. Women’s physical and mental health 

Raisedawarenessamongwomen’sorganisationsonwomen’ssexualandreproductivehealthandrightsandreadinessofwomen’sorganisationstomeetconservatism.

Younggirlshaveaccesstoinformationonsexualandreproductiverights.24ThecurrentKtKprograminSerbia(6millionSEKinthecurrentyear)hasprovidedsupporttothefollowing:Organisation  Location  Project Supported  AutonomousWomenCenter(AWC),Belgrade‐Network Belgrade NationalnetworkofSOSHotlinesandsheltersAutonomousWomenCenter(AWC),Belgrade Belgrade

NationalSOShelp‐lineandcounsellingserviceforvictimsofviolence

Awin,Belgrade Belgrade

NetworkingandcapacitybuildingofotherruralwomengroupsandorganisationsinSerbia

Fenomena,Kraljevo KraljevoCounsellingforwomenvictimsofviolence,ICTandsmallbusinesscentreforwomen

NemezaNezavisnostWomen’sSection,Belgrade Belgrade

SOSHotlineforwomensufferingfromdiscriminationatwork

NLO,NoviSadLesbianOrganisation Novisad

VisibilityofLGBTissues,supporttoLGBTactivists,reachingouttoyoungpeople

Sandglass,Krusevac Krusevac

Women’sInformationandEducationCentre,promotinggenderequalitylocallyandregionally

Shelter,Belgrade Belgrade Shelterforwomenvictimsofviolence

Women’sAlternative,Sombor Sombor

SOS‐helplineandprofessionalpsychologicalandmedicalCounselling,genderawarenesstrainingandlecturesinschoolsonreproductivehealth

Women’sCentre,Leskovac LeskovacSOShelplineandcounselling,activeinWomeninBlacknetwork

WomenforPeace,Leskovac LekovacSOSHelplineandcounselling,institutionaleducationandcooperation,peaceadvocacy

Women’sSpace,Nis Nis

NetworkingactivitiesbetweenRomawomenactivistsinsouthSerbia,encouragepoliticalparticipation

ZenenaDelu,Belgrade Belgrade

Antiburn‐outprogramforactivistsfightingviolenceagainstwomen,Theatreactivism,WomenandICT

WomeninBlack,from2006 BelgradeTohighlightwarcrimes,patriarchal,nationalistic,fascistictrendsinmedia

24KtKProgramProposalSerbia2008‐2011

WINDOC Belgrade GenderequalityinandthroughthemediaInassessingtheworkofKtKinSerbia,fieldvisitstookplaceinKruševacandNiš,withvisitstoPesčanik (Sandglass) in Kruševac and Ženski Prostor (Women’s Space) inNiš. Ženski ProstordescribesitselfasaRomafeministorganisation,andwhileitparticipatesinwidernetworks,itsfocus is on Roma women and Roma women’s networks. Pesčanik focuses on its ownorganisationaldevelopmentandcapacityinorderto(andaswellas)theparticipationofwomenin local politics and the development of and participation in national and regional women’snetworks. 2.2 Outcome (impact) Thework of KtK can be said to have impacted on Serbia in some areas of its strategic focus,althoughnotallofitsfocusareashavebeenaddressedinitscurrentprogramsupport.Ofthe6programareasand20delineatedprogramobjectives,impactcanbedescribedintwoprogramareas,addressing4oftheprogramobjectives: Women’s organising 

Astrongerandmorevisiblewomen’smovement. Women’s participation in decision making processes 

Increasednumberofpoliticallyactivewomen.

Improvedandsystematicco‐operationbetweenwomen’sorganisationsand(women)politicians.

Changedattitudestowardswomenpoliticiansfromthegeneralpublic.Theworkdonewithwomen’sorganisations,particularlyruralandRomaorganisations,andthework done in encouraging and assisting the increase of women’s participation in decision‐makingprocesses(particularlylocalpolitics)issignificant.ThequalityoftheworkdonebyKtKwith Pesčanik (Sandglass) and by Pesčanik with local women politicians, and the obviousstrengthofPesčanikasanorganisationpointstotheimportanceandimpactofKtKsapproachandintervention.Against the three key criteria of the evaluation, sustainable impact has been achieved to acertainextent. Mobilise trust, support and resources  The working relationship between partner organisations and Municipalities, other women’sgroupsandnationalnetworkshasimprovedandbeenstrengthened.Partnersaremorevisiblelocally,andhavehigherlevelsofsupportfromandinvolvementinlocal(andnational)activitiesandinitiatives.Interviewedorganisationsdiscussedtheincreaseintheirvisibilityasimportanttowidercommunitytrustandsupport–includingbeingaskedtoundertakeresearchstudies.Aswell, organisational capacity in mobilising is notable, particularly the mobilisation of targetgroups toadvocate forchange.Responses toquestionnaires indicateasignificantcontributionfromKtKinempoweringindividualsandorganisationstomobiliseandtakeaction,includinganumberofsocialandpolicychangesasaresultofthesupportprovided. Build alliances  Allianceswhichwerepointedtointhefieldinterviewsincludednationalwomen’snetworks,thenationalRomawomen’snetwork,theNetworkforEuropeanWomen’sLobby.Allorganisationsbenefit fromtheirnetworkinvolvement, includingthroughinformationsharing,educationandsupporttolobbyingandadvocacyactivities,whichhavelessimpactifdoneonanorganisationby organisation basis. One boundary partner described the Roma Women’s Network as ‘the

most important work’ because of its impact on local and national strategy development.Pesčanik created a local NGO Forum, with others, and participates in two national women’snetworks.Responsestoquestionnairesallindicateasignificantimprovementinthecooperationof partners with other NGOs, and indeed this cooperation occurs locally, nationally andregionally. Interact with and influence authorities ŽenskiProstorwasasked,andprovided,theShadowReporttoCEDAWforSerbia,whereintheydescribed their research on 250 cases of the abuse of women’s human rights and makerecommendations in theareasofhealth, education, violenceagainstwomenandemployment.Subsequently,andthroughtheRomaWomen’sNetwork,theyareapproachedbyauthoritiestoaddress Romawomen’s human rights and violence against women. There used to be 3 localwomen councillors in Kruševac, from a total of 70. The number is now 24, with the changeattributedtotheworkofPesčanik.ThePresidentofthelocalselfgovernmentisalsoawoman,andamemberofPesčanik. ‘Ithasbeena long road,but theyaremuchmore readynow’.KtKparticipationwithŽenskiProstorintheNationalNetworkandtheworkdonebytheNetworkonthe political participation of Roma women in the National Roma Council, may yet see realparticipationfromRomawomenintheCouncil. 2.3 Relevance KtKhasmaintainedastronglinktograssrootswomen’sorganisationsaswellaswithinnationalnetworks, and with these contacts and links has been able to develop a well‐structuredunderstanding of issues and priorities for women in Serbia. Their response, the focus onviolence against women, networking, the participation of women in political processes, andorganisational development and sustainability was deemed appropriate by partners andexternalobservers.AsignificantfocushasbeenplacedonthenationalSOSHotlinenetworkandlocalSOSHotlines,aswellas relatedwomen’s shelters.Thisemphasis,directlyand indirectly,hasincreasedtheeffectivenessoftheSOSHotlinesnationally.Theselectionofpartnerorganisationsisdeemedrelevantandappropriate.Thereisafocusonruralwomen’sorganisations,Romaorganisationsandnationalnetworks.KtK’sworkrespondsdirectlytoSida’sSerbianpriorities,withanemphasison(women’s)humanrightsandgenderequality.KtK’s program objectives were established by KtK itself, ‘based on our and our partners’analysesofthecurrentsituationandneeds’,andintheviewoftheevaluationreflecttheSerbiansituationwithregardsgenderequality,gender‐basedviolenceandtheneedsanddirectionsofthe women’s movement. The program design is relevant and appropriate, and the activitiesundertakenalsoarerelevant.Asdiscussedabove,theprogramfailsintermsofrelevanceinnotaddressingawidercomponentoftheseprogramobjectives;infocussingontoonarrowarangeoftheseobjectives. 2.4 Effectiveness KtK is effective in its work in strengthening the women’s movement, in increasing theparticipation of women in the decision‐making process and in addressing issues related toviolence againstwomen.The fundamental approachof developing theorganisational capacityand knowledge of partner organisations is particularly effective in addressing the strength ofwomen’s organisations at the local level. KtK’s partners are particularly supportive of theapproach taken by KtK, with an emphasis on KtK’s ‘partnership’ and its ‘organisationaldevelopment’. It is obvious from theundertaken fieldvisits that this approach,particularly inthe long‐termmanner inwhich it isdelivered, strengthens thepartnerorganisationscapacity,andtheirabilitytoworkeffectivelywiththeirstakeholders.

OneexampleoftheeffectivenessoftheirworkisfoundinacommentfromŽenskiProstor,whosaid‘KtKfirstinsistedweadoptmonitoringandevaluationasaregularactivity.Theymadeus–butnowweseethisourselvesasusefulandnecessary.Wedon’tfearthisanymore.’Aswellasotherareasdiscussedinmoredetail,responsestothequestionnaireindicatestrongsupportfrompartnerstotheeffectivenessofKtK’sworkinassistingpartnersintheirprogramfocus, development of their strategic approach, development of leadership and the quality ofstaff.KtK’sworkaddressesgenderequality,butitdoesnotworkatalllevelsofsocietyinaddressinggender equality issues. Particular reference is made to KtK’s objectives on improvements todialogue between state institutions and women’s organisations, gender equality laws andgendermechanisms(ie,state levelstructuresofgenderequality)andthekeyareasofgender‐based violence in the public consciousness and on the political agenda. These are areas ofparticular importancetoSida,generallyandspecifically inSerbiabutarenotareaswhereKtKhasexpendedmoneyor focused its actual activitiesduring theperiodunder review.Programeffectivenesswillbeincreasedbywideningactivitiestoaddressmoredelineatedobjectives.Havingestablishedthe6programareas,theactualfundingforprojectsprovidedbyKtKdidnotprovidesignificantsupporttoprojectsaddressingWomen in the peace process, Women’s human rights  and Women’s  physical  and mental  health. Aswell, the program focus onWomen’s work against violence and sexual abuse,whichintheKtKprogramwasfocusedoninstitutionalchangeand increasing of professionalism in institutions, as well as on the issue of violence againstwomenbeingestablishedonthepoliticalagenda,actually focusedontheSOSHotlinenetworkandshelters.There isnoargumentthattheSOSHotlineandsheltersare important initiatives,butthereality isthattheprogramdidnotaddressKtK’sown objectives intheareaofviolenceagainstwomen,anddidnotachieveoutputsoroutcomesinthiskeyarea.Fromtheperspectiveofthefuture,KtKwoulddowelltoa)havefewerprogramobjectives,andobjectivesonwhichtheycanandwillfocusandb)toensureaclearerlinkbetweentheirproblemanalysis,programobjectivesandprojectsupport. It isnotintendedheretobecriticalofKtK’scurrentoperation,buttoencourageastrongerstructural/strategicflowbetweenKtK’sownanalysisandprogramactivities. 2.5 Cost efficiency TheevaluationteamconsidersKtKtobearelativelycost‐efficientpartnerinthedeliveryofSidafunding. The activist, committed nature of KtK’s approach, and the nature of it grassrootsprogramoforganisationaldevelopmentisofparticularimportancetopartnerorganisations,andtooverallandcosteffectiveness.Some improvement could be made in head office costs, where it would appear a largepercentageofoverallcostsfortheSerbiaoperationaregoing.Unlikeelsewhere, theSerbiaoperationhashada long‐termprogramofficerpresencewhich isconsidered by the evaluation team to be important in delivering a cost efficient and effectiveoutcomewithgrassrootsorganisations,particularlywithanemphasisoutsideBelgrade. 2.6 Sustainability SustainabilityofKtK’sworkhasbeenachievedtoacertainextent.Fromthefinancialperspectiveforpartner organisations, it is unclearwhichwill continue to flourish, or even survive, in thecurrent political climate. According to the returned questionnaires, KtK partners aresignificantlydependentfinanciallyonKtK,with6ofthe7respondingorganisationsreportingaminimumof50%ofcoreandprogramfundingcomingfromKtK,withmostorganisationsbeing

supportedtobetween60%and70%ofprogramfundingandbetween70%and100%forcorecosts.AveragecontributionsfromKtKarebetween22,000and28,000Eurosannuallyforeachfundedorganisation.Beyondfinances,allorganisationsreportasignificantimprovementintheirfocusonwhattheywant toachieve,5of7reportasignificant improvement in theirstrategywhile theother tworeportimprovements‘toalargeextent’,allhavebetterleadershipandmorecompetentstaff,allhave more members, clients and supporters. Four of the 7 report good to very goodimprovementsinthenumberofdonorsprovidingsupport,and2of8respondentscommentedongettingmorefinancialsupportfromauthorities.Theparticipationinnationalnetworkswaspointedtobyoneorganisationasanimportantcomponentoftheirongoingsustainability–‘wecannotdoitourselves’.OneinterestingcommentcamefromPesčanik,who‘haveaconcernthatwedependonafairlysmallcoreofabout20women’,asmanyorganisationswoulddelightinacoreof20.AccordingtoKtK,‘wehaveclearlyseenthedevelopmentof“our”organisations.Theystarted local of course, now they are strong nationally. Someone said “KtK supports all thestrongestNGOintheBalkans”. Iwouldsaythat theirstrength isareflectionofourworkwiththem.On balance, and directly because of the long‐term financial and organisational developmentsupport provided by KtK, organisations have better structures, better leadership and morecompetentstaff,andanimprovedplaceinsocietyandrelationshipwithauthorities,butallfacean uncertain financial future. It isworth noting here that KtK’s support is not just importantbecauseofitslong‐termfocus,butbecausetheorganisationisintentonassistingpartnersinawide number of areas that are not focussed on generally, including mediation of internalconflicts,regionalnetworkingandexperiencesharing.KtKitselfindicatesthattheparticipationofKtKstaffinpartneractivitiesisapositiveaspectoftheirwork.

3. Civil Rights Defenders 3.1 Background and History In its Strategy  For  The  Swedish  Helsinki  Committee  For  Human  Rights,  SHC  2004­2006, theSwedish Helsinki Committee (now called Civil Rights Defenders) describe their mission andobjectivesasfollows:

ThepurposeofSHC is to increase therespectofhumanrightsand freedoms inaccordancewiththeInternationalCovenantonCivilandPoliticalRights,ICCPRof1966andtheHelsinkiFinalActof1975,aswellastocontributetoademocraticdevelopmentinallHelsinkisignatorystates(thecurrentOSCE‐area).TheSHCmonitorsandadvocatesthecomplianceofhumanrights,andcooperateswith local organizations sharing the view that respect for human rights is apreconditionforbuildingofdemocracy.The vision of SHC is that all people in the OSCE‐area should be enabled toexercise their civil and political rights, recognising that this is one importantpillaruponwhichdemocracyisbuilt.Overall Objectives The SHC seeks to contribute to an increased respect for human rights andthereby to contribute to the building of democracy. Fundamental forachievements in this regard ispromotionof state systemsbasedon the ruleoflaw. In order tomeet ourmission and visionwe have three overall objectives,whichwillguideouractivities.1. Strengthening of the rule of law 

Recognising that rule of law does not mean merely a formal legality whichassures regularityandconsistency in theenforcementofdemocraticorder,but

justicebasedontherecognitionandfullacceptanceofthesupremevalueofthehumanpersonalityandguaranteedbyinstitutionsprovidingaframeworkforitsfullest expression. (Final document of the OSCE Human DimensionMeeting inCopenhagen1990).2. Strengthening of the freedom of expression Recognising thateveryonehas theright to freedomofexpression including therighttocommunication.Thisrightwill includefreedomtoholdopinionsandtoreceive and impart information and ideas without interference by publicauthority and regardless of frontiers. The exercise of this rightmay be subjectonly to such restrictions as are prescribed by law and are consistent withinternationalstandards.(FinaldocumentoftheOSCEHumanDimensionMeetinginCopenhagen1990).3. Protection against discrimination 

Recognising that all persons are equal before the law and are entitledwithoutany discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the lawshould prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal andeffectiveprotectionagainstdiscriminationonanyground.(FinaldocumentoftheOSCEHumanDimensionMeetinginCopenhagen1990).25

ItispossiblymorerelevanttopointtoCRD’scurrentobjectivesinrelationtoeachofitsprogramareas.TheseobjectivesaredetailedinCRD’sSerbia Plan of Action 2008­2011.

Rule of Law Program • Improve accountability and compliance of duty‐holders in relation to the European

ConventionofHumanRights.• Todecreaseimpunityinrelationtoserioushumanrightsviolations• Enhance people’s access to justice by providing free legal aid with drafting and/or

lobbyingforadoptionofaFreeLegalAidLaw

Freedom of Expression Program • To improve legal protection and other mechanisms for independent media and

journalists, therebydiminishing thepowerofgroupswhichtry tomisuse themedia toachievetheirpoliticalendsoradvanceotherinterests.

• To improve professionalism in journalism and contribute to politicians' accountabilitybystrengtheningthefirstdigitalmediaarchive.

• To increase the level of competence of localmedia to improve itsweb presence, thuspavingtheroadforachievingself‐sustainability

Anti­discrimination Program 

• Strengthenmonitoringandadvocacyonrightsofnationalminorities• IncreaseknowledgeaboutLGBTrightsamongdutyholdersandthepublic• To raise knowledge aboutmechanismsof disability baseddiscrimination and improve

co‐ordination around policies for disabled people in order to improve conditions forinclusionofpeoplewithdisabilitiesintheeverydaylife

• Improve thenews flowonminority languages forminoritymedia inorder to improvemeansofexpressionforminoritygroups.

TheCRDprogramfor2005‐2009totals34.268millionSEK(Theprogramis6.08millionSEKinthecurrentyear)andhasprovidedsupporttothefollowing:

Organisation  Location  Project Supported 

25 Strategy For The Swedish Helsinki Committee For Human Rights, SHC 2004-2006

CHRIS(NetworkoftheCommitteesforHumanRightsinSerbia)

Networkof6localorg.

Basicoperationalsupprt,legalaidandadvocacy,awarenessraisingonhumanrights

BelgradecentreforHumanRights(BCHR) Belgrade

TranslationofjudgementsoftheEuropeanCourtofHumanRightsinregardtospecificarticlesofECHR

CUPS,CentreforAdvancedLegalStudies Belgrade

Draftingandadvocacyforaanationalsystemoflegalassistance,draftingandadvocacyforanti‐discriminationlegislation

YouthInitativeforHumanRights Belgrade

Monitoringandimplementatinof5crucialtransitionlaws

CenterforRegionalism NoviSad DecentrwithinConstitutionofSerbia

HelsinkiCommittteeSerbia BelgradeProductionofAnnualreportonhumanrights+prisonmonitoring

HumanitarianLawCentre Belgrade

Reparationandlitigationrelatedtocasesofserioushumanrightsviolationsintherecentpast

YoungLawyersofSerbia BegradeLawclubsatuniversitiesonHRlaw,regionalmootcourtcompetition

YoungLawyersofSerbia Regional

TransparencySerbia BelgradeWorkshopsonimplofanti‐corruptionlegislation

PescanikFM Belgrade

PublishingtranscriptandsupporttotheRadioShowPescanikFM,dealingwithvariousissuesrelatedtohumanrightsandtransition

IndependentjournalistsAssociationofSerbia Belgrade

Surveyofpositionofjournalists,organisationaldevelopmentandoperationalsupport

ANEM‐Associationofindependentelectronicmedia Belgrade

Adviceandlegalaidtomedia,promotionofafreeenviromnentforelectronicmedia

LocalPressAssociation BelgradeBasicoperationalsupportandOD,legaiaidandcouncelforjournalistsandmedia

IndependentJournalistsAssociationVojvodina NoviSad SeminaronpromotingdifferencesNoviSadSchoolofJournalism NoviSad ReportingdiversitytrainingMediaArtServiceInternational LinkMagazineSupplementsCentreforProfessionalismofMedia(CPM) Belgrade MediaandHR,ECHRonFoERexCulturalCentre Belgrade HumanrightsfilmfestivalEbartMediaArchive Belgrade Mediaarchive,investigativejournalism,OD

VelkiMali PancevoTrainingandawarenessraisingrelatedchildrenwithdisabilites,capacitybuildingoflocalNGOs

AssociationofStudentswithdisabilites Belgrade

Trainingandawarenessraisingrelatedtodisabilityrights

LABRIS Belgrade AwarenessraisingandadvocayonLGBTrightsQueeria Belgrade PubliccampaignonLGBTrightsGayStraightAlliance Belgrade AnnualreportonLGBTrightsMinorityRightsCentre Belgrade AdvocacyonRomaRightsSandzakCommitteeforprofofHR

NoviPazar MinorityRightsProtectioninSandzak

CivicActionforHRonbehalf Novi MonitoringandPRofMinorityrightsinSanjak

ofSanjakcoalition Pazar

BetaNewsagency BelgradeMinoritynewsservices,newsinthreeminoritylanguages(Albanian,Roma,Hungarian)

RadioTocak(roma) OperationalsupportDEVE EducHRinregardtosexualminorities

ResourceCenters

Networkof5ocalorg Exercisingourrights

MediaontheWeb/MediaDots

Capacitybuildingandsupportforlocalmedia'swebeditions(regionalproject)

RegionalCentreforMinorities Belgrade

Institutionalsupport,resourceandtrainingforminorityorganisations,advocacyforromaorganisations

 3.2 Outcome (impact) As a country in transition, Serbia requires assistance in responding to areas that mightotherwisebe seton theside, and theviewmostoftenexpressedduring theevaluation is thatCRDplaysasignificantroleinensuringthesecriticalissuesofhumanrightsareontheagendaandarebeingaddressed. Mobilise trust, support and resources  All partner organisations, in responses to the questionnaire, report improvements in theirability tomobilise trust and support, notably in better relationships and increased trustwithauthorities.SpecificchangeisvisiblewithinthePolice–therearespecificexamplesofthePoliceaddressing complaints from gay persons in a professional manner – Police who haveparticipatedintrainingprovidedthroughtheCRD‐fundedprogram.Theseeducationprogramsareseenas‘veryimportantaspects’oftheCRDprogram,withLabrisreportingthatbeyondthework they have donewith CRD assistance other organisations are now approaching them toprovide input(workshopsand lectures)withintheirexistingprograms.Thesearesmallsteps,andmoreisneeded,buttheyindicatechange. Build alliances  TheworkdonebyCRDin‘coalitioning’ispointedtoasanimportantdevelopment.Aswellasanumber of references to CRD’s capacity to increase and improve general communicationbetweenNGOs(notinsignificantinasometimesdividedsector)thespecificworkondevelopingcoalitions in support of legislation and actionswas pointed to as an important component ofCRD’swork.Particularmentionwasmadeofthecoalitionformedtoworkonandlobbyfortheanti‐discriminationlaw,theanti‐hatespeechcoalitionandtheworkdonewiththeMediaCentre.In 2009, LGBTNGOSwere attempting to organise thePrideParade, but realised theydidnothavethecapacitytodoso–neitherknowingwhattodoorhowtodoit.CRDprovidedthemwithboth financial and non‐financial support, including office space, coordination assistance, andcontactingandlobbyingwithauthorities.Thissupportincludedprovisionofanexperttoassessthesecuritythreatsinherentinorganisingtheevent.Interact with and influence authorities Accordingtoexternalobservers/expertsspokentoaspartoftheevaluation,thereisnotrustinthe judicial system in Serbia, and most relationships are personal, not institutional. In thiscontext, local organizations have a good understanding and good connections, and from ahumanrightsperspective,NGOsdrivetheagenda.The first ‘hate speech’ caseeverhashappened inSerbia.Theanti‐discrimination law isalsoagood example. ‘The Anti‐Discrimination Law would not have been possible without CRD.’

Coupledwiththelawitselfistheworktheyhavedonewithfreelegalaid–‘theyweretheonlysourceoflegalaidforpeoplewhohavebeendiscriminatedagainst’. ‘Theworktheyhavedonewith the LGBT community –what they didwith Labris is very important.’ Labris themselvesmakethepointthatCRDis‘afriendofourorganisation’,andthattheactivistnatureoftheCRDroleinSerbiaisimportanttowhotheysupportandtheoutcomestheyachieve.AlsocommentedonbyexternalobserversistheCRD‐fundedannualreportonhumanrightsandprison monitoring undertaken by the Helsinki Committee Serbia and the annual reportingundertaken by the Gay Straight Alliance on LGBT rights in Serbia, all of which provideauthoritiesand thecommunitywithdetailedanalysisof thesituationwithandstatusof thesekeyareasofhumanrightsinSerbia.CRDpartnershaveexcellentrelationshipswiththeOfficeoftheOmbudsperson,aswellastheimprovingrelationshipwiththePolicedescribedabove. 3.3 Relevance The CRD country and related objectives and program are relevant to Serbia, to its partnerorganisationsandtoSidaobjectivesinSerbia,whichincludeandemphasison‘cooperationwithstate institutionsandstrengtheningofcivilsociety’,bothofwhicharecomponentsof theCRDprogram,the ‘interactionamongtheseactors’,alsoa focusof theCRDprogramanda focuson‘theparticipationofminoritiesinthedevelopmentofsociety’,akeywithinCRD’sprogramwhichincludestheRomacommunity,LGBTorganisationsandpeoplewithdisabilities.Aswellasthespecificlegaloutcomesrelatedtolegislation,andtheeducationalworkbeingdonewith authorities, a significant amountofwork is beingdonewith themedia that arebringingaboutchangeinhowthemediareportsonhumanrights,particularlywithrelationtotheRomaand LGBT communities. CRD and its partners are very proactive with the media, and thisemphasisishavinganimpactonreporting.TheHelsinkiCommitteeofSerbiaissupportedinitsworkonprisonmonitoring.‘Weraisedtheawarenessofprisonmanagementoftheimportanceofthehumanrightsofprisonersandoftheprisoners of their own rights so these rights could be respected. Prison authorities have anunderstanding and our recommendations have contributed to improved conditions in twoprisons.’ HCS had been doing prison monitoring for some time, but had stopped – the CRDsupportallowedthismonitoringtobeinitiatedagain.Only two political parties in Serbia have policies on non‐discrimination related to the LGBTcommunity. Only 8 LGBT organisations exist in Serbia, of which two, or three depending oncircumstances,canbedescribedasadvocacyorganisations.ThereisacriticalneedforsupporttoanddevelopmentofthisareaoftheNGOsector. 3.4 Effectiveness TheCRDapproachinSerbiais‘partnership,notpatronage’andincorporatesafocusontheworkof partnerorganisations generally, not onparticularprojects.TheCRDapproach is alsomorefocusedexternally,onchangein legislationandchangeinthepracticeofauthority, thanonitspartner organisations themselves. Inmany instances this is visible in the existing strength ofpartnerorganisations (noorganisationreports receivingmore than50%of itsprogram fundsfromCRD,andofthe12reporting,only4receivemorethan33%ofcorefundingfromCRDandhalf get less than 20%). CRD does address organisational development, and is effective isassistingpartnerorganisationsindevelopingamorestrategicapproach,andto‘focusoureffortsmoreeffectively’,toquoteonepartner.Theconsistentviewacrosspartners,boundarypartnersandexternalobserversisthatthisapproachiscorrectandeffective.With the CRD emphasis on human rights, and its activist approach, partners and observerscommented on the role CRD plays in agenda‐setting and in focusing directions. While thequestionwasraisedduringfield interviewsabout ‘ownership’,and ‘anappropriateframework

todevelopacivilsocietymodelforSerbia’,theconsistentviewwasthatthiswasapositive,notanegative.Theviewwas thatastrong, internationalNGOactingasdonor/partner,particularlyonewithastrong localknowledgeandpresenceaddsvalue to theworkof localhumanrightsNGOs.Oneexternalobserversaid‘Iheargoodthingsfromcivilsociety,IheargoodthingsfromParliament. The framework organisations are strongnameswith strong reputations andwithdemonstratedcompetence.’AnotherexternalobservernotedthathumanrightsNGOsinSerbiawill struggle without the international nature provided by CRD, as this international natureprovidesastaturenotfoundlocally.Itisarguablethattheapproachisaneffectiveapplicationofbothatop‐downandabottom‐upapproach to addressing human rights issues, with a respected, activist international humanrights NGO providing a framework for and impetus/ assistance to local human rights NGOs,providing a wider perspective and knowledge to the local organisations and giving theinternationalorganisationeffective,locally‐basedknowledgeandcapacity.Aswellasotherareasdiscussedinmoredetail,responsestothequestionnaireindicatestrongsupportfrompartnerstotheeffectivenessofCRD’sworkinassistingpartnersintheirprogramfocusanddevelopmentoftheirstrategicapproach. 3.5 Cost efficiency TheevaluationteamconsidersCRDprovidesacost‐efficientdeliveryofSidafunding.Generallyorganisations are not supported to 100% of needs, and CRD funding has been directed to acomponentoftheorganisation’sworkthatbenefitedfromtheextrafocusforaperiodoftime.Generallyorganisationsreceivesomeformofcoresupport,butthisisnotauniversalsituation.Support is generally multi‐year, and efficiency would benefit from multi‐year agreementsbetweenCRDanditspartners.Asindicatedabove,theactivist,committednatureofCRD’sapproachisofparticularimportanceto partner organisations, and to overall and cost effectiveness. CRD can and does adjust itsapproach topartnersbasedonneed–organisationalor strategic–and is responsive to theseneedsbecauseofthenatureoftheorganisation.Itisconsideredimportant,whendiscussingcostefficiency,thefocusednatureoftheCRDapproach. 3.6 Sustainability TheevaluationteamvisitedtwoorganisationsfundedbyCRD(four,givenBCHRwasfundedinthepastbyCRD,butthevisittoBCHRwasspecificallyrelatedtoOPIC).Noneofthethreecanbedescribed as being financially dependent on CRD funding, although 40% of VelikiMali’s coresupport is fromCRD.As indicatedabove,manyCRDsupportedorganisationshavea larger,orwider focus, anddonotdependonSwedishdonations.However, thisdoesnotmean theyarefinanciallyself‐sustainable.Ascommentedbyoneexternalexpert:‘Thereisaclearperspective:ifinternationaldonorfundingstops,organisationswilleitherceasetoexistortheywillbecomeserviceprovidersincompetitionforgovernmentfunds.’There is the other side to sustainability – organisational capacity beyond just the question offinances. While the organisations visited all demonstrated levels of professionalism, andreasonable to excellent strategic approaches to their planning and implementation, there is afragilityintheirexistence.Labrisisacaseinpoint.Theevaluationteamhasspokentothreeofthe organisation’s leaders in recent weeks, each of whom demonstrated professionalism,capacity,foresightandmotivation.Unfortunately,allLabrisstaffhaveresignedandareleavingthe organisation as the result of an internal disagreement with the organisation’s governingcommitteeoverfuturedirections.Labriswillprobablycontinueasanorganisation,butwillnotbeengagedinadvocacyonbehalfofthelesbiancommunity.

WithoutCRDassistance,VelikiMaliwillalmostcertainlybeabletocontinuetoprovidesupporttotheparent’sandfamiliesofchildrenwithdisabilities,butwillalmostcertainlynotcontinuewith its current, national focus on advocacy, and organisational development for similarorganisations. CRD itself indicates that the participation of CRD staff in partner activities is apositiveaspectoftheirwork.

4. Olof Palme International Centre  4.1 Background and History AccordingtodocumentationoftheOlofPalmeInternationalCenter(OPIC),theCentre‘worksinthespiritofOlofPalmefordemocracy,humanrights,andpeace.Wecooperatewithpeopleandorganizations throughout theworld, in nations such as Brazil, Burma, SouthAfrica, Palestine,andMoldova. Throughourdevelopmentprojects,weseektoempowerpeopletochangetheirsocieties and thereby their own lives. Women, youth, and grassroots activists are our maintarget groups. It is the convictionof thePalmeCenter that an active, democratic civil society,basedontheneedsandaspirationsof thepeople isabasicpreconditionforstabledemocraticsocialdevelopment.’26

The Palme Center started to work in the Balkans during the war in the early1990s and has continued to support partnership between Swedish andBalkancivilsocietyeversince.InSerbia,thePalmeCenterhassupporteddifferentpeacegroupssincethebeginningofthe1990s,includingtheanti‐Milosevicmovement.ThePalmeCenterhasa localoffice inBelgrade; theprogramme ismanagedbySerbian and Swedish head office staff. The Palme Center programme in Serbiahas always been characterised by partnership and mutuality, based on therespectandconvictionthatourpartnersarethedriversofdevelopmentandtheonestoformulateproblemsandsolutions.During the period since the programme started in the early 1990s, thedevelopments in the region have been considerable and the Palme Center hascontinuouslyadaptedtheprogrammetothechangingsituation.BesidesextensiveworkintheBalkans,thePalmeCenterhasalongexperienceindifferentregionsoftheworldinthefieldofdemocracydevelopmentandhumanrights.TheSwedishmemberorganisationsbringtheirexperienceandknowledgeintotheinternationalcooperation.’ThePalmeCenterandpartnersdirectlyaimtoincreasethecapacityofNGO’stoidentify common interests and needs and advocate effectively to influence thepublicandprivatesectorsonissuessuchassustainablefundingmechanisms,theroleofcivilsocietyinpublicservicedelivery,publicpolicyaffectingcivilsocietyorganisations, and allow the NGO community to function as a fully integratedsectorofademocraticsociety.BesidessupporttoaprocessofredefiningtheroleofcivilsocietybyestablishedBelgradeorganisations,thePalmeCentersupportslocalinitiativesinotherpartsofthecountry.27

OPIC’sspecificgoalsforSerbiaare:

• Citizensareabletoinfluencethelocalpoliticalagendawhenelectedrepresentativesaremoreaccountable.

• Citizensareinvolvedinpublicdebateonpoliticalissues.

• Citizenparticipationinmember‐basedcivilsocietybymeansofyouthmobilisationhasincreased.

26 Palme Centre Strategy for South East Europe Programme Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Kosovo 2008-2011 27 Olof Palme - Serbia Application 2008 – 2011

• CitizensandcivilsocietyorganisationsparticipateintheEUintegrationprocess.

Organisation  Location  Project Supported 

CommitteeforCivicInitiative Nis

Traininglocalpoliticiansandcivilservantsinproblemsolving,strategicmanagement,activitiesrelatedtofunctioningoflocalself‐governments.

CenterforAnti‐warAction Belgrade YouthActivisminLocalCommunitiesBelgradeCentreforHumanRights Belgrade

Strengthenhumanrightsknowledgeamongyoungprofessionalsandstudents,

RegionalCentreofCivicActionLINGUA  Kraljevo Facingthepast‐reconciliationCentreforFreeElectionsandDemocracy–CeSID Belgrade

LocalinitiativesandincreasedactivismamongcitizensalloverSerbia

BelgradeOpenSchool Belgrade

FacilitatetheuseofInternetasatoolfordevelopmentofvariousaspectsofcivilsocietyandtopromoteInternetasameanfordevelopmentofcoop.

PROCONCEPT BelgradeTheAnalysisofCapabilityandCapacityofNGOsinDevelopmentofCivilSocietyinSerbia

CenterforDemocracyFoundation Belgrade PromotionofEUPolicyofGenderMainstreaminginSerbiaCenterforDevelopmentofNonProfitSectorWesternSerbia Uzice

Empowermentofelectedcitizensandlocalstafftobecomemoreresponsivetotheneedsoftheircommunity

KIOSKNGO BelgradeEstablishadialogueandcommunicationbetweencitizensofvariousethnicgroupsthroughphotoworkshop

Milenijum NisRegionalreconciliationforyoungpeople,thefutureofcivilsocietyinSerbiainthereformprocess

ToplicaCenterforDemocracyandHR Prokuplje

Promotionofcommon,sharedEuropeanvalues,proceduresandstandards,municipalitiesinToplicaregion

Centerofmodernskills Belgrade TrainingoflocalcommunityNGOsinadvocacyskillsCenterforDevelopmentofSerbia Belgrade

InvolvingcitizensofBelgradeinmonitoringandevaluatingperformanceoflocalauthorities

EuropeanMovementinSerbia

Belgrade,Vojvodina,Sandzak

Promotionandunderstandingoftheinnovativecapabilitiesofsocialeconomicactors

GroupLet's(since2007) BelgradeDevelopmentofaYouthofficemodelforlocalgovernments,increasedyouthactivismandimplementationofyouthpolicy

UrbanInn(since2007) NoviPazarIncreasedcivicparticipationinlocalcommunitydecisionmaking,improvedservices

 4.2 Outcome (impact) TheOPICapproach in Serbiadiffers frombothCRDandKtK in that theirs is a focusmoreonprojectsthanoneithertheorganisationaldevelopmentfocusofKtKorthestronghumanrightsfocusofCRD.TheprojectsofOPICincludetraining,promotionandknowledgebuilding,withafocus on Municipalities and young people (and young people in Municipalities). Given theirapproach,andthetypeofsupporttheyprovide,impactisnotreadilyapparent.Theprojectstheysupport are important, useful, and valuable to participants and stakeholder groups/organisations, but with some exceptions, impact cannot be ascribed to them. The evaluationvisitedthreeOPIC‐fundedorganisations,twoofwhomhadbeencooperatingwithOPICformanyyears. Theproject are relevant to Serbia, and toOPIC’s readingof the situation in Serbia, butgenerallylackanindividualstrengthorthestrengththatwouldcomefromamorestrategically‐focusedOPICprogram.

 Mobilise trust, support and resources  TheBelgradeCentreforHumanRight’sproject,whichstrengthenshumanrightsknowledgeinyoungprofessionals, isaworthy initiative ineducation,and in its10yearsofbeing fundedbyOPIC(and5yearspriortothatwithotherfunding)hasinfluencedmorethan500participants.TheevaluationteamwouldarguethatitisneitherfocusedonnorhasimpactedOPIC’skeyareasofcitizeninfluenceoflocalpoliticalagendas,citizenparticipationinmember‐basedcivilsociety,citizeninvolvementintheEUintegrationprocessandonlymarginallyincitizeninvolvementinpublic debate. More importantly, after 15 years the program has evolved little and the roleplayedbyOPICismorefriendandbenefactorthanpartneranddonor.Aswellasotherareasdiscussedinmoredetail,responsestothequestionnaireindicatestrongsupportfrompartnerstotheeffectivenessofOPIC’sworkinassistingpartnersintheirprogramfocusanddevelopmentoftheirstrategicapproach.Build alliances  Alliance/ network‐building is not a focus of OPIC’s activities, and the project/ organisation‐oriented approach which OPIC uses does not lend itself to alliances. OPIC’s focus is on thespecificprojectsof itspartnerorganisations,andwiththerangeofprioritiesthereisa limitedscopeforalliancebuilding.Networkinghappens,andOPICorganisesnetworkingmeetingswithitspartnerorganisations,butitisnotakeycomponentoftheOPICapproachinSerbia.Interact with and influence authorities OPIChasfundedtheNis‐basedCommitteeforCivicInitiativesfor12years.Duringthistime,OGI(fromitsSerbianname)hashadfourseparateinitiativeswithOPICfunding.ThecurrentSchoolforEuropehasatentative4‐yearfundingarrangement.Thetrainingprogramaddresses20‐25Municipal people (from two towns) each year. It is a three‐month longprogram,with classeseachSaturday.OGI,anditprograminNis,issynonymouswitheducationalprogramsrelatedtoEuropean integration. Municipal authorities respect their work, and previous OPIC‐fundedprojecthave includedtrainingforpoliticiansandtrainingforyoungpeople inpoliticalparties.The project focuses on citizen involvement in the EU integration process, and is thereforerelevanttoOPIC’sagendainSerbia.TheprojectbeingimplementedbyHajdeda(GroupLet’s…),withaspecificemphasisonyouthinvolvement in local politics and development of a youth office model for Municipalities ishaving an impact in a number of Municipalities in the south‐west of Serbia and in Belgrade,where there is an increase in the involvement of young people, andwhere an active role forMunicipalYouthOfficesisbeingdefinedandimplemented. 4.3 Relevance The OPIC country assessment is relevant and appropriate. OPIC’s problem analysis includesissueswithaccountabilityatthelevelof localselfgovernment,andtheprogramfocusonlocalparticipationincivilactivismisanappropriateresponsetothisissue(andindeedtotheissueofaccountabilityatthenationalpoliticallevel.OPIC’s countryassessment in relation to civil society is also relevant,whereinOPICdescribesthefourmajorproblemsitseeswithcivilsocietyinSerbiatoday:

• Thenon‐existenceofalegalframeworkforcivilsociety(whichhassincebeenaddressed,withthenewlawoncitizen’sassociations).

• Lackofstablefinancialresources(whichremains,andwillcontinuetoremainformanyyears,acriticalissue).

• Citizens’lackingconfidenceinthecivilsociety.

• Avoidanceofdirectpoliticalactivities(andinvolvingthemselvesin‘expert’activitiesratherthantherealissuesthatimpactonpeopledaily).

 4.4 Effectiveness Unfortunately, theOPICprogramwith civil societydoesnot focus sufficientlyon theassessedproblems,anareainwhichtheworkofOPICcouldbeimproved,astherelevanceandimpactoftheiractivitieseachlackstrengthforthesamereasons–theprogramtorespondtotheproblemanalysisisnotlinkedwellenoughtotheproblemanalysisandspecificprojectsarethereforenotfocusedappropriately.According to OPIC, it’s ‘programme goals leave a lot of space for creative ideas of Serbianorganisations todevise concreteprojects.This reflects thePalmeCenter’s conviction that it ismore effective to support home‐grown initiatives rather then to look for implementationpartners forpre‐determinedprojects.’ 28Whileagreeing inprinciple, theevaluation team isofthe view that there needs to be a stronger correlation between OPIC’s problem analysis andobjectivesandtheproject/organisationworktobesupported.Thereappears tobea lackofcorrelationbetweenOPIC’sproblemanalysisandobjectivesandtheactualproject/organisationworkbeingfunded.Whiletherearesomelinks,itistheviewoftheevaluationteamthatOPICshouldre‐visititpartnershipsanditprojectsinthecontextofitsproblemanalysis,andseekinitiativesfromcivilsocietyorganisationsdesignedtoaddresstheseproblems.Whilethisbecomesmorerelevantinthelongerterm,itisworthaskingthequestionnow,forexample,oftheBCHR’sprogram– ‘Wheredoesthisprogramfitourproblemanalysisandourcountryobjectives?’ 4.5 Cost efficiency TheevaluationteamconsidersOPICprovidesacost‐efficientdeliveryofSidafunding.Generallyorganisations are not supported to 100% of needs, and OPIC funding is directed to singlecomponentsofapartnerorganisation’swork.Generallyorganisationsreceivesomeformofcoresupport,but the levelsarenothigh.This is indicativeof the typeoforganisationandsupportprovidedbyOPIC,ielarger,stableorganisationswhereOPICprovidesprojectsupportinspecificareas.Supportisgenerallymulti‐year,andefficiencywouldbenefitfrommulti‐yearagreementsbetweenOPICanditspartners.AswithCRD,mostorganisationsfundedbyOPICreceiveonlyasmallproportionoftheirfundinginthisway(of10reportingorganisations,onlyonereceivesmorethan50%of its funds fromOPIC and 5 report 10‐15%). Generally speaking core funding levels are even lower,with theexceptionofCRS(TheCentrefortheDevelopmentofSerbia)whichreceivesalmost70%ofitscorefundingfromOPIC). 4.6 Sustainability SustainabilityofOPIC’swork inSerbiahasbeenachieved toacertainextent.Financially,onlyoneorganisationwhichresponded to thequestionnairewilldependonOPIC funding for theirfuture existence, and all organisations indicate that their OPIC‐funded work fits within theirongoing activities and operational context. The three organisations visited as part of theevaluation are all on‐going concerns – their project make‐up/ activities will be affecteddepending onwhether or not they receiveOPICmoney, but their existence is not in anywayendangerediftheydonotreceiveSidaassistance.Looking beyond finances, OPIC itself indicates that the participation of OPIC staff in partneractivitiesisapositiveaspectoftheirwork.

28 Olof Palme - Serbia Application 2008 – 2011

5 Overall comments on the Modality TheapproachofprovidingsupporttocivilsocietythroughSwedishNGOs,withapresenceinthefieldiseffective,relativelycost‐efficientandhasseenanimpactonSerbiansociety.Themodalityitselfhassomeparticularlygoodaspects,andsomeareaswheremodificationsarerequired,butingeneralrepresentsanappropriateapproachforSidatotaketodeliveryofitssupporttocivilsociety.It isandwill remaindifficult tobalance thecreativity,activismandpossibilityof independentCSOswiththenecessaryanddesirableformandstructuredesiredbySidaasadonor.Workingtomaintainthisbalancethoughisaveryimportantcomponentforthesuccessoftheprogram,andtheongoingprocessesofprogramdesignandmanagement,andtheselectionofframeworkorganisations,shouldbeundertakenisawaythatencouragesthemaintenanceofthiscreativetension,asitisahallmarkofthemodality.TheuseofNGOsasimplementingpartnersisapositivecomponentoftheprogram.Moreso,theuseofNGOswithdifferentbackgrounds,differentprioritiesanddifferentmodesofoperationisnot seen as an issue or problematic but as an enabling aspect of the modality. Civil societyorganisations bring a commitment and activism that cannot be found in organisations fromgovernmentortheprivatesector.Thisistheirgreatvalue.Theywilltendtofocusontheirownpriorities, andmaywell address administrative requirements less strongly than required, buttheseissuescanbedealtwithstructurally,inthecontractualrelationship.ThisisnottosaythatNGOs in general, nor the existing framework organisations in particular, have not done aneffectivejobofprogramadministration,buttoindicatethatoneparticularbenefitofusingNGOs,toworkwithNGOs,isthattheirfocusisontheworktheyaredoingandtheexternalworkstheywanttoachieve,notonprojectmanagementperse.Sida’sprioritieswith regards civil society arewide, andactivistNGOswill tend (althoughnotexclusively) to operatewithin a narrow range of issues,with a narrow range of priorities. Inorder to cover its priorities, the use of NGOs from a wider range of backgrounds is bothappropriateandeffective.Whileaprojectmanagementconsultancymighthavethecapacitytoworkwith‘partners’acrossallpartnerareas,theirin‐depthknowledgewillnevercompare,andthey will never be able to achieve the quality of relationship – the quality discussed by allpartnersinterviewedduringtheevaluation.Thisqualityofpartnershipisonethingthatsetsthemodalityapartfromotherapproaches.It isrelevantandappropriateto juxtaposetheapproachesofFrameworkOrganisations inthisdiscussion. The organisations have different priorities, different types of partners, differentapproaches(althougheachprovidesmulti‐year fundingto longer‐termpartners)anddifferentoutcomes. The importantword is different, as it does not imply a value judgement. It is thisdifferencethatgivesstrengthtotheoutcomesofthesupport,preciselybecauseawiderrangeoforganisations with a wide range of capacity are benefiting from the support and from therelationshipwith international NGOs. Itwould be difficult to compare and value of theworkdone by these organisations in Serbia. Notwithstanding the qualifications discussed in theframeworkorganisation sectionabove, theevaluation teamwasgenerally impressedwith thework of the organisations. But they are not comparable, not as organisations nor in theirapproach.Itistheviewoftheevaluationteamthatthisisanimportantpositiveofthemodality.The use of Swedish NGOs is appropriate, although they must have a field presence in eachcountry inwhich theywork. Swedish organisations provide a link back to Stockholm, and toSida, ensuring a clear line of communication to the donor as required.Whether or not theseNGOsuselocal,Swedishorothernationalsastheirprogramofficersshouldbeamatterfortheorganisations. It would be worth considering the use of a Swedish NGO – National NGOpartnership as a framework organisation. This would provide local NGOs with strong

international supportandassistance indeveloping theworkand theirprofilewhileprovidingSwedishNGOswithastronglocalcomponent.Sidawouldbenefitfromclarifyingitsinternalunderstandingofandarrangementregardingthedelivery of the support, particularly the understandings between Sida Stockholm and SidaofficesinrelevantEmbassies.Thereisnotalwaysacorrelationbetweenprojectsfundedbythisprogramand fundingprovideddirectlyby theEmbassies, and there isoverlapwhichappearsbasedonalackofknowledge.SomeEmbassiesaremoreknowledgeableaboutand/orinvolvedintheprogram.A much clearer understanding must exist between Sida and the framework organisationsregarding the responsibilities of the framework organisations and of Sida. The existingarrangementisneitherdetailedenough,clearenoughorwellenoughunderstoodbytheparties.Theselectionofframeworkorganisationsmustbedonetransparently,againstaclearTermsofReference. The financial framework for the services associated with overseeing the supportshould be provided as part of each organisation’s tender documentation. The financialframeworkmustclearlydelineatebetweendirectprogramsupport,organisationaldevelopmentsupport(includingnationalandregionalnetworkingactivities)andadministrativesupport.Allcomponents should be clearly justified in terms of program outcomes and administrativearrangements.Whileitwillbeimportanttoallowtheframeworkorganisationstooperatewithintheirexistingpriorities,thesemustfitwithinSida’soverallstrategyfortheWesternBalkansandeachcountry,meaningthesestrategystatementsmustformpartofthetenderdocumentationandtenderingNGOsmustbewillingandabletoprovideserviceswithinoneormoreofthestrategicpriorities.A wider representation of NGOs should be represented in the tendering/ selection process,althoughexistingframeworkorganisationsshouldbewelcometotender.Itdoesnotneedtobepre‐determined that1,or2,or3organisationswillprovideservices–responses to the tendercall should inform this decision. It may be that an organisation provides a proposal for arelatively small component of the total program – if the approach, outcomes and financialstructurefallwithintheoverallprogramframework,suchanoutcomeneednotbediscouraged.The processes followed by framework organisations in selection of project and partners forfunding require greater transparency, and a greater emphasis on ensuring organisations in aposition to design and implement projects of relevance to Sida priorities – and within thepriorities of framework organisations ‐ have an opportunity to access available funding. Theselectedframeworkorganisationsshouldmanageacall forproposals ineachcountry,byeachorganisation.Thecallshouldbeopen,againstaclearlydefinedcriteriaandthedecision‐makingprocesstransparentandpubliclyannounced.

• Programflexibilityisimportant,withafocusonstrongoutcomesandthedevelopmentofthecapacitiesandorganisationalsustainabilityoffundedorganisations.

• Theintentandpriorityofeachorganisations’call(andthereforethetypesofactivitiestobefunded)canandshouldbedeterminedbytheframeworkorganisation,accordingtotheirprioritiesandtheiragreementwithSida.

• Theprogramshouldallowmulti‐yearagreementswithfundedpartnersineachcountryandshouldencouragefundedorganisationstoconsider,designandsubmitproposalsfor2,3or4yearprogramswithaclearbeginningandendandaclearneedforthemulti‐yearfocustoachievedesiredoutcomes.Thepurposeofthemulti‐yeararrangementsistoallowprojectsthatrequiremorethanoneyeartodeliveroutcomestobedesignedandimplementedwithconfidenceof fundingarrangements–sucharrangementsarebetterfor thedonorand the implementingagency.However,multi‐yeararrangementswherefunding is provided to repeat an activity should be discouraged – the program focus

shouldbeonmulti‐yeararrangements foroutcomesand impact,notonconsistencyoffundingoforganisationsforthesakeofit.

• Single year projects should not be discouraged. It is worth considering to alloworganisations funded in this way to return for follow‐up funding, if it is needed anddesirable.Again,however, theprincipleshouldbe follow‐up funding(meaning fundingforspecific,importantvalueadding)notrepeatfunding.

• Framework organisations should be required to retain a proportion of the allocationtheywillprovideingrants(20%isrecommended).Thiscomponentistobeavailabletobeusedfora)follow‐upactivitiesasdescribedabove,b)fororganisationswhodidnotapplyat the initial call forproposals, c) for issues that emergeand require immediateresponse,d) for ‘special initiatives’ore) for subsequentCall forProposals later in theprogramperiod.

• A cost‐share component would be of value. All funded organisations have experiencewiththerequirementtofind10%or20%ofagrantamount,andtherequirementtofindthecost‐sharecomponentcreatesanownershipdynamicinrelationtothegrantandtheproject.

Thecurrentemphasison results‐basedmanagement shouldbe confirmedandenhanced,withframeworkorganisationsandfundedorganisationsrequiredtohaveasetofclearoutputsandoutcomes – clearly linked to their priorities and the intents of their program – and to reportagainst measurable indictors relevant to the output/ outcome statements. It is an importantorganisationalmanagementdiscipline,ofrelevancetoallorganisationsinallfields.Itwouldbeworth considering having each framework organisation undertake an impact assessment oftheirwork,attheendoftheprogram,againsttheirprogramdesignmatrix.Theprogramrequiresaformalcooperationandcoordinationbetweenframeworkorganisationsineachcountry.FormalcooperationinSwedenisalsorecommended.The particular skills and qualities of the field staff is critical. They must be senior, i.e. withexperience and ‘presence’ as well as having the right training and employment background.Senior does notmean theymust be old, but young people lacking field experience are highlyunlikelytofilltherequirements.

List of Interviewees  Framework Organizations  Name of the interviewee  Organization GoranMiletic CivilRightsDefendersNatalijeBratuljevic CivilRightsDefendersAnaLidstrom(twomeetings) KvinnatilKvinnaDaniloMilic(twomeetings) OlofPalmeInternationalCentre

Framework Organizations Country Partners  Name of the interviewee  Organization  Framework 

Organization JovanaZoric BelgradeCentreforHumanRights OPICSuzanaKrstic Organisation‘Let’s’(Hajdeda) OPICSrdjanMitrovic Organisation‘Let’s’(Hajdeda) OPICPredragCveticanin CommitteeforCivicInitiatives(OGI) OPICBogdanDjurovic CommitteeforCivicInitiatives(OGI) OPICAnaZorbic ZenskiProstor(Women’sSpace) KtKVeraKurtic ZenskiProstor(Women’sSpace) KtK

MilenaCelic ZenskiProstor(Women’sSpace) KtKBiljanaPavlovic Pescanik KtKMirjanaJovanovic Pescanik KtKSandraFarkas Pescanik KtKSnezanaJakovljevic Pescanik KtKSlavicaStanojlovic Pescanik KtKJelenaMemet Pescanik KtKDraganaVuckovic Labris CRDMarijaSavic Labris CRDNatasaMilojevic VelikiMali CRD Boundary Partners Name of the interviewee  Institution/Organizat

ion  FO Local Partner   Framework 

Organization ZarkoMarkovic Self BCHR OPICSanjaToskovic Self BCHR OPICNevenaDicic Self BCHR OPICMinjaBlazic Self BCHR OPICDaniloCuric Self BCHR OPICAmelijaJovanovic YouthOfficeSavski

VenacBCHR OPIC

VesnaSimic GradNis–DepartmentforAgricultureandRuralDev

OGI(CommitteeforCivicIniatives

OPIC

AnaSacipovic Osvit ZenskiProstor KtKDusanKnezevic Self VelikiMali CRDGoranaTrajulovic Self VelikiMali CRDIljaJovic Self VelikiMali CRDSnezanaZivkovic RomanoAliv Pescanik KtKSlavicaRakic RomanoAliv Pescanik KtKAngelinaEric Activist Pescanik KtKStankaDimitrijevic Book‐keepingAgency

"Digitron"Pescanik KtK

DragicaObradovic PoliticalPartyG17+ Pescanik KtKSnezanaJovanovic Pescanik Pescanik KtKNadaBudimirovic WeeklyMagazine

‘Grad’Pescanik KtK

DejanaJovanovic PoliticalPartyLDP Pescanik KtKMihaelaBalevic Self Pescanik KtKVesnaViskovic MunicipalAssembly

KrusevacPescanik KtK

 External Parties Name of the interviewee  Organization AnaSekulic Sida–SwedishEmbassyBelgradeBjornMossberg Sida–SwedishEmbassyBelgradeAndrejNosov HeartefactFundMarkoKaradzic StateSecretary,MinistryforHumanandMinority

RightsMiodragMilosavljevic FundforanOpenSocietySlavicaStojanovic ReconstructionWomen’sFundZoeGudovic ReconstructionWomen’sFund