|
|
|
|
|
Level 5: Public plans/laws/budgets/
policies reflect rights holder’s advocacy
|
|
|
|
|
Level 4: Duty bearers take action to address the advocacy issue
|
New policy/legislation is passed and implemented
And/or
Timetables put in place for meeting policy change/ increasing budget allocations
And/or
Policy practice impact:
Increase in resource allocation
And/or
Policy/legislation change implemented
And/or
Budget allocations are in line with timetables or commitments
|
|
|
|
Level 3: Duty bearers agree to the need for addressing the advocacy of NCA and/or partners
|
Duty bearers take action or present issue at key policy forum
And/or
Duty bearers vote in support of the issue
And/or
Government body follows up on the issue
And/or
Government commits to a target with a fixed timeline
And/or
New inter-department group formed to address the issue
And/or
New policy/legislation is proposed
|
|
|
Level 2: Duty bearers are aware of their duties and responsibilities towards rights holders
|
Duty bearers invite NCA and partners to present policy recommendations in public
And/or
Duty bearers express support (in public/private)
And/or
Duty bearers champion t he issue in public
|
|
Level 1: Duty bearers are passive or unaware of their duties and responsibilities
|
Duty bearers respond to inquiries and acknowledge our position
And/or
Duty bearers approach NCA and partners with requests for information and advice
And/or
Duty bearers request internal briefing from NCA and/or partner
And/or
Duty bearers make reference to NCA and partners’ asks
Issue is discussed at policy level
And/or
Duty bearer mentions issue in media
|
|
Duty bearers are unresponsive to NCA and partners’ inquiries about the issue
And/or
Duty bearers do not take action in response to advocacy
And/or
Duty bearers do not accept proposal for a meeting
And/or
Duty bearer accepted proposal for meeting, but we were received by someone without decision making power
|
Partner assessment on advocacy processes:
Step 1: Identify the specific target of the advocacy initiative (e.g. policy change; religious/cultural norm; budget; etc.)
Step 2: List key recommendations/demands made by partners/rights holders
Step 3: Assess whether, and to what extent, the recommendations have influenced the policy/plan/budget/implementation. Using a scale of 1-3 (1=low; 2 =medium; 3 = high).
|
Recommendations/Demands
|
Influence (1-3 scale)
|
Evidence/justification for this grade
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How to use the above scale:
The ability of NCA and partner organizations to safely access (and interview) duty bearers will depend on the context. NCA COs, together with partners, need to reflect on the potential conflict sensitivity and security issues involved in this type of data collection to decide the safest and most effective methodology. Preferably, interviews would be conducted with duty bearers on an annual basis (see question guide below). If this is not feasible because of contextual concerns, a more passive approach can be taken.
Collection methodologies:
Analyse duty bearers’ attitudes towards the identified issue and partners’ recommendations
- Interviews of duty bearers (annual basis, if possible)
- Identification of duty bearers’ behaviour in media and decision-making processes (ongoing documentation of media appearances, speeches or statements given by duty bearers, policy documents, government’s strategies, budget documents and plans, records from Parliamentary discussions)
- Response from duty bearers on partners’ and rights holders’ advocacy initiatives (ongoing documentation of feedback from duty bearers, such as comments, e-mails, response to questions, acceptance of meetings)
