Download English version
Download Spanish version
COVERAGE
The ICLA programme has operated and continues to operate in the ‘right’ parts of the country, i.e. the regions of Colombia where the most vulnerable internally displaced people (IDPs) are located, and it has made significant efforts to reach IDPs that state institutions were not reaching. However, the programme needs to adopt a more systematic approach to contextual analysis and needs assessment, applying targeting criteria, and ensuring access by all social groups within the communities it covers, otherwise it runs the risk of neglecting the most vulnerable.
It is clear that NRC has prioritized strategic presence and quality of services over volume of beneficiaries. This approach has enabled NRC to build and maintain its reputation as an expert and co-operative organization, which is critical to the programme’s success and sustainability.
RELEVANCE
The ICLA programme’s focus on two desired outcomes – IDPs’ inclusion in the official government register (from hereon referred to as ‘the Register’) and enjoyment of housing, land and property (HLP) rights – is highly relevant to IDPs’ needs because it enables them to access the system designed to uphold the rights of victims of armed conflict under Colombian law 1448/2011. Its strategy of institutional strengthening, working alongside state institutions and supporting the work of judges on issues relating to IDPs rights under Law 1448/2011 is also highly appropriate to both the national and local contexts. In both cases, however, NRC could enhance its relevance through systematic and participatory needs assessment and consultation on appropriate programme design.
The time is now ripe for NRC to further clarify the scope of the programme. Firstly, NRC needs to define the limits of its involvement, i.e. until what stage or for how long it is able to follow up on unmet needs and denied rights of particular individuals or communities. Secondly, as ICLA in Colombia has limited its HLP actions to land restitution, other potentially relevant aspects of HLP remain unaddressed to date.
In the so-called ‘post-conflict’ Colombia there will be a continued need for support to IDPs to access registration procedures and HLP rights, due to the presence of other illegal armed groups and the likelihood of continuing displacement and new victims of armed conflict. As/when the peace process is consolidated, other issues are also likely to come to the fore, such as sexual and gender-based violence, restricted movement and forced recruitment. To keep relevant, NRC will also need to respond to these issues.
EFFECTIVENESS
Through the services and accompaniment it has provided to communities and individuals. NRC ICLA has increased their ability to demand that their rights are upheld and has enabled them to participate effectively in public policy issues affecting them. The programme has attained almost all its targets at output level, and in some instances it has surpassed them by far. It has been quite successful at the outcome level but, due to some assumptions in the theory of change that have not held true, a proportion of its beneficiaries are not obtaining the desired results, i.e. land titles and/or humanitarian assistance, within the expected timeframes. The strategy needs adjusting to manage expectations and increase the accountability of the state institutions on which some results depend.
Beneficiaries and institutional partners attribute NRC ICLA’s success to the advocacy it carries out at local and national levels, the inter-institutional coordination it has generated, and its dedication to leadership development and community strengthening. The evaluation team also considers that the reinforced presence of NRC and the ICLA programme in the field has allowed it to further develop the qualities that contribute to its effectiveness: legitimacy, impartiality, transparency, expertise, and credibility.
IMPACT
Beneficiaries, state institutions, partners and staff unanimously agree that the programme has had, and continues to have, high impact. It has generated significant, positive change in the lives of the beneficiaries that have achieved the financial and material support to which they are entitled, and has transformed the way in which beneficiary communities interact with the State institutions to claim their rights. According to beneficiaries in municipalities where the ICLA programme has been implemented alongside other NRC interventions, overall impact is increased. The evaluation team also noted other likely impacts of community strengthening, including prevention of coercion by illegal armed actors, and establishing foundations for peace.
In addition to changes in the lives of its direct beneficiaries, broader impacts have and will be achieved through the attitudinal changes that the programme has achieved, and the emblematic cases that have influenced and will influence the outcome of others across the country.
As noted above, to enhance the programme’s impact, the theory of change requires some modifications. Bottlenecks in the chain of results and false assumptions about the capacity and will of state institution need to be addressed so that the programme can fully achieve its objectives and bring about deep and lasting change. Also, to improve measurement of impact (and effectiveness), NRC needs to have baselines and a more systematic approach to capturing its beneficiaries’ views.
The full impact of NRC’s decentralization strategy is not yet clear. Partial and anecdotal evidence exists of positive trends (such as more consistent follow-up of cases, and effective local institutional partnerships) but it is too early to judge if it is achieving all that NRC intended.
PROTECTION POLICY
Although field staff are not familiar with NRC’s policy per se, they are, in effect, implementing most aspects of both of its parts: proactive and safe programming.
Overall, the ICLA programme has largely achieved its objectives with regard to coverage, relevance and appropriateness to IDPs’ needs. It has been moderately to largely effective in achieving the results it aims for, and is generating significant, positive impacts in the lives of its beneficiaries and others in Colombia.
To enhance its performance in all areas – and ultimately its impact – NRC should:
- Strengthen contextual analysis, including of the capacities and weaknesses of state institutions and other actors, to ensure that the programme is designed to reach the most vulnerable, both on national and local scales.
- Prioritize strategic presence and effectiveness over geographic expansion, in order to generate the greatest possible impact in the lives of beneficiaries, build the capacity of key institutions and set precedents in complex and/emblematic cases.
- Increase the involvement of the target beneficiary group – IDPs, victims of the conflict – in needs assessment, monitoring and learning exercises.
- Use context analysis and projections of needs to decide what emphasis should be given to registration, land restitution and public policy in the post-conflict scenario. Consider including more elements that contribute to durable solutions, such as holistic compensation, and clarification and formalization of land, neighbourhoods and housing.
- Adapt the ICLA programme’s theory of change to ensure goals are attainable; if necessary, redesign the programme to address institutional weaknesses and obstacles, and adapt monitoring and evaluation to reflect realistic objectives and timescales.
- Ensure all staff ‘own’ and use the Monitoring and Evaluation Framework to analyse and increase the programme’s effectiveness, rather than seeing it as a reporting tool.
- Strengthen the ICLA team’s knowledge of institutional approaches and policies, including the protection policy; in turn, enrich NRC’s global approach by sharing learning from the Colombian context.
The evaluation has directly fed into the NRC Colombia's strategy for 2018 and the country office is currently developing a management response to the evaluation.