This report presents the results and impact of the Trafficking Victims Re/integration Programme (TVRP) in the lives of trafficked persons, as well as in the field of reintegration in the Balkans. It provides a detailed analysis of the outcomes and impact of the TVRP, which ran from 2007-2014, based on interviews with trafficking victims, partner NGOs, experts and government officials and other sources of data.
This report summarizes the main findings of the final TVRP evaluation conducted by NEXUS Institute in 2015. It presents the results and impact of the TVRP in the lives of trafficked persons in the Balkans as well as the results and impact of the TVRP in the field of reintegration.
This paper is a first step in the articulation of ethical principles for reintegration programs and polices. The analysis reviews existing efforts in South-East Europe to highlight how ethical issues are identified and addressed in the anti-trafficking field. In addition, the paper explores some of the challenges organizations face while working on reintegration of victims of trafficking, as well as discussing different strategies used to anticipate, manage and address appropriately ethical issues in the day-to-day operations of reintegration organizations. The paper outlines ethical principles that can serve as a basis for reflection, discussion and analysis of the challenges and dilemmas that reintegration professionals face, supporting them in making ethically informed decisions about how to act in different situations in accordance with the values of the reintegration process and advancing victim-centered considerations.
Global concern about human trafficking has prompted substantial investment in counter-trafficking interventions. That investment, and the human rights imperatives that underpin counter-trafficking work, demand that interventions demonstrate accountability, results and beneficial impact. How this can happen in practice is complicated and contested. This article, which considers success measurements with respect to criminal justice interventions, seeks to cut through the complexities presented by multiple theories and elaborate methodologies by focusing on one key issue: who decides success, and how? A review of evaluation reports and interviews with practitioners confirm that determinations of success (or failure) will vary according to: (i) who one consults and their role in the intervention; (ii) the criteria against which success is measured; and (iii) the assumptions that are built into that criteria. Each aspect is considered with reference to examples and insights drawn from recent practice. A major finding of the article is that the lack of an overarching vision of what ‘success’ might look like allows mediocre or even harmful interventions to flourish and good work to go unrecognized and unrewarded.
Over the past decade, global concern about human trafficking has prompted massive investment into anti-trafficking interventions by intergovernmental organizations, states and civil society. While early interventions took place in a performance evaluation vacuum, there have been growing calls for greater transparency and accountability within the anti-trafficking sector, including through rigorous impact evaluation. Such calls are fully justified. The human rights imperatives that underpin anti- trafficking work and the significant investment of public resources demand that interventions demonstrate accountability, results and beneficial impact. However, in practice this is more complicated and there has been relatively little analysis of the practical issues and challenges that arise in efforts to evaluate anti-trafficking work. In the specialized area of criminal justice responses to trafficking, such analysis is virtually non-existent, despite the increasing attention and resources that are being directed to this aspect of the anti-trafficking response. Impact and effectiveness evaluation in the context of international development is both complicated and contested. Multiple theories and elaborate methodologies abound, and these can present a daunting impediment to those seeking practical guidance on the essential problem of determining “what works”. This paper seeks to cut through some of the complexities by focusing attention on several areas that are directly implicated in measuring anti-trafficking interventions in the criminal justice sector. It is the result of a comprehensive review of relevant literature and recent evaluation reports as well as interviews with key players in the field.
When the TVRP was designed (in 2006) there were very few reintegration programs available to trafficking victims in the Balkan region. Assistance was short term; most victims did not receive longer term support to restore their mental and physical well-being and develop the skills to be economically independent and live in a healthy social environment. In 2010, NEXUS undertook an assessment of the TVRP (Taking stock). This paper summarizes some of the key lessons and results of the assessment including what is reintegration; how long reintegration takes; why reintegration is challenging; and the impact of the TVRP in the lives of trafficked persons.
It is important to systematically monitor assistance programs, to assess if and how reintegration has been achieved as well as how to more effectively reintegrate trafficking victims. This manual outlines two aspects of monitoring – 1) how to monitor individual reintegration plans and 2) how to monitor reintegration services – and provides a matrix, composed of indicators and the associated means of verification, to measure the outcomes and impact of individual services and, cumulatively, the various stages of reintegration. Monitoring is undertaken from the perspective of reintegration service providers (NGOs, IOs and GOs) as well as program beneficiaries.
This report examine best practices in activities designed to prevent trafficking in persons (TIP). The purpose of this report is to help improve anti-trafficking in persons programs in terms of effectiveness and impact, thereby reducing the incidence of TIP. This report was commissioned by USAID’s Europe & Eurasia (E&E) Bureau and covers the following countries: Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, the Republic of Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
This paper explores issues related to the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) of anti-trafficking reintegration programs. Overall, M&E should enhance the conceptual and practical knowledge of reintegration organizations in ways that improve programs and service delivery. This paper discusses, on the one hand, how monitoring should take place within reintegration programs, including the identification of indicators and development of systems to collect, analyze and mobilize information in on-going work. On the other hand, the paper explores various aspects of evaluation work, including different types of evaluations and different approaches in undertaking evaluations of reintegration programs. Overall the paper makes clear that far more time and attention needs to be given to the M&E of reintegration efforts and makes recommendations for strengthening the M&E of anti-trafficking reintegration programs.
This evaluation was requested by USAID/Albania in the context of developing its multi-year country strategy on anti-trafficking, with particular focus on the two existing anti-trafficking projects commenced in 2003 and coming to a close in 2006. These are: The Albanian Initiative: Coordinated Action Against Human Trafficking (CAAHT), a three-year $4.5million contract with Creative Associates International Inc. (CAII); and Transnational Action against Child Trafficking (TACT), a three-year $1.7million cooperative agreement implemented by the Swiss NGO, Terre des hommes (Tdh) with the support of six donors. The evaluation was comprised of three stages: 1) literature review and fieldwork preparation; 2) fieldwork in-country; and 3) report preparation. The evaluation was not designed as research: thus, the result is an analytical evaluation rather than a precise measure of program impact. As the objective of the evaluation was not to assess the current trafficking situation in Albania, it does not present new findings in terms of how trafficking occurs within and from the country. In terms of USAID/Albania’s anti-trafficking (AT) programs, the main overall program impacts have been (i) the infusion of funds and attention to AT efforts, (ii) the focus on government involvement in AT work at the national and local level, (iii) strengthened civil society on AT and associated issues, and (iv) a highlighted importance of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) on program work. Program impact has been limited, to varying degrees, by aspects of the M&E systems and gaps in strategic coordination among TACT, CAAHT and existing networks.