126
Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities International Emergency and Refugee Health Branch Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Atlanta, U.S.A. October-December 2010

Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    6

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

International Emergency and Refugee Health BranchCenters for Disease Control and Prevention

Atlanta, U.S.A.October-December 2010

Page 2: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Executive summary

Nearly three decades of civil conflict between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam resulted in significant contamination with landmines and explosive remnants of war (ERW). In addition to marked minefields, contaminated physical locations include living areas such as houses, livelihood areas such as gardens and agricultural and pastoral land, and common areas such as roads and water sources. Landmines and ERW pose a threat to civilians living in contaminated areas; between 2000 and 6 September 2010, 915 landmine and ERW casualties were reported in 20 districts. i In addition to the threat of injury or death, contamination has posed a major obstacle to resettlement ii and economic reconstructioniii following the conflict.

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in Sri Lanka conducts mine risk education (MRE) activities in partnership with a network of national and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and government and community partners. Mine action (MA) personnel based in Colombo and four UNICEF zonal offices provide technical support to personnel from five national NGOs and the Humanitarian Demining Unit (HDU) of the Sri Lanka Army (SLA), who implement community-based MRE in ten districts. UNICEF supports school-based MRE in partnership with the Ministry of Education and other government education stakeholders. Additional MRE partners include some demining agencies, who conduct community liaison (CL) activities, and various non-profit and commercial partners who conduct MRE media campaigns. UNICEF also provides financial and technical support to the National Mine Action Centre (NMAC) and District Mine Action Offices (DMAOs), which will eventually assume leadership of all MRE and other MA activities.

In early 2010, UNICEF Sri Lanka initiated an external evaluation of its MRE activities. The goal of the evaluation was “to contribute to the review, planning and improvement of the prevention strategies which have been implemented thus far in Sri Lanka for the purpose of minimizing the number of victim-activated explosions” and the objective was “to assess the relevance and effectiveness of the support provided by UNICEF in addressing the MA needs in Sri Lanka in …MRE.” The evaluation was carried out by members of the International Emergency and Refugee Health Branch at the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities were evaluated according to the United Nations (UN) Evaluation Group’s Norms and Standards for Evaluationiv and the International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) Mine Risk Education Best Practice Guidebook 8 on evaluation, developed in 2005 by UNICEF and the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining. Additional interview questions and qualitative methods (see Section V.B below) were developed based on the evaluation team’s previous MRE evaluation experience and conversations with key stakeholders in Sri Lanka. Field work was carried out during five weeks in September and October 2010 with technical and logistical support from the UNICEF Sri Lanka central and zonal offices. The evaluation team used three primary methods for the evaluation: document review; qualitative data collection via 75 interviews, group discussions and meetings in Colombo and eight additional districts; and observation of community-based MRE activities conducted by four MRE partners. Evaluation questions focused primarily on the current time, although participants often mentioned past activities and events.

The evaluation team’s findings are divided into six sections: coordination and planning of MA and MRE; injury risk and MRE targeting, coverage, and messaging; MRE methods, techniques, and materials; CL; monitoring and evaluation of MRE activities; and additional community considerations. Findings and recommendations related to trap gun use and injury and a summary of qualitative data about key community influencers and methods of communication were included as appendices to the final report. Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are summarized below.

i Sri Lanka Mined Area Database (2010). Summary statistics, 1 January 2000 – 6 September 2010.ii International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2009). Landmine monitor 2009 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2009&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. iii International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.iv United Nations Evaluation Group (April 2005). Norms for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved 8 August 2010 from http://www.escwa.un.org/divisions/pptcd/upload/uneg.pdf. United Nations Evaluation Group (April 2005). Standards for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved 8 August 2010 from http://www.uneval.org/papersandpubs/documentdetail.jsp?doc_id=22.

2 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 3: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

KEY STRENGTHS

• The establishment of the NMAC, development and implementation of national MA standards, and finalization of a national MA strategy demonstrate the government’s dedication to advancing MA activities. • UNICEF central and zonal personnel are knowledgeable, experienced, and dedicated to their work.• UNICEF has fostered a very positive relationship with the NMAC.• Good relationships between UNICEF and some SLA field commanders facilitate the SLA permission process. UNICEF and NGO personnel maintain strong relationships with the HDU, government agents (district administrative heads, or GAs), and other local partners, who often intervene when MRE field personnel are stopped at checkpoints.• UNICEF has fostered positive relationships with government education personnel at the central, provincial, district, and local levels. Government education personnel who met with the evaluation team understood and discussed the importance of MRE for school-aged children and seemed supportive, enthusiastic, and well-organized.• NGO MRE trainers are very committed to their work. NGO MRE community session trainers appeared confident, knowledgeable, and engaging during observed MRE sessions. Several NGOs make an effort to work through existing government and village-level structures rather than create new ones.• HDU personnel are dedicated to providing high-quality MRE activities to communities. Many HDU personnel cultivate positive relationships in the communities they serve; they sometimes play with child and youth clubs and have collaborated with local NGO chapters to organize sports clubs for local youth.• NGO and HDU personnel support each other’s contributions to MRE and coordinate activities together in several districts. Positive relationships between NGO and HDU personnel improve MRE programming and build peace and trust within communities. • NGO field workers believe that the methods they learn during trainings are appropriate for the communities they target, and report feeling knowledgeable and confident to perform their field duties following UNICEF trainings.• The joint Mines Advisory Group (MAG)-UNICEF capacity building project objectively reviews the activities of NGOs and targets project areas in need of strengthening.• MRE and demining teams exchange information that is beneficial to each other’s programming.• Strong links between MRE and victim assistance stakeholders connect survivors and their families with needed resources and services.• NGOs invite landmine and ERW survivors to participate in MRE activities.• MRE partners utilize integration of MRE with child protection and other development concerns to strengthen skills, connect people with needed resources and trainings, and conserve UNICEF and NGO resources.• Selection of communities and schools for MRE is conducted based on injury and contamination data and in collaboration with Grama Sevakas (GSs)v and DMAO and UNICEF personnel. Special efforts are made to address the needs of high-risk populations.• Integration of MRE into the national school curriculum will reach all children who pass through government schools, and these children will be able to spread MRE messages to others.• When asked about messages used in the field, NGO MRE trainers consistently answered that they use the curriculum of core messages provided by UNICEF. Use of the same core messages by all MRE operators guarantees the consistency of MRE messages delivered.• UNICEF and partner NGOs have updated messages according to changing contamination, injury trends, and newly developing risk behaviors and misunderstandings.• Partners have used a wide variety of MRE settings, methods and techniques, often developing different approaches to reach specific communities and populations.• NGOs value the review and revision of materials with other MRE stakeholders, and some have conducted formal field-testing. NGOs have made several modifications to improve MRE materials following field tests.• UNICEF and NGO partners have improved the cost-effectiveness of community-based MRE.• Some challenges, such as removal of landmine/ERW signs, markings, and stakes from demining sites, have been resolved via CL.• Creation and use of community maps have encouraged village participation in MRE.• Evaluation participants believe that risk reduction initiatives such as the Safer Village project have reduced engagement in high-risk behaviors in some areas.• Overall, community views of MRE heard by the evaluation team were overwhelmingly positive.

v The smallest administrative unit in Sri Lanka is referred to as a “Grama Niladhari”, or “GN” Division in Sinhala and “Grama Sevaka” or “GS” Division in Tamil. “GS” is used in this report because most evaluation participants use this term.

3 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 4: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

KEY CHALLENGES• Some donors fear that the external—rather than internal—impetus and significant external funding for the establishment of the NMAC questions its ability to function in the future without significant external support.• The implementation of MRE activities has been obstructed by the need to obtain Ministry of Defence clearance, a lack of support from some government personnel (see Section VI.A.2.a), and—until recently—required approval by the Presidential Task Force for Resettlement, Development and Security (see Section VI.A.4.c.ii). • The placement of UNICEF MA focal points (in UNICEF zonal offices or DMAOs) has not been resolved, leading to confusion and frustration among several stakeholders.• Some UNICEF MA focal points seem overwhelmed with duties and unable to complete all of their tasks.• Combining MRE with child protection issues may have endangered government support of MRE activities.• MRE partners do not always have sufficient knowledge of MRE implementing partners and activities in specific areas. • NGO MRE teams are often stopped by local SLA personnel, leading to delays and cancellations of MRE programs. • The review process for proposals and contracts within and between UNICEF and NGOs is inefficient. • Internal UNICEF bureaucracy at the central level is slowing the pace at which contracts and proposals are approved.• A combination of access, approval, and contract delays has effectively shut down civilian capacity for programming in some areas, notably in Jaffna District.• Feedback on MRE training sessions does not appear to be solicited in a consistent or effective manner. • HDU teams do not include women or representatives of several ethnic and religious communities. • Most HDU personnel do not speak Tamil and cannot communicate adequately with participants in community-based MRE.• At this time no clear uniform policy is enforced during HDU MRE activities. • Some Village Child Rights Monitoring Committees, child clubs, and other village-based partners are not currently functioning.• NGO and HDU partners experience considerable transportation shortages in the field.• Some local partners are having difficulty conducting programs with limited resources.• Many evaluation participants believe that school-oriented MRE has been inadequate.• A UNICEF risk reduction consultant found several obstacles to school-based MRE, including poor prioritization of MRE relative to other subjects and “lukewarm enthusiasm” among teachers.• Little or no quality assurance (QA) is conducted on the Sri Lanka Mined Area Database (SLMAD). SLMAD contents are not adequately analyzed and regular reports based on these contents are not created or used sufficiently during the planning of MA activities. • Many MRE partners conduct knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) surveys but do not always analyze survey results or use them for program planning. Because NGOs do not use the same sampling methods, data collected in different communities and at different times cannot be compared to determine trends. • Low levels of injury give people a false sense of security.• People living in landmine- and ERW-affected areas do not have adequate access to alternative livelihood projects.• No formal process or standard technical procedures are in place to clear wells. As a result, people try to clear wells themselves or hire others to clear them.• Targeting of foreign returnees, Sri Lankan tourists, religious pilgrims and workers from unaffected areas is inadequate.• Evaluation participants believe that certain more accessible communities have been targeted multiple times while some less accessible communities have not been targeted at all. • Some demining agency personnel are bridging MRE coverage gaps with their own MRE activities. Demining agencies do not conduct activities using messages and methods agreed upon by UNICEF and partners.• Misinformation and misunderstandings related to landmines and ERW prevail among target audiences.• MA partners are spreading inconsistent messages about community markings.• The presence of uniformed military personnel at MRE sessions conducted by NGOs may intimidate civilian participants or dissuade them from participating during MRE sessions.• Some materials have contained mistranslations between Tamil and Sinhala.• Materials have not been field-tested in a consistent manner.• Demining agencies never received CL support personnel pledged by UNICEF.• Some communities receive very little information about demining progress or future demining plans.• MRE monitoring criteria currently used by DMAO personnel are superficial and do not measure the quality of MRE activities. SLMAD MRE monitoring information is not being adequately used in planning of MRE. • Some UNICEF and NGO personnel have been asked to leave communities upon arrival to conduct MRE activities.• Challenges unrelated to landmines and ERW trouble communities and prevent uptake of MRE messages.• Little action has been taken to address trap gun proliferation and injury. KEY RECOMMENDATIONS

4 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 5: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

(References to sections of origin in parentheses; a full list of recommendations is available in Section VII).

National coordination activities• Utilize UNICEF’s strong relationships with senior government and military personnel to secure permission to allow MRE activities to continue as planned. Engage the assistance of government-affiliated personnel (such as representatives of the HDU and DMAOs), non-HDU deminers, and advocates from disabled servicemen’s organizations and/or other victim assistance and advocacy groups who are supportive of and knowledgeable about community-based MRE activities. (VI.A.1.b.i, VI.A.4.c.ii)• Encourage the hiring of NMAC and DMAO personnel who have the skills, experiences, and competencies recommended by IMAS (available in Appendix D). The NMAC and DMAOs may wish to consider hiring NGO workers with significant field experience for such positions. (VI.A.1.a, VI.A.2.a)District and zonal coordination activities• Finalize the decision regarding placement of UNICEF MA focal points in UNICEF zonal offices or DMAOs. The evaluation team recommends placement in the DMAOs, which would improve government MRE capacity and enhance coordination with other MA activities. If stakeholders decide that the UNICEF MA focal points should split their time between the two locations, adherence to a regular weekly schedule with equal time in each office will improve time management and communication with partners in both offices. (VI.A.1.c, VI.A.2.a)• Assess the workloads of UNICEF MA focal points and reassign non-MRE child protection responsibilities to other UNICEF staff in locations in which MRE is urgently needed at this time—especially in areas with increased resettlement and insufficient MRE coverage. (VI.A.2.b) Training and capacity building of MRE partners• Establish refresher trainings for all NGO and HDU MRE trainers on a regularly scheduled basis. (VI.A.3.a.i)• Collect training feedback in a consistent and confidential manner, preferably on paper, and use both positive and negative feedback to guide future trainings. Discuss feedback immediately following trainings, while memories are fresh and trainers are not occupied with other activities. (VI.A.3.a.ii)• Compare indicators measured in the ongoing MAG-UNICEF capacity building project with the indicators recommended for training needs assessments by IMAS (see Appendix E) and edit ongoing and future project indicators as necessary. (VI.A.3.b)Coordination of community-based MRE• Create a clear record—via a chart, map, or diagram—of MRE implementing partners and activities in specific areas (“who is doing what where”) to find areas of low coverage and avoid duplication of MRE activities for specific populations. (VI.A.4.b)• Strengthen community-based volunteer networks to increase MRE coverage. Community-based MRE creates a powerful “leave behind legacy” with local networks of community-based volunteers trained in advocacy and communication skills. Community-based volunteers can provide valuable assistance—not only for MRE but for other health and social interventions. Consider the “barefoot doctor”—or “barefoot health educator—modelvi to increase MRE coverage in rural areas. (VI.A.4.d)• Discuss physical access problems with senior SLA personnel. Acknowledge that this is a problem of communication rather than intent, and avoid blaming lower-level SLA personnel who are conducting their jobs as they have been instructed. Educate lower-level SLA personnel about MRE activities to increase their familiarity and comfort with MRE teams and materials. (VI.A.4.c.i)• Assess the extent to which MRE field officers are at risk of occupational injury and reduce these risks wherever possible. (VI.A.4.d)• Urge senior HDU personnel to hire women, representatives of more ethnic and religious communities, and fluent—and preferably native—Tamil speakers. If they are unable to hire additional personnel they may be able to second experienced NGO personnel for MRE activities. (VI.A.4.a.ii)• Encourage the HDU leadership to finalize a clear dress code for HDU personnel conducting MRE in communities, ideally with civilian clothes or with the blue Ministry of Economic Development (MoED) uniform as a second choice. HDU—not UNICEF—personnel should monitor adherence to the uniform policy. (VI.A.4.a.ii, VI.D.2)• Continue to coordinate joint NGO and HDU MRE activities and discuss their benefits during high-level advocacy activities with relevant government personnel. Language and cultural barriers and the history of the conflict will not allow HDU personnel to work as well in communities, but they have much to offer when partnering with NGOs. (VI.A.4.a)• Coordinate MRE activities conducted by HDU personnel for Sinhala-speaking people traveling to landmine- and ERW-affected areas from unaffected parts of the country. (VI.A.4.a.ii)

vi According to the “barefoot doctor” model, first popularized in the 1960s in the People’s Republic of China, lay people receive basic medical and health training in order to serve rural communities. This model has been replicated in the fields of dentistry and health education in many low-resource settings, leading to more efficient use of limited resources and higher service coverage among rural communities.

5 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 6: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Coordination of school-based MRE• Study the recommendations made by the risk reduction consultant for education authorities, school principals, and UNICEF MA personnel—as well as the additions and edits of other UNICEF personnel—and implement recommendations as appropriate to improve coordination of school-based MRE. (VI.A.5.a.ii)• Provide adequate instruction and materials to ensure that all district, zonal, and local education personnel have adequate knowledge and materials to incorporate MRE into their routine teaching activities. (VI.A.5.a.ii)Data collection and use for planning and implementation of MRE• Develop standardized QA procedures to improve management of the SLMAD. (VI.A.6.a) • Develop procedures to guarantee regular analysis, reporting, and use of a minimum set of key SLMAD variables by DMAOs and other stakeholders. Explore the possibility of automated data analysis. EpiInfo, for example, can be programmed to allow people with little epidemiologic or database training to generate basic reports with a simple series of keystrokes. (VI.A.6.a)• Ensure that all fields are consistent on the SLMAD data collection forms and in the database. (VI.A.6.a)• Require NGOs to maintain well-organized records of KAP results. Collect results in a national repository and use both aggregate and location-specific data to guide programming. Include training in KAP survey administration and submission of KAP data to the DMAOs in the NGO accreditation criteria (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii). (VI.A.6.b)• Collaborate with representatives of all NGOs to create standardized KAP sampling methods and ensure that all NGO personnel use them. (VI.A.6.b) Integration of MRE with other programming• Investigate the possibility that combining MRE and child protection programming has hindered implementation of MRE activities, particularly in relation to government approvals (see Section VI.A.4.c). If this is found to be a significant problem, reconsider the decision to combine MRE and child protection activities. (VI.A.7.c)Injury risk and MRE targeting, coverage, and messaging• Increase MRE coverage in Jaffna with media campaigns and targeting of specific groups, including school children, high-risk workers, and tourists and religious pilgrims coming from unaffected parts of Sri Lanka. (VI.B.3)• Collaborate with demining agencies to find gaps in MRE coverage and work with DMAOs and other MRE partners to bridge these gaps. Discourage demining agencies from conducting MRE activities unless they have been accredited by the NMAC and agree to disseminate messages consistent with those used by UNICEF and partner NGOs. (VI.B.3)• Target returning populations via government and NGO service providers and GAs, Divisional Secretaries, and GSs. (VI.B.2.c)• Target working populations via transportation and construction companies, the Ministry of Transport, and employment agencies. (VI.B.2.c)• Partner with the MoED, Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority, travel guide writers, travel bureaus and companies, other tourism partners, and temple personnel to target tourists and religious pilgrims. (VI.B.2.c)• Target child surrendees/separatees through UN and other programs. (VI.B.2.c)• Collaborate with the DMAOs to assign responsibility for particular communities to each MRE implementing partner, either during meetings or by other methods of communication (telephone or e-mail). Establish a strong external monitoring system (see Section VI.E.1) that is inclusive of all MRE partners. Monitor districts where different partners are conducting MRE activities to ensure that communities are being targeted appropriately. (VI.B.2.c)• Determine the frequency of certain high-risk behaviors (such as removing stakes and using ERW as household items) and use risk reduction measures (see Section VI.D.2) to address situations in which people continue these behaviors despite understanding the risk of injury. (VI.B.1.d)• Urge the DMAOs and demining partners to develop standard procedures to clear wells and inform communities about these procedures. In the absence of such procedures, conduct risk reduction activities (see Section VI.D.2) to decrease the risk of injury. (VI.B.1.d)• Work with all relevant stakeholders to develop one unified national policy for community marking of landmines and ERW and ensure that all partners are committed to this policy. This policy may decree marking by no civilians, marking by some civilians (such as NGO personnel), or marking by all civilians. If some or all civilians are expected to conduct community marking, they should be trained to mark objects and areas safely. (VI.B.4.c.ii)• Address high-risk practices among military personnel with their superiors and explain why these behaviors—though possibly safe for military personnel—may be setting an unsafe example for civilians. Request that military authorities create policies to dissuade their personnel from engaging in such behaviors, particularly in the presence of civilians. (VI.B.4.c.ii)

6 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 7: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

MRE methods, techniques, and materials• Encourage military members who are present at community-based MRE activities to wear non-military clothing and take a more active—rather than observatory—role in trainings. Increased engagement of HDU personnel may also dissuade other military personnel from feeling that it is necessary to observe MRE sessions. These actions may prevent civilian participants from feeling anxious, frightened, or otherwise uncomfortable during MRE sessions. (VI.C.1.e)• Collaborate with MRE partners to determine which materials contain mistranslations. Create a professionally translated set of core messages in both Tamil and Sinhala and ensure that materials created in the future are translated and back-translated by separate professional translators. Consider the use of more wordless materials, such as a well-designed leaflet with core messages in the form of illustrations (see Section VI.C.2.c). (VI.C.2.c)• Create a centrally-produced, high-quality, colorful and attractive leaflet that contains images of all core MRE messages without words (see Appendix H for example).• Create a new set of laminated training flashcards that includes all core MRE messages; risk and safe behaviors for which photographs are not available can be illustrated with drawings. Consider binding the flashcards into a flipchart (see Appendix H for example) to ensure proper order of messages, keep images flat (to improve visibility), and increase grip and usability. (VI.C.2.c)Community liaison• Hire and train CL personnel promised to demining agencies and coordinate their integration with demining teams. (VI.D.2)• Strengthen the risk reduction capacity of MA partners by increasing funding, training, and other resources. Continue and increase support of alternative livelihood activities for people living in landmine- and ERW-affected areas. (VI.D.2)• Improve communication between DMAOs and GSs, who can share information about demining priorities and schedules with community members. (VI.D.2)Monitoring and evaluation of MRE activities• Collaborate with MRE stakeholders to create a new MRE monitoring checklist that is IMAS-based, simple to use, and useful for program planning. According to IMAS, monitoring should track and monitor program activities and how these capabilities are being applied as well as changes in the landmine/ERW threat and operating environment (including changes in priorities, target groups, behavior, victim surveillance, victim assistance, and humanitarian demining).vii Use IMAS Guidebook 7 for guidance, exclude information that will not be used, and provide results to all relevant stakeholders. (VI.E.1.c)• Use geographic information system (GIS) technology to overlay population or resettlement data with MRE activities conducted. This will allow partners to study and improve MRE targeting and coverage. SLMAD personnel at the DMAOs are able to create maps by combining database contents with GIS technology. (VI.E.1.c)• Focus MA resources and attention on internal program improvements and postpone conducting an impact evaluation. Given the amount of financial and human resources such an evaluation would take, it is necessary to determine whether a) the findings would justify the costs, and b) this is the right time for such an evaluation. Given other challenges faced by MRE partners in Sri Lanka, the evaluation team recommends postponing plans for an impact evaluation at this time and reconsidering it in the future, if desired. (VI.E.2.b.i)• Collaborate with colleagues in the Communications Section and other UNICEF Sections to conduct a broader survey on preferred sources of information for different kinds of social and health issues. Many questions raised by representatives of the UNICEF Communications Section (see Appendix G)—regarding key influencers, use of technology, and preferred information methods—are also applicable to many topics external to MRE. If several UNICEF sections (Child Protection, Health, Education, etc.) collaborated on such a study, the findings could be used to provide communities with messages on a wide range of topics. (VI.E.2.b.i)Additional community considerations• Investigate each situation in which UNICEF and/or NGO personnel have been asked to leave communities and determine exactly why they were asked to leave in each case. Address concerns with community leaders and MA stakeholders and conduct risk reduction activities as needed. (VI.F.1)• Speak with community members and other stakeholders about community concerns. Network with NGOs, community-based organizations, and government partners to educate all stakeholders about community challenges and available resources, and ensure that MRE field officers know how to refer individuals in need to available services. (VI.F.2)Trap gun use and injury• Incorporate trap gun education into community- and school-based MRE activities conducted by UNICEF and partners (including training of trainers (see Sections VI.A.3.a and VI.A.5.a.iii), development of core messages (see Section VI.B.4.a), and creation of materials (see Section VI.C.2). (Appendix C)• Educate the public about trap guns via media campaigns. (Appendix C)• Anticipate a future increase in trap gun proliferation and use and plan activities accordingly. (Appendix C)

vii United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 7: monitoring. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NZSSR/$file/imas-7gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.

7 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 8: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Table of Contents

Executive summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 2

Table of Contents .............................................................................................................................................................. 8

III List of figures, tables, and maps ...................................................................................................................................... 13

IV Background ..................................................................................................................................................................... 14

IV.A Political and administrative divisions in Sri Lanka .................................................................................................... 14

IV.B The Sri Lankan civil conflict and use of explosive devices ........................................................................................ 15

IV.C Demining efforts and current explosive device contamination ............................................................................... 16

IV.D Injuries due to landmines and explosive remnants of war (ERW) ............................................................................ 16

IV.D.1 Measurement of landmine and ERW injuries in Sri Lanka ................................................................................ 16

IV.D.2 Injury trends and risk factors for landmine and ERW injuries .......................................................................... 17

IV.E Introduction to coordination of mine action (MA) and mine risk education (MRE) in Sri Lanka .............................. 18

IV.F Goal, objective, and major tasks of the evaluation ................................................................................................... 19

V. Methods .......................................................................................................................................................................... 20

V.A Document review ...................................................................................................................................................... 20

V.B Interviews, group discussions, and meetings ............................................................................................................ 21

V.C Observation of community-based MRE activities ...................................................................................................... 23

V.D Additional evaluation activities ................................................................................................................................. 23

VI. Findings .......................................................................................................................................................................... 24

VI.A Coordination and planning of MA and MRE ............................................................................................................. 24

VI.A.1 National coordination activities ........................................................................................................................ 24

VI.A.2 District and zonal coordination activities .......................................................................................................... 29

VI.A.3 Training and capacity building of community MRE partners ............................................................................. 31

VI.A.4 Coordination of community-based MRE ........................................................................................................... 34

VI.A.5 Coordination of school-based MRE ................................................................................................................... 44

VI.A.6 Data collection and use for planning and implementation of MRE ................................................................... 48

8 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 9: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VI.A.7 Integration of MRE with other programming .................................................................................................... 50

VI.B Injury risk and MRE targeting, coverage, and messaging ......................................................................................... 55

VI.B.1 Injury risk ........................................................................................................................................................... 55

VI.B.2 MRE targeting .................................................................................................................................................... 59

VI.B.3 MRE coverage ................................................................................................................................................... 60

VI.B.4 MRE messaging ................................................................................................................................................. 61

VI.C MRE methods, techniques, and materials ................................................................................................................ 64

VI.C.1 MRE methods and techniques ........................................................................................................................... 64

VI.C.2 Print and media materials for MRE ................................................................................................................... 68

VI.D Community liaison ................................................................................................................................................... 70

VI.D.1 Community relationships and communications with partners ......................................................................... 70

VI.D.2 Development of risk reduction strategies ......................................................................................................... 71

VI.E Monitoring and evaluation of MRE activities ........................................................................................................... 73

VI.E.1 Monitoring of MRE activities ............................................................................................................................. 73

VI.E.2 Evaluation of MRE activities .............................................................................................................................. 74

VI.F Additional community considerations ...................................................................................................................... 77

VI.F.1 Community acceptance and impressions of MRE .............................................................................................. 78

VI.F.2 Community needs, challenges, and concerns .................................................................................................... 78

VII. Summary of recommendations ..................................................................................................................................... 81

VIII. Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................................ 89

IX. List of references ............................................................................................................................................................ 90

X. Appendices ...................................................................................................................................................................... 92

Appendix A. Maps of Sri Lanka ........................................................................................................................................ 93

Appendix B. Summary of landmine and ERW injury trends and risk factors ................................................................... 94

Table 5. Number of incidents in districts, most highly affected districts, mortality rate ............................................. 94

Table 6. Device type, gender of casualty, age of casualty ............................................................................................ 96

Table 7. Occupation of casualty, activity at time of incident, receipt of MRE prior to incident ................................... 98

9 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 10: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix C. Findings and recommendations related to trap gun use and injury .......................................................... 100

Appendix D. Recommended skill, experience, and competency areas for NMAC and DMAO staff ............................... 103

Appendix E. Recommended skill, experience, and competency areas for training needs assessments ........................ 104

Appendix F. Sri Lanka Mined Area Database MRE KAP form ......................................................................................... 105

I don’t know ........................................................................................................................................................ 105

Others (specify)___________________________________________ ............................................................................. 106

Others (specify)_____________________________________ ......................................................................................... 107

Appendix G. Summary of qualitative data about key community influencers and methods of communication ........... 108

Appendix H. Examples of MRE materials used in other settings ................................................................................... 115

MRE kits ......................................................................................................................................................................... 115

Appendix J. Recommendations from the 2007 evaluation of MRE activities by Ramazzotti ......................................... 121

XI. References .................................................................................................................................................................... 123

10 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 11: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

II....................................................................................................................................List of acronyms

ADE – Assistant Director of EducationAXO – abandoned explosive ordnanceCBO – community-based organizationCDC – Centers for Disease Control and PreventionCL – community liaisonCTF – Community Trust FundDMAO – District Mine Action OfficeDS – Divisional SecretaryEHED-Caritas – Eastern Human Economic Development-CaritasERW – explosive remnant(s) of warEU – European UnionGA – Government AgentGIS – geographic information systemGS – Grama SevakaHDU – Humanitarian Demining UnitHSZ – High Security ZoneIDP – internally displaced personIERHB – International Emergency and Refugee Health BranchIMAS – International Mine Action StandardsIMSMA – Information Management System for Mine ActionINGO – international non-governmental organizationISA – (government education) in-service advisorKAP – knowledge, attitudes, and practices LTTE – Liberation Tigers of Tamil EelamMA = mine actionMAG – Mines Advisory GroupMoD – Ministry of DefenceMoE – Ministry of EducationMoED – Ministry of Economic DevelopmentMoHN – Ministry of Healthcare and NutritionMRE – mine risk educationNCoE – National Colleges of EducationNGO – non-governmental organizationNIE – National Institute of EducationNMAC – National Mine Action CentreNSCMA – National Steering Committee on Mine ActionNSMASL – National Strategy for Mine Action in Sri LankaPTF – Presidential Task Force for Resettlement, Development and SecurityQA – quality assuranceRDF – Rural Development FoundationRDS – Rural Development SocietyRMAO – Regional Mine Action OfficeSLA – Sri Lanka ArmySLMAD – Sri Lanka Mined Area DatabaseSLMAS – Sri Lankan Mine Action StandardsSOND – Social Organization Networking for Development

11 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 12: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

SOP – standard operating procedureStC – Save the ChildrenTOR – Terms of ReferenceTTC – Teacher Training CollegeTWG – technical working groupUN – United NationsUNDP – United Nations Development ProgrammeUNDSS – United Nations Department of Safety and SecurityUNHCR – Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for RefugeesUNICEF – United Nations Children’s FundUXO – unexploded ordnanceVA – victim assistanceVCRMC – Village Child Rights Monitoring CommitteeWRDS – Women’s Rural Development Society

12 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 13: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

III List of figures, tables, and maps

Figure 1. Summary of administrative divisions and personnel ............................................................................. Section IV.AFigure 2. Number of incidents per district, 2000 – 6 September 2010 ............................................................. Section IV.D.2Figure 3. Landmine and ERW incidents and casualties, 2000 - 2009 ................................................................. Section IV.D.2Figure 4. Locations of evaluation field work .......................................................................................................... Section V.BFigure 5. Resource needs of MRE implementing partners ............................................................................. Section VI.A.4.dFigure 6. Partner NGO program areas ............................................................................................................ Section VI.A.7.cFigure 7. Key community influencers mentioned by group discussion participants ............................................. Appendix GFigure 8. Most important information sources used by men, women, and children ............................................ Appendix GFigure 9. Images of MRE kits used in Nepal .......................................................................................................... Appendix HFigure 10. Images of MRE banners used in the Democratic Republic of the Congo .............................................. Appendix HFigure 11. Images of a wordless MRE leaflet used in Nepal .................................................................................. Appendix HFigure 12. Images of MRE flipcharts used in Nepal ............................................................................................... Appendix H

Table 1. Selected characteristics of the four largest ethnic groups in Sri Lanka ...................................................... Section IVTable 2. MRE implementing partners by district .................................................................................................. Section IV.ETable 3. MRE evaluation participants .................................................................................................................... Section V.BTable 4. MRE methods currently used in Sri Lanka ....................................................................................... Section VI.C.1.c.iTable 5. Number of incidents in districts, most highly affected districts, mortality rate ....................................... Appendix BTable 6. Device type, gender of casualty, age of casualty, mortality rate ............................................................. Appendix BTable 7. Occupation of casualty, activity at time of incident, receipt of MRE prior to incident ............................ Appendix BTable 8. Preferred information sources within IMAS communication channels ................................................... Appendix GTable 9. Other preferred information sources ...................................................................................................... Appendix G

Map A1. Geographic location of Sri Lanka ............................................................................................................ Appendix AMap A2. Districts of Sri Lanka ............................................................................................................................... Appendix A

13 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 14: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

IV Background

The Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka is an island nation in South Asia with a population of approximately 21.5 million 1 (see Map 1 in Appendix A for the geographic location of Sri Lanka). The majority of Sri Lankans are Sinhalese, followed by significant populations of Tamils and Sri Lankan Moors and smaller numbers of Burghers and Malays; estimates of the breakdown of various ethnic groups vary widely by source.viii The Sinhalese speak Sinhala and are predominantly Buddhist, with Christian and Muslim minorities. Sri Lankan and Indian (or Indian Origin) Tamils speak Tamil and are predominantly Hindu, also with Christian and Muslim minorities. Sri Lankan Moors speak Tamil and are predominantly Muslim. Table 1 below contains selected characteristics of the four largest ethnic groups:

ETHNIC GROUPPRIMARY

LANGUAGE RELIGION GEOGRAPHIC CONCENTRATIONSinhalese Sinhala Predominantly Buddhist, with

Christian and Muslim minoritiesNorthwestern, western, southern and central

Sri Lankan Tamils Tamil Predominantly Hindu, with a Christian minority

Northern, eastern and western

Indian (or Indian Origin) Tamils Tamil Predominantly Hindu, with Christian and Muslim minorities

Southern, central and western

Sri Lankan Moors Tamil Predominantly Muslim Western, central and easternTable 1. Selected characteristics of the four largest ethnic groups in Sri Lanka

IV.A Political and administrative divisions in Sri Lanka

The smallest administrative unit in Sri Lanka is a Grama Niladhari (GN) or Grama Sevaka (GS) Division. ix The 14,008 GN (GS) Divisions in the country are grouped into 324 Divisional Secretary (DS) Divisions. DS Divisions are grouped into 25 Districts, which are further clustered into nine provinces. Map 2 in Appendix A shows the nine provinces and 25 district headquarters; Figure 1 below provides a summary of administrative divisions and personnel.

viii Most cited ethnicity data are taken from the 2001 Census of Population and Housing, which reached only 18 of 25 districts in Sri Lanka. The original data gave the

following breakdown for a total population of 16,929,689: 82.0% Sinhalese, 4.3% Sri Lankan Tamil, 5.1% Indian Tamil, 7.9% Sri Lankan Moor, 0.3% Malay, 0.2% Burgher, 0.2% Other (http://www.statistics.gov.lk/PopHouSat/PDF/Population/p9p8%20Ethnicity.pdf). Estimates of Sri Lankan Tamils and Sri Lankan Moors in particular are thought to be incorrect, as several of the seven omitted districts – Batticaloa, Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mannar, Mullaitivu, Trincomalee, and Vavuniya – have significant populations of these ethnic groups. Preliminary reports based on special enumerations carried out in three of these districts (Batticaloa, Jaffna and Trincomalee) found significant populations of Sri Lankan Tamils (74.0%, 99.9% and 28.6% in Batticaloa, Jaffna and Trincomalee, respectively) and Sri Lankan Moors (25.0% and 45.4% in Batticaloa and Trincomalee, respectively) (http://www.statistics.gov.lk/page.asp?page=Population%20and%20Housing). The nationwide population of Sri Lankan Tamils has been estimated as high as 18% (quoted on Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sri_Lanka#Ethnic_group from a now defunct government link). The CIA World Factbook gives the following breakdown for a total population of 21,513,990 and based on the 2001 census provisional data: Sinhalese 73.8%, Sri Lankan Moor 7.2%, Indian Tamil 4.6%, Sri Lankan Tamil 3.9%, other 0.5%, unspecified 10% (https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ce.html).ix This government division is referred to as a “Grama Niladhari”, or “GN” Division in Sinhala and “Grama Sevaka” or “GS” Division in Tamil. “GS” is used in this report because most evaluation participants use this term.

14 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 15: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Figure 1. Summary of administrative divisions and personnel

IV.B The Sri Lankan civil conflict and use of explosive devices

1983 is widely acknowledged as the start of the civil conflict between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which sought to establish a separate Tamil state in the northern and eastern parts of the country. Levels of violence fluctuated throughout the three decades of conflict, with a marked increase in fighting in 2001 and 2002 and establishment of a formal ceasefire in February 2002. Hostilities began anew in late 2005 and early 2006 and escalated in 2007 and 2008. Government forces made significant military gains in 2008 and 2009, seizing all territories under LTTE control. The government declared an end to the conflict on 16 May 2009, and the LTTE released a statement acknowledging defeat on the following day.

Both the Sri Lanka Army (SLA) and the LTTE used landminesx and other explosive devices extensively throughout the conflict.2 The SLA used antipersonnel mines, anti-tank mines,3 command-detonated Claymore directional fragmentation mines,4 and tripwire improvised explosive devices (IEDs),5 while the LTTE used antipersonnel mines,6 anti-tank mines,7 IEDs,8 Claymore-type directional fragmentation mines9, anti-tank mines,10 and booby traps.11 The Indian Peace Keeping Force, present in Sri Lanka between 1987 and 1990, also used landmines.12

In 1999, the government estimated that 20,000 to 25,000 landmines had been planted during the conflict; 13 this estimate had risen to 1.5 million landmines by 2004.14 In 2010, the SLA estimated that a total of 1.6 million landmines were laid during the conflict.15

x Throughout this report, landmines and explosive remnants of war are defined according to Protocols II and V of the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), which declare the following:1. “ ‘Mine’ means any munition placed under, on or near the ground or other surface area and designed to be detonated or exploded by the presence, proximity or contact of a person or vehicle, and "remotely delivered mine" means any mine so defined delivered by artillery, rocket, mortar or similar means or dropped from an aircraft (CCW Protocol II on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices. Geneva, 10 October 1980).”2. “Explosive ordnance means conventional munitions containing explosives, with the exception of mines, booby traps and other devices as defined in Protocol II of this Convention as amended on 3 May 1996.3. Unexploded ordnance means explosive ordnance that has been primed, fused, armed, or otherwise prepared for use and used in an armed conflict. It may have been fired, dropped, launched or projected and should have exploded but failed to do so.4. Abandoned explosive ordnance means explosive ordnance that has not been used during an armed conflict, that has been left behind or dumped by a party to an armed conflict, and which is no longer under control of the party that left it behind or dumped it. Abandoned explosive ordnance may or may not have been primed, fused, armed or otherwise prepared for use.5. Explosive remnants of war means unexploded ordnance and abandoned explosive ordnance (CCW Protocol V on Explosive Remnants of War. Geneva, 28 November 2003).”

15 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 16: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

IV.C Demining efforts and current explosive device contamination

According to Landmine Monitor, 17 agencies and organizations have been involved in demining and clearance operations since 1999. Nine of these are active at this time: the SLA’s Humanitarian Demining Unit (HDU); two national non-governmental organizations (NGOs) (Delvon Assistance for Social Harmony Sri Lanka and the Milinda Moragoda Institute for People’s Empowerment); and six international NGOs (Danish Demining Group, the HALO Trust, Horizon, Mines Advisory Group (MAG), Sarvatra, and the Swiss Foundation for Mine Action). Demining groups operating during the conflict faced numerous setbacks, including staff abductions and resignations,16 restrictions on movement and resources,17 suspension of demining operations,18 and continuing use of landmines.19

In 2002 the United Nations (UN) reported that both parties to the conflict had been using landmines “mainly in accordance with conventional military tactics” and that “neither [g]overnment forces nor [the] LTTE seem to use landmines to target civilian populations or to deny civilian population access to particular areas.”20 However, significant contamination with antipersonnel and anti-tank landmines and other explosive remnants of war (ERW) (including unexploded and abandoned explosive ordnance, or UXO and AXO)21 remained in ten districtsxi following the conflict. According to Landmine Monitor, the Northern and Eastern provinces—particularly in Jaffna22 and the Vannixii—were heavily affected.23

It is difficult to determine exact levels of current contamination. According to the SLA, 366,870 of the total 1.6 million landmines laid in Sri Lanka were cleared by September 2010, leaving a remaining 1.23 million landmines. 24 As of 31 August 2010, an estimated 552 square kilometers of land remained contaminated by landmines and ERW.25

In addition to marked minefields, contaminated physical locations include living areas such as houses 26 and livelihood areas such as gardens27 and agricultural and pastoral land.28 Reports also confirm contamination of urban areas,29 water sources,30 and roads.31

During and after the conflict, contamination with landmines and ERW has posed a major obstacle to resettlement 32 and economic reconstruction33 in the northern and eastern parts of the country.

IV.D Injuries due to landmines and explosive remnants of war (ERW)

This section discusses measurement of injuries due to landmines and ERW and selected injury statistics; a more comprehensive selection of injury statistics is available in Appendix B.

IV.D.1 Measurement of landmine and ERW injuries in Sri Lanka

Landmine Monitor began reporting on landmine and ERW injuries in 1999, based on data collected from UN organizations such as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP),34 United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF),35 and United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS);36 the military;37 the media;38 international organizations39 including the International Committee of the Red Cross40

and Save the Children (StC)-UK;41 and NGOS such as the Jaipur Foot program42 and White Pigeon.43

UNDP started managing the Sri Lanka Mined Area Database (SLMAD), which includes information on incidents and victims as well as mine risk education (MRE) activities and audiences, in 2000.44 The database, which was created according to Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA) standards, contains retroactive data from 1985 onward. In May 2009, the National Mine Action Centre (NMAC) assumed management of the database.

Mine action (MA)xiii stakeholders agree that casualties likely were under-reported45 during the conflict due to a lack of access to landmine- and ERW-affected areas and “insufficient distinction” regarding device types used. 46 Landmine Monitor reported

xi Landmine and ERW contamination remained in Ampara, Anuradhapura, Batticaloa, Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mannar, Mullaitivu, Polonnaruwa, Trincomalee, and Vavuniya following the conflict.xii The Vanni is the mainland area of the Northern Province, comprising all of Mannar, Mullaitivu, and Vavuniya Districts and most of Kilinochchi District.

16 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 17: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

significant problems with management of the SLMAD in 2007 and 2008, including displacement of data collectors, 47 security restrictions,48 discontinuation of support by UNICEF,49 and insufficient verification of injury data by UNDP.50

IV.D.2 Injury trends and risk factors for landmine and ERW injuries

In 2000, Landmine Monitor reported that thousands of people had already been injured or killed during the conflict and that 15 to 20 people were being injured every month.51

Between 2000 and 6 September 2010, 915 landmine and ERW casualties were reported in 20 districts: Ampara, Anuradhapura, Badulla, Batticaloa, Colombo, Gampaha, Hambantota, Jaffna, Kegalle, Kilinochchi, Kurunegala, Mannar, Matara, Monaragala, Mullaitivu, Nuwara Eliya, Polonnaruwa, Puttalam, Trincomalee, and Vavuniya. 52 The most heavily affected districts were Jaffna (227 incidents, 339 casualties), Kilinochchi (117 incidents, 142 casualties), Mullaitivu (90 incidents, 122 casualties), and Batticaloa (46 incidents, 98 casualties) (see Figure 2 below).53

Figure 2. Number of incidents per district, 2000 - 6 September 2010 (Source: SLMAD)

xiii “Mine action” is a term used to describe activities conducted to address the issue of landmines and explosive remnants of war throughout the world. Mine action professionals commonly refer to the five so-called “pillars” of mine action: “Removing and destroying landmines and explosive remnants of war and marking or fencing off areas contaminated with them; mine-risk education to help people understand the risks they face, identify mines and explosive remnants of war and learn how to stay out of harm's way; medical assistance and rehabilitation services to victims, including job skills training and employment opportunities; advocating for a world free from the threat of landmines and encouraging countries to participate in international treaties and conventions designed to end the production, trade, shipment or use of mines and to uphold the rights of persons with disabilities; and helping countries destroy their stockpiles of mines as required by international agreements, such as the 1999 anti-personnel mine-ban treaty.” (Electronic Mine Information Network (no date). What is mine action?. Retrieved 10 January 2011 from http://www.mineaction.org/section.asp?s=what_is_mine_action.)

17 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 18: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Figure 3 below shows the annual incidence of incidents and casualties between 2000 and 2009. 647 incidents and 892 casualties were reported during this time.

Figure 3. Landmine and ERW incidents and casualties, 2000 - 2009 (Source: SLMAD)

During 2010, 47 people were injured or killed in 28 landmine or ERW incidents.54

Of all casualties for whom gender and age were known (717 of 909 total casualties injured or killed between 2000 and 6 September 2010), men (≥18 years) were most highly affected (62.6% of casualties) followed by boys (21.5%), women (10.0%) and girls (5.2%).55

Of 491 casualties for whom the activity at the time of incident was known, the top six activities were household work (22.4% of casualties),xiv collecting food/water/wood (19.8%), tampering (19.6%), passing/standing nearby (14.7%), traveling (11.2%), and playing/recreation (7.7%).56 Of 397 casualties for whom it was known whether MRE had been received, 112 (28.2%) had received MRE and 285 (71.8%) had not.57

Claymore attacks increased in 2006, 2007 and 2008, killing 641 people and injuring 978 during these three years. The majority of Claymore attacks occurred (in descending order) in Jaffna, Vavuniya, Anuradhapura, Trincomalee, and Batticaloa.58

See Appendix B for a more comprehensive selection of injury statistics.

IV.E Introduction to coordination of mine action (MA) and mine risk education (MRE) in Sri Lanka

UN agencies began MA programming in Jaffna District in 1997.59 Despite delivery challenges and periodic suspensions of activities, programming continued and expanded to include additional districts during the following decade. With a network of government and community partners and national and international NGOs, UNICEF coordinated MRE, victim assistance (VA), and advocacy and UNDP coordinated demining and injury surveillance.

xiv Given what is known about the physical locations of landmine and ERW contamination in Sri Lanka, it is unlikely that “household work”—which accounts for the highest number of casualties for whom the activity at the time of incident was known—refers only to activities conducted inside the home. At the time of writing, the evaluation team had requested but not received the definition of “household work” used in the SLMAD.

18 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 19: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

In 2001, the UN convened the Interagency Mine Action Working Group and the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies established the Mine Action Resource Centre.60 The National Steering Committee on Mine Action (NSCMA), which included NGOs, government, deminers, donors, and UN partners, was established in 200261 and housed in the Ministry of Relief, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Development.62 District Mine Action Offices (DMAOs) opened the same year in Jaffna and Vavuniya, with supervision by GAs and support from UNDP and UNICEF. Additional offices and sub-offices were later established in Batticaloa, Kilinochchi, Mannar, Mullaitivu, and Trincomalee, although the offices in Batticaloa and Trincomalee have since closed. The Kilinochchi office closed in August 2006 and reopened in 2010. At this time the DMAO in Jaffna manages MA activities in Jaffna and Kilinochchi, while the DMAO in Vavuniya manages MA in Vavuniya and eight additional districts (Ampara, Anuradhapura, Batticaloa, Mannar, Mullaitivu, Polonnaruwa, Puttalam, and Trincomalee). According to the newly approved National Strategy for Mine Action in Sri Lanka (NSMASL) (see Section VI.A.1.b.i), three Regional Mine Action Offices (RMAOs) will operate in the future: the Jaffna RMAO, which will oversee MA activities in Jaffna and Kilinochchi; the Batticaloa RMAO, which will oversee MA activities in Ampara, Batticaloa and Trincomalee; and the Vavuniya RMAO, which will oversee MA activities in all other landmine- and ERW-affected districts.”

The NMAC was approved by the cabinet in July 2010 and is currently administrated by the Ministry of Economic Development (MoED). The NMAC has gradually been assuming central leadership of all MA activities with continued financial and technical support from UNDP and UNICEF.

UNICEF provides two types of support for MRE and other MA programming. UNICEF provides financial support alongside donors (currently the European Union (EU), the UN Peacebuilding Fund, and the Australian Government's overseas aid program (AusAID)). UNICEF provides technical support via MA personnel based in Colombo (housed in UNICEF’s Child Protection Section) and MA focal points in the UNICEF zonal offices in Batticaloa, Jaffna, Trincomalee, and Vavuniya.

Five national NGOs implement community-based MRE in eight districts. At the request of the government, the HDU began conducting some community-based MRE activities in May 2010. As of November 2010 the HDU was conducting activities in eight districts under the authority of the MoED. (See Table 2 below.)

In addition to MRE activities conducted by NGOs and the HDU, some demining agencies conduct community liaison (CL) activities. UNICEF supports school-based MRE in partnership with the Ministry of Education (MoE) and other government education stakeholders. Media-based MRE has been conducted with partners including Internews, various Tamil and Sinhala radio stations, and Young Asia Television.

DISTRICT MRE PARTNERSAmpara • Humanitarian Demining Unit (HDU) and SarvodayaAnuradhapura • Community Trust Fund (CTF)Batticaloa • HDU and SarvodayaJaffna • HDU, Sarvodaya, and Social Organization Networking for Development (SOND)Kilinochchi • HDU and SarvodayaMannar • CTF and HDU Mullaitivu • HDU and Rural Development Foundation (RDF)Puttalam • CTFTrincomalee • Eastern Human Economic Development (EHED)-Caritas, CTF, and HDUVavuniya • CTF and HDUTable 2. MRE implementing partners by district

IV.F Goal, objective, and major tasks of the evaluation

In early 2010, MA personnel at the UNICEF Sri Lanka central office in Colombo asked members of the International Emergency and Refugee Health Branch (IERHB) at the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to conduct an evaluation of

19 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 20: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

UNICEF’s MRE activities in Sri Lanka. According to the Terms of Reference (TOR) agreed upon by UNICEF and CDC, the goal of the evaluation was “to contribute to the review, planning and improvement of the prevention strategies which have been implemented thus far in Sri Lanka for the purpose of minimizing the number of victim-activated explosions” 63 and the objective was “to assess the relevance and effectiveness of the support provided by UNICEF in addressing the MA needs in Sri Lanka in …MRE.” 64 The TOR also specified the following major tasks for the evaluation:

• “Understand the context (political, humanitarian, financial, accessibility, partnership, etc.), the history, and the current implementation of the project.

• Analyze the activities and strategies developed by UNICEF in MRE.

• Analyze the previous findings of evaluations, surveys and reports conducted on these areas.

• Develop and implement methods to assess the impact of MRE on reducing injuries and/or risk-taking behavior.

• Propose a summary of strengths and areas for development of the MRE project and propose how best UNICEF can help build sustainable capacity in this area.

• Present the final results with recommendations to UNICEF.”65

The evaluation team conducted the tasks stated above with one exception: it did not develop or implement methods to assess the impact of MRE on reducing injuries and/or risk-taking behavior because it was not possible to do so at this time. The evaluation team did, however, examine the possibility of conducting a future impact evaluation; these findings and recommendations are discussed in Section VI.E.2.b.i.

V. Methods

Members of IERHB evaluated UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities according to the UN Evaluation Group’s Norms and Standards for Evaluationxv and the International Mine Action Standards (IMAS) Mine Risk Education Best Practice Guidebook 8 on evaluation, developed in 2005 by UNICEF and the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining. Additional interview questions and qualitative methods (see Section V.B below) were developed based on the evaluation team’s previous MRE evaluation experience and conversations with key stakeholders in Sri Lanka. The evaluation team used three primary methods for the evaluation: document review; qualitative data collection via interviews, group discussions and meetings; and observation of community-based MRE activities. Evaluation questions focused primarily on the current time, although participants often mentioned past activities and events.

V.A Document review

The evaluation team reviewed the following documents:

• the UN Evaluation Group’s Norms and Standards for Evaluation;

• the IMAS MRE Best Practice Guidebooks 1-12, published in 2005, especially Guidebook 1 (Introduction to Mine Risk Education), Guidebook 2 (Data Collection and Needs Assessment), Guidebook 3 (Planning), Guidebook 4 (Public Information Dissemination), Guidebook 5 (Education and Training), Guidebook 6 (Community Mine Action Liaison), Guidebook 7 (Monitoring), Guidebook 8 (Evaluation), and Guidebook 10 (Coordination);xvi

• Landmine Monitor reports published between 1999 and 2009;

• national strategy and MRE standard documents;

• data collection forms and incident and injury data from the SLMAD;

• a database of MA images compiled by UNICEF for the NMAC;

xv United Nations Evaluation Group (April 2005). Norms for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved 8 August 2010 from http://www.escwa.un.org/divisions/pptcd/upload/uneg.pdf. United Nations Evaluation Group (April 2005). Standards for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved 8 August 2010 from http://www.uneval.org/papersandpubs/documentdetail.jsp?doc_id=22.xvi IMAS guidebooks are available online at http://www.mineactionstandards.org/.

20 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 21: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• previous evaluation reports by Ms. Anusha Fonseka, Prof. Kalinga Tudor Silva and Prof. Asoka Jayasena (2004) and Mr. Marco Ramazzotti (2007) (see Section VI.E.2 and Appendices I and J); and

• reports, presentations and other documents provided by UNICEF and partners.

V.B Interviews, group discussions, and meetings

Field work comprised 75 key informant interviews, group discussions and meetings in Colombo and eight additional districts, as indicated in Figure 4 below. Field work was carried out during five weeks in September and October 2010 with technical and logistical support from the Child Protection Sections at UNICEF in Batticaloa, Colombo, Jaffna, Trincomalee, and Vavuniya.

Figure 4. Locations of evaluation field work (Map source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sri_Lanka_blank_locator_map.svg)

21 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 22: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Of the 75 interviews, group discussions and meetings, 54 were conducted outside Colombo. Evaluation participants are shown in Table 3 below (numbers in parentheses indicate organizations and individuals visited in multiple districts):

UNICEFINTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS

COMMUNITY MEMBERS (6 DISTRICTS)

• Child Protection Section (including Mine Action) (5 districts)• Communication Section• Education Section (3 districts)• Planning Section

• Danish Demining Group • European Commission• The HALO Trust• Horizon India• International Campaign to Ban Landmines• Internews• Mines Advisory Group (2 districts)

• District Mine Action Office (Mine Action, Sri Lanka Mined Area Database, and Geographic Information System personnel) (2 districts)• Education Department, Eastern Province• Humanitarian Demining Unit (3 districts)• Jaffna Zonal Director of Education• Kachcheri (District Secretariat) (2 districts)• Ministry of Economic Development (National Mine Action Center)• Ministry of Education• Ministry of Healthcare and Nutrition• Ministry of Social Services• School• Social Care Center (division level)• Teachers’ Center• Teaching hospital

• Child club officers and members• Grama Sevakas • Health volunteers• Internally displaced person camp leaders• Non-governmental and community-based organization representatives and volunteers• Samurdhi (village social/development) officers• School teachers, principals, and students• Temple leaders• Village Child Rights Monitoring and Child Protection Committee officers and members• Village Development Officers• Village volunteers• (Women’s) Rural Development Society Officers• Other community members

UNDP NATIONAL NGOS• Mine Action & Recovery

• Community Trust Fund (3 districts)• Eastern Human Economic Development-Caritas• Rural Development Foundation (2 districts)• Sarvodaya (4 districts)• Social Organization Networking for Development

Table 3. MRE evaluation participants

Key informant interviews and group discussions included location-specific information about the following topics:

• landmine and ERW contamination;

• high-risk groups and behaviors;

• community acceptance, impressions of MRE, needs, challenges, and concerns;

• coordination of MRE activities at the national, district, and local levels;

• training of trainers;

• integration of MRE with other MA, child protection, and development activities;

• MRE targeting, coverage, messaging, methods, and materials;

• CL; and

• MRE monitoring activities.

The evaluation team also conducted some qualitative listing and ranking activities with evaluation participants to learn about “key community influencers” and methods of communication. “Key community influencers” were defined as highly trusted individuals with whom other community members would feel comfortable sharing information. See Appendix G for a description of listing and ranking activities and a summary of qualitative data collected during field work.

22 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 23: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

V.C Observation of community-based MRE activities

The evaluation team observed community-based MRE activities conducted by four MRE partners (CTF, EHED-Caritas, HDU, and RDF) in four districts: Mannar, Mullaitivu, Trincomalee and Vavuniya.

V.D Additional evaluation activities

The evaluation team also attended meetings of organizations and working groups and spoke informally with landmine survivors and visitors to the Northern and Eastern Provinces.

The evaluation team delivered a preliminary presentation for representatives of UNICEF and partner organizations in Colombo on 4 October 2010. Following completion of field work, the team conducted follow-up interviews by telephone and e-mail, reviewed additional documents, and wrote the evaluation report.

23 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 24: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VI. Findings

The evaluation team’s findings are divided into six sections:VI.A Coordination and planning of MA and MRE;VI.B Injury risk and MRE targeting, coverage, and messaging;VI.C MRE methods, techniques, and materials;VI.D Community liaison;VI.E Monitoring and evaluation of MRE activities; andVI.F Additional community considerations.

Each of these sections is further subdivided into additional subsections. Descriptions of some MRE activities are followed by boxed lists of strengths, challenges and related recommendations, and/or recommendations unrelated to specific challenges (“stand-alone recommendations”). Recommendations focus on the current time, although references to past MRE activities are included where relevant. Findings and recommendations related to trap gunxvii use and injury are available in Appendix C. A summary of recommendations is available in Section VII and a shorter list of key recommendations is available at the end of the Executive Summary.

VI.A Coordination and planning of MA and MRE

This section contains findings related to national coordination activities, district and local coordination partners, training and capacity building of community MRE partners, coordination of community-based activities, coordination of school-based MRE, data collection and use for planning and implementation of MRE, and integration of MRE with other activities.

VI.A.1 National coordination activities

VI.A.1.a Establishment and staffing of the National Mine Action Centre (NMAC)

See Section IV.E for a brief description of the establishment of the NMAC and other national MA and MRE coordination activities.

The NMAC is currently advertising for and recruiting new personnel, and the acting director believes that all NMAC officers will be recruited by the end of 2010. Most NMAC officers will be recruited into permanent – rather than temporary – civil service positions. Some senior staff positions within the Centre remain unfilled, and coordination and authority roles are being established.

xvii According to a paper published by Saferworld in 2008, a trap gun is “made from a metal pipe, explosives (usually taken from firecrackers and other readily available explosive chemicals or explosive remnants of war) and metal pellets. The trigger mechanism is a basic trip system, that when disturbed by the movement of a person or an animal, fires the gun.” (Saferworld (March 2008). Trap guns in Sri Lanka.) The indiscriminate nature of this weapon results in comparisons with landmines, ERW, and the injuries they cause. UNICEF and MRE partners are interested in conducting awareness activities about trap gun use and injuries.

24 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 25: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS The establishment of the NMAC indicates the government’s acceptance of the landmine/ERW problem and dedication to advancing MA activities. Recruitment of NMAC officers into permanent – rather than temporary – positions will improve long-term sustainability of NMAC activities. The acting director of NMAC has significant MA knowledge and understands that landmine/ERW contamination is a long-term problem that requires long-term strategies. He has been instrumental in garnering support for MA in the Ministry of Nation Building and Estate Infrastructure Development and the MoED.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• The NMAC has been established with significant external funding and encouragement. Some donors fear that the external – rather than internal – impetus for the establishment of the Centre questions its ability to function in the future without significant external support.

• Conduct periodic assessments of NMAC program ownership, effectiveness, and responsiveness in order to monitor the sustainability of the NMAC and its ability to operate independently of external support.

• Currently employed government civil servants often do not possess technical expertise in MA, and those who do are drawn to higher paying positions in international organizations.

• Encourage the hiring of NMAC personnel who have the skills, experiences, and competencies recommended by IMAS (available in Appendix D). The NMAC may wish to consider hiring NGO workers with significant field experience for such positions.• Discuss the trend of highly qualified candidates foregoing government employment in favor of positions in international organizations (with higher salaries and other benefits) with government and other development partners. Consider options such as increasing pay and improving training within government positions and seconding UNICEF and/or NGO personnel to the NMAC.

• The process of hiring government workers is slow due to bureaucratic delays.

• Collaborate with government authorities to minimize bureaucratic delays in the hiring of new NMAC staff, and consider the seconding of UNICEF and/or NGO personnel to the NMAC until permanent personnel can be hired.

• Although MA partners have made progress toward unified coordination of MA and MRE, some stakeholders are concerned that partners are not always working toward unified MA goals.

• Review MRE goals stated in the SLMAS and NSMASL with all partners and develop strategies to achieve all unified goals. Remind MA partners of the importance of working toward unified goals.

VI.A.1.b MRE-related roles of the National Steering Committee for Mine Action and the NMAC

MRE-related roles of the NSCMA and the NMAC include the establishment and implementation of national standards for MRE; creation of a national strategic plan for MRE; development and dissemination of core MRE messages; accreditation of MRE operators; and communication with national, district, and local partners.VI.A.1.b.i Development and implementation of national mine action standards and a national strategic plan for MREThe NSCMA published the first edition of the SLMAS, based on IMAS, in July 2004. A second edition was approved by the Additional Secretary of the MoED and shared officially in November 2010.

The NSMASL, finalized and officially approved in January 2011, outlines the continued implementation of school-, community-, and media-based MRE and CL.

25 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 26: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS The NSCMA and other partners have developed and implemented national MA standards and finalized a national MA strategy, confirming the government’s commitment to MA in the coming years.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Although MRE activities outlined in the SLMAS have been approved by relevant government authorities, their implementation has been obstructed by the need to obtain Ministry of Defence (MoD) clearance, a lack of support from some government personnel (see Section VI.A.2.a), and—until recently—required approval by the Presidential Task Force for Resettlement, Development and Security (PTF) (see Section VI.A.4.c.ii).

• Confirm that MRE and other MA activities fall under the auspices of the MoED and secure permission from relevant government authorities to allow MRE activities to continue as planned. Engage the assistance of other government-affiliated personnel (such as representatives of the HDU and DMAOs) who are supportive of—and knowledgeable about—community-based MRE activities. Deminers are particularly strong advocates; two interviewed for this evaluation said, “the biggest MA need at this time in Sri Lanka is MRE” and “MRE will save more lives than clearance at this time.” High-level advocacy should include the following points:1. Current demining efforts do not ensure that all land is cleared of landmines and ERW, and some contamination will remain in the foreseeable future. In Europe, for example, ERW are still being found 65 years after the end of the Second World War. This level of contamination is considered “acceptable” by many MA experts as long as people living in affected areas are adequately prepared to protect themselves. MRE and risk reduction (see Section VI.D.2) help to ensure that individuals who do find suspicious objects know how to protect themselves and others. 2. Increasing movement throughout Sri Lanka for work and pleasure has made landmines and ERW a pertinent issue for all Sri Lankans, not just those from contaminated areas. On a related note of economic interest, an increase in injuries in Sri Lanka would hinder tourism and development activities.3. Fatal and non-fatal injuries from landmines and ERW cause many long-term consequences in addition to immediate effects such as physical and psychological suffering. Injuries result in the need for resource-intensive medical care and rehabilitation and loss of employment, education and marriage prospects for injured individuals and their family members. Such challenges create tremendous economic strain on the resources of individuals, families, communities, and government agencies.4. Locally based MRE teams – and the community members they train – provide valuable information about the location of suspected landmines and ERW to demining and clearance operators, who use this information for the planning and prioritization of their tasks.5. As one evaluation participant mentioned, community-based MRE creates a powerful “leave behind legacy” at the local level. This “legacy” includes networks of community-based volunteers trained in advocacy and communication skills, who can assist with other health and social interventions.VI.A.1.b.ii Development and dissemination of core MRE messages

Both the first and second editions of the SLMAS contain curricula of core messages for use by MRE partners. These curricula include messages about the appearance of landmines and ERW, safe and dangerous areas, warning clues and signs, recommended actions when suspicious objects are found, how landmines and ERW are activated, what landmines and ERW can do, and additional important messages for dissemination.

According to IMAS, MRE messages should always be clear and appropriate. While main topics should be standardized, some local variations may be used to reach certain populations (local messaging is further discussed in Section VI.B.4.b).

26 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 27: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS When asked about messages used in the field, NGO MRE trainers consistently answered that they use the curriculum of core messages provided by UNICEF. Use of the same core messages by all MRE operators guarantees the consistency of MRE messages delivered.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Partners do not consistently use the same language when referring to certain types of explosive devices. Some UNICEF MA personnel have advocated for replacement of the term “UXO” with “ERW”, which is inclusive of both AXO and UXO.

• Collaborate with MRE partners to finalize a standard set of terms for use and make necessary changes in the curriculum of core messages, national-level MA and MRE documents, and MRE training materials.VI.A.1.b.iii Accreditation of MRE operators

According to IMAS, MRE implementing partners should receive both organizational and operational accreditation. xviii The NMAC has been charged with the accreditation of MRE partners and other MA operators in the areas of demining and quality assurance (QA).

The NMAC will establish an accreditation program for all MA operators in 2010. In support of this, UNICEF and MAG established an accreditation and capacity building project (see Section VI.A.3.b).

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• NGO implementing partners have not been accredited in the past, and some DMAO personnel have not been informed about the current state of the accreditation process.

• Create a clear, transparent process for accreditation of MRE partners. Publish accreditation criteria and distribute them to all relevant stakeholders. Inform NMAC and DMAO staff of the current state of the accreditation process.VI.A.1.b.iv Communications

The NSCMA and NMAC will eventually take full responsibility for communicating with all MRE stakeholders, including ministry-level and other government personnel, national and international NGOs, demining agencies, donors, and UN agencies.

The NSCMA, chaired by the Secretary of the MoED, meets quarterly to discuss policy-level decisions. Technical Working Groups (TWGs) focusing on different pillars of MA meet regularly, although the TWG on demining was unable to meet for approximately two years. In the future, partners will convene one national TWG and several sub-working groups as required. Additional central coordinating bodies meet monthly, quarterly or annually.

xviii According to IMAS, organizational accreditation is “the procedure by which a MRE organization is formally recognised as competent and able to plan and manage MRE activities safely, effectively and efficiently. Accreditation will be given to the in-country headquarters of an organization for a finite duration.” Operational accreditation is “the procedure by which a MRE organisation is formally recognized as competent and able to carry out specific MRE activities. The organization will receive accreditation for each operational capability required to carry out a particular activity such as community mine action liaison or public information dissemination. The awarding of operational accreditation assumes that the capability will not change beyond the original scope or intention for which it was accredited.” (United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 1: an introduction to mine risk education. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://ocha-gwapps1.unog.ch/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NRPJC/$file/imas-gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.)

27 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 28: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS The acting director of the NMAC recognizes the benefit of Ministry-level support and has pledged to bring together personnel from the Ministries of Economic Development, Education, Foreign Affairs, Health and Nutrition, and Social Services to address MA issues.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• The 2010 presidential election and subsequent transfer of NMAC to the MoED prevented some key central-level meetings from taking place.

• Establish contingency plans for continuation of regular communications during times of political instability. Plans should include increased use of remote communication methods such as telephone conferencing or real-time Internet communication.

VI.A.1.c Increasing government leadership of MRE activities

According to IMAS standards, leadership of all MA activities should eventually be transferred to the government. Evaluation participants largely agreed that successful handover will require well-organized central- and district-level coordination with a strong local presence.

The progress of—and challenges to—central-level coordination are discussed in Sections VI.A.1 and VI.A.2.

According to national plans, GAs of all landmine- and ERW-affected districts will eventually assume coordination of all MA activities in their districts, with technical support from the DMAOs. Current involvement by GAs varies widely by district; some GAs are very supportive of MA and MRE activities, while others are not.

• In one district, a Project Director in the Kachcheri coordinates MA with the aid of a UNICEF-supported assistant. The GA, who has taken an active interest in MA and MRE, chairs monthly meetings in the Kachcheri with all relevant stakeholders.

• In another district, the GA and Kachcheri personnel take a slightly less active role in MA but are fully supportive of MA programming conducted by partners and provide all necessary permissions without hesitation.

• In another district, the GA has not been supportive of MRE programming. This GA has denied permission for NGOs to conduct MRE activities and refused to participate in meetings addressing MRE and other MA issues.

Community-based evaluation participants are not confident of the government’s ability to maintain a strong presence at the village level without the participation of NGOs and community-based organizations (CBOs). They believe that government personnel “do not know what to do” at the local level and “do not always have field experience or like to go to the field”. Even with the best intentions, government personnel generally do not have the capacity to conduct some activities that are currently conducted by locally active organizations. Due to their constant field presence and the trust they have earned in communities, local organizations have more flexibility and capacity at the village level.

28 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 29: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Some district-level government personnel are unsupportive – and even obstructive – of MRE programming.

• Evaluate differences in coordination across districts and develop “lessons learned” from districts where the shift to district government (GA)-coordinated MA has been successful. Replicate successful policies in other districts where the shift to government coordination has been more difficult. • Collaborate with NMAC and other central government personnel to engage district-level government personnel who are not currently supporting MRE and other MA programming. It is necessary to understand why these personnel are not supportive; if they are receiving pressure from others not to support MRE programming, it may be easier to address some of these pressures at the central level.

• MRE experts are based at UNICEF—rather than NMAC and DMAO—offices.

• Collaborate with government partners to finalize the decision regarding the placement of UNICEF MRE focal points. Consider seconding these focal points to the NMAC and DMAOs, and increase integration of their activities with those of government partners if they continue to be based at UNICEF.

VI.A.1.d UNICEF support of national coordination activities

MA personnel based at the UNICEF central office in Colombo have been instrumental in many areas of national MRE coordination. Recent activities by UNICEF include assisting with the development of the SLMAS and the NSMASL; continuing dissemination of core MRE messages to partners (as outlined in the SLMAS); and coordinating MA observance visits to Cambodia and Laos for MA representatives of the government, UNICEF, and NGOs.

STRENGTHS UNICEF central personnel are knowledgeable, experienced, and dedicated to their work. UNICEF has fostered a very positive relationship with the NMAC. The acting director of the NMAC is appreciative of UNICEF’s “joint” or “team” (rather than strictly advisory) approach to coordination of central MA activities. UNICEF has partnered with the MoE to support a consultant who will facilitate implementation of compulsory MRE in government schools.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• One of two principal MA staff members in the UNICEF central office will leave his post in late 2010. Given the broad nature of UNICEF’s activities, some key informants expressed concern that UNICEF’s capacity might suffer following his departure.

• Monitor UNICEF’s central activities immediately following this staff member’s departure and reassess the decision to abolish his position. It may be necessary to provide additional support to the remaining primary staff member by seconding an NGO staff member to UNICEF and/or funding an additional MRE officer at the NMAC.

VI.A.2 District and zonal coordination activities

VI.A.2.a MRE-related roles of district governments and DMAOs

See Section IV.E for a brief description of the establishment and roles of the DMAOs.

UNICEF MRE focal points were based at the DMAOs from 2003 to 2007. Since then, DMAOs’ involvement in MRE has been limited to coordination of weekly meetings for all MA stakeholders and limited monitoring of MRE quality by DMAO QA officers (see Section VI.E.1.b).

29 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 30: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

DMAOs, like the NMAC, are in the process of recruiting and hiring personnel. Their staff numbers have increased recently; in the past year, UNDP-supported DMAO personnel increased from eight to almost 40. In the future, one UNICEF-supported officer in each DMAO will coordinate MRE and victim assistance VA activities in that DMAO’s program districts.

At this time, UNICEF MA focal points based outside of Colombo sit in the UNICEF zonal offices in Batticaloa, Jaffna, Trincomalee and Vavuniya. Although these focal points maintain close contact with DMAO personnel, their physical absence in DMAOs hinders some coordination and reduces the cohesiveness desired by MA partners. While both UNICEF and government personnel agree that programs should be run by national partners, they tend to disagree on the physical placement of UNICEF MA focal points. While government personnel tend to encourage placement of the focal points in the DMAOs for better coordination with other MA activities, UNICEF personnel believe that their staff should stay in UNICEF offices for supervision and better integration with other UNICEF activities.

Stakeholders designed a compromise in Jaffna and Vavuniya (the two districts with both DMAOs and UNICEF zonal offices) whereby UNICEF MA focal points would split their time equally between their respective DMAOs and UNICEF zonal offices. As of December 2010, however, the focal points were continuing to sit in the UNICEF offices due to additional UNICEF obligations and supervisory concerns.

DMAOs hold weekly coordination meetings for MA stakeholders including demining agencies, NGOs, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, UNDP, the UN Department of Safety and Security (UNDSS), the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), and UNICEF. These meetings provide a forum in which partners can discuss coordination of MA activities and address challenges as they arise.

STRENGTHS The transition to district-coordinated MA is going well in some districts, due in part to the cooperation and support of district-level government personnel. Many evaluation participants spoke very highly of DMAO coordination meetings and their overall relationships with DMAO personnel. As with the NMAC, recruitment of DMAO officers into permanent—rather than temporary—positions will improve long-term sustainability of DMAO activities.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• As with the NMAC, currently employed government civil servants often do not possess technical expertise in MA, and those who do are drawn to higher paying positions in international organizations.

• As with the NMAC, encourage the hiring of DMAO personnel who have the skills, experiences, and competencies recommended by IMAS (available in Appendix D). DMAOs may wish to consider hiring NGO workers with significant field experience for such positions.• As with the NMAC, discuss the trend of highly qualified candidates foregoing government employment in favor of positions in international organizations (with higher salaries and other benefits) with government and other development partners. Consider options such as increasing pay and improving training within government positions and seconding UNICEF and/or NGO personnel to DMAOs.

• The placement of UNICEF MA focal points (in UNICEF zonal offices or DMAOs) has not been resolved, leading to confusion and frustration among several stakeholders.

•Finalize the decision regarding placement of UNICEF MA focal points in UNICEF zonal offices or DMAOs. The evaluation team recommends placement in the DMAOs, which would improve government MRE capacity and enhance coordination with other MA activities. If stakeholders decide that the UNICEF MA focal points should split their time between the two locations, adherence to a regular weekly schedule with equal time in each office will improve time management and communication with partners in both offices.

• Some stakeholders fear that NGO field workers lack confidence in DMAO meetings, where they may feel intimidated

• Establish a set of DMAO meeting rules and norms to ensure that meetings are conducted in a manner that respects and values the input of all attendees.

30 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 31: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

by the language of conduct (English) or more aggressive communication styles of international personnel.• As with the NMAC, the process of hiring government workers is slow due to bureaucratic delays.

• As with the NMAC, collaborate with government authorities to minimize bureaucratic delays in the hiring of new DMAO staff, and consider the seconding of UNICEF and/or NGO personnel to the DMAOs until permanent personnel can be hired.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Design and implement an accreditation process for all DMAO MRE and QA officers in accordance with IMAS standards to ensure the quality of MRE provision and monitoring.• Create clear, consistent TORs and standard operating procedures (SOPs) for all DMAO personnel to ensure that staff members correctly understand the scope of and best practices for their MA responsibilities.

VI.A.2.b MRE-related roles of UNICEF zonal offices

UNICEF zonal personnel provide technical MRE expertise to DMAOs and coordinate with NGOs and the HDU to organize community-based MRE activities.

In at least one case, UNICEF has taken the lead role in all district MA coordination. In September 2009, partners closed the DMAO in Batticaloa as the focus of MA in Sri Lanka shifted to the Northern Province. Because no mechanism was in place for local MA coordination, UNICEF stepped in to coordinate all MA in Batticaloa until the GA was able to assume responsibility for MA activities in March 2010. UNICEF currently supports an office assistant in the Batticaloa Kachcheri, assists with coordination letters and other activities, and provides resources such as computers and printing equipment.

STRENGTHS UNICEF MA focal points in zonal offices, like central MA personnel, are knowledgeable, experienced, and dedicated to their work. They are well-informed about the MRE—and other MA—activities and partners within their respective areas of coverage. UNICEF MA focal points in zonal offices are strong local advocates for MRE. In one area where district government officials felt hesitant about spending necessary time and resources on MRE activities, UNICEF personnel explained the importance of MRE to these officials and secured their support. Communication among UNICEF zonal MA personnel and between zonal and central MA personnel is frequent and consistent.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• UNICEF MA focal points are often called upon to assist with child protection activities unrelated to MA. While the integration of MA and child protection activities has led to some positive results (see Section VI.A.7.c), some MA focal points seem overwhelmed with duties and unable to complete all of their tasks.

• Assess the workloads of UNICEF MA focal points and reassign non-MRE child protection responsibilities to other UNICEF staff in locations in which MRE is urgently needed at this time—especially in areas with increased resettlement and insufficient MRE coverage.

• Handover procedures between successive UNICEF MA focal points need strengthening; one recently hired MA focal point did not receive sufficient support and struggled during the first period of tenure. UNICEF’s inconsistent presence at DMAO meetings during this personnel change frustrated other stakeholders.

• Develop standardized handover procedures for successive UNICEF MA focal points. Secure additional support from other zonal child protection personnel to continue basic MA activities—such as presence at DMAO meetings—during interim periods.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Apply the district-level coordination model successfully implemented in Batticaloa, whereby UNICEF supports an office assistant in the Kachcheri, in other districts. This may facilitate handover of MRE activities to district government partners.

VI.A.3 Training and capacity building of community MRE partners

31 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 32: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VI.A.3.a Training of trainers

This section describes the typical model used for training of trainers; types, facilitators and recipients of trainings; training topics and methods; and training needs.

VI.A.3.a.i Types and recipients of trainingsTo train partners implementing MRE in the field, UNICEF usually conducts two- to three-day trainings for project and field coordinators. These coordinators then train other staff and village volunteers linked with their organizations. UNICEF and NGO partners conduct refresher trainings as needed and by request; several NGO and HDU trainers emphasized the importance of refresher trainings during conversations with the evaluation team.

In addition to regular trainings conducted for partner NGOs, UNICEF facilitates “stand-alone” trainings for new MRE trainers. In April 2010, UNICEF and CTF conducted a five-day joint training for 64 members of the HDU. In September, UNICEF and CTF conducted a training for 35 police officers at the Police Academy, which offers continuing education to advancing police inspectors (UNICEF also plans to teach an MRE course at the Police Training College, which provides basic training for new police officers). UNICEF and MAG have been conducting a six-month capacity building and training program for MRE providers (see Section VI.A.3.b).

STRENGTHSNone noted.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Establish refresher trainings for all NGO and HDU MRE trainers on a regularly scheduled basis.VI.A.3.a.ii Training topics and methodsAccording to MRE field workers, training topics include the five pillars of MA;xix methods and tools used to deliver messages to different audiences; techniques and language used to increase MRE message comprehension; creation of MRE materials; and basic training in child protection issues. Methods used in trainings include drama, presentation, games, and group discussions. Some field workers receive materials such as flashcards, posters, and stickers during trainings.

Some participants in UNICEF-facilitated trainings are given an opportunity to provide feedback about the sessions, either on paper forms or by writing on a board. In some cases in which boards were used, one UNICEF trainer left the room and another trainer facilitated a feedback session.

xix See note xiii on page 16.

32 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 33: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS Field workers believe that the methods they learn during trainings are appropriate for the communities they target, and report feeling knowledgeable and confident to perform their field duties following UNICEF trainings.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Feedback on training sessions does not appear to be solicited in a consistent or effective manner. Trainees may not feel comfortable providing feedback orally—especially in the presence of UNICEF staff. It is not clear whether UNICEF uses evaluation forms to guide future trainings in a consistent manner.

• Collect training feedback in a consistent and confidential manner, preferably on paper, and use both positive and negative feedback to guide future trainings. Discuss feedback immediately following trainings, while memories are fresh and trainers are not occupied with other activities.

VI.A.3.a.iii Training needsMRE trainers interviewed by the evaluation team claimed that they felt confident and well-prepared when they went to the field. Some MRE trainers would like to learn more about newly identified explosive devices, while others are interested in additional training on psychosocial and human rights issues. One UNICEF staff member identified a need for training in creating SOPs for NGO personnel; past UNICEF workshops have covered planning and proposal writing but some NGO personnel need additional instruction in these areas. MAG is conducting a project that systematically identifies knowledge gaps among partner NGOs, and is planning to provide training in SOP development (see Section VI.A.3.b below).

STRENGTHSNone noted.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Continue to evaluate the changing landmine/ERW situation in different geographic areas, closely monitoring levels of contamination and other risk factors, to update MRE training curricula and provide refresher trainings as needed.• Develop capacity building trainings related to additional topics of interest, including newly identified explosive devices, psychosocial support, and human rights issues.

VI.A.3.b Capacity building

In 2010, UNICEF and MAG began a capacity building and training project for MRE implementing partners in anticipation of future accreditation by the NMAC and DMAOs. This project has four main components: capacity assessment; tailoring of training based on assessment results; conduct of trainings; and accreditation (including SOP development). Curricula and the training schedule were developed jointly by the UNICEF central office and MAG in Vavuniya.

The project team consists of an international consultant and five MRE officers who have been trained to assess NGO capacity and train MRE personnel. The project team ranks NGO activities according to four competency levels in the areas of MRE implementation and organizational capacity. The expected outcome of the project is the training of 160 NGO personnel; certification (with a 70% passing mark) will be valid for three years following project completion.

Project personnel also intend to plan trainings for NGO senior staff (including topics such as CL and media campaigns) and NMAC- and DMAO-based QA officers.

33 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 34: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS This project objectively reviews the activities of NGOs and targets project areas in need of strengthening. The project team intends to use active—rather than passive—teaching methods such as discussion groups during the trainings.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Project team members have had some trouble communicating with NGO and HDU personnel. The project seems to have limited buy-in from NGOs and UNICEF zonal staff because they were not involved in early project development.

• Contact project beneficiaries (in this case, NGO and HDU personnel) and UNICEF zonal staff early in the planning process for future training projects; involvement at an early stage may have secured better buy-in from participants, created a stronger project, facilitated better communications, and circumvented the impression among some participants that this project was “imposed” upon them by an external source. Require participation by UNICEF staff as needed.

• Some NGO personnel have questioned the ability of newly trained QA officers—who do not have MRE field experience—to assess the capacity of individuals and organizations with years of MRE field experience.

• Invite MRE trainers with field experience to facilitate future trainings, which will build better rapport with current NGO personnel and allow participants to learn from past successes and challenges.• Hire some NGO field personnel as QA evaluators during future capacity building projects.

• MoD clearance and problems with transportation and accommodation have made it difficult for project team members to visit certain NGO partners.

• Assist with MoD clearance at the central level, plan additional time for future projects that rely upon MoD clearance, and assist MAG with arrangements for transportation and accommodation.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Compare indicators measured in the ongoing project with the indicators recommended for training needs assessments by IMAS (in Appendix E) and edit ongoing and future project indicators as necessary.

VI.A.4 Coordination of community-based MRE

VI.A.4.a Community-based MRE implementing partners

VI.A.4.a.i Non-governmental organizations Five national NGOs (CTF, EHED-Caritas, RDF, Sarvodaya, and SOND) currently conduct MRE activities. These partners have a wide range of MRE experience: some started conducting MRE activities in 2002, while others did not start until 2009. Some NGOs conducting MRE activities during the conflict were forced to suspend or stop operations in certain areas.

NGO partners address a variety of health, development, and social issues (see Section VI.A.7.c) and most work in collaboration with networks of village volunteers. NGO MRE teams include women and members of various ethnic and religious groups. Trainers are predominantly Tamil-speaking, though many speak Sinhala as well.

Several NGO district chapters hold weekly internal meetings, sometimes including their local volunteer networks. One organization chapter, for example, discusses what went well during the past week, what did not go well, and requests for action during the coming week; in this way staff members are able to learn from past activities and coordinate future programming. EHED-Caritas holds monthly meetings with child animators, while SOND conducts monthly volunteer network meetings. Many NGOs write monthly and/or annual reports which are shared internally and with UNICEF.

34 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 35: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS NGO MRE trainers are very committed to their work. Some delivered MRE by bus or on foot during the conflict, and some were arrested while en route to MRE trainings. Some trainers have worked for months without pay. NGO MRE community session trainers appeared confident, knowledgeable, and engaging during observed MRE sessions. Several NGOs make an effort to work through existing government structures rather than create new ones. UNICEF, government, and International NGO (INGO) personnel praise local NGOs for their thoroughness and their collaborative efforts with UN organizations, district and local government partners, (Women’s) Rural Development Societies ((W)RDSs) and other CBOs, school personnel, and religious organizations. When some NGOs were forced to stop MRE activities during the conflict because of internal problems, closure by the government, or difficulty with local government officials, other NGOs absorbed their MRE personnel. NGOs hold regular coordination meetings with their staff and volunteer networks. Field officer vacancies in some NGOs are preferentially filled with former volunteers whenever possible and appropriate. In 2009, UNICEF and MRE implementing partners agreed upon minimum and maximum salary levels for MRE personnel in order to ensure fair payment and reduce competition and conflict among partners.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• NGOs do not always use clear criteria when hiring paid staff and volunteers. Internal hiring procedures in at least one NGO have led to personnel problems and damaged the reputation of this NGO among some MA partners.

• Assist NGOs in the development of clear hiring criteria, possibly in a capacity building workshop. Organize trainings on personnel management with MRE partners and foster openness in their recruiting and hiring processes.

• NGOs do not always use clear TORs and SOPs for paid staff and volunteers.

• Create clear, consistent TORs and SOPs for paid staff and volunteers and make them widely available.

• In some instances, UNICEF and NGOs have deployed MRE trainers to different districts to provide coverage during emergency periods. While most partners agree that this decision displayed flexibility and efficient resource management, some are concerned that trainees were distracted by the trainers’ dialects and clothing and that messaging may have suffered as a result.

• Consider the social norms of trainers and host communities when planning future MRE programming and plan to eliminate distractions. If trainees are distracted, they may be less likely to absorb necessary MRE messages. Addressing this challenge may be as simple as acknowledging potentially distracting differences in dialect and dress at the beginning of each training and encouraging participants to alert trainers if messages are not understood.

• Several NGOs want to expand teams to cover more areas but have limited personnel and funding.

• Assess NGO coverage needs and increase funding for staff expansion as necessary (see Section VI.A.4.d).VI.A.4.a.ii The Humanitarian Demining Unit (HDU)

Sixty-four members of the HDU, including four senior staff members, were trained to conduct MRE activities in March 2010. Fifty HDU members are stationed in the Northern Province and 10 are stationed in the Eastern Province. HDU members are currently conducting MRE activities in eight districts (Ampara, Batticaloa, Jaffna, Kilinochchi, Mannar, Mullaitivu, Vavuniya and, on a smaller scale, Trincomalee.

As military personnel, HDU members are more able than NGO personnel to provide certain MRE activities. HDU personnel can create landmine sign gardens and answer highly technical questions about landmines and ERW. They have better access to photos of newly found landmines and ERW. Compared to NGOs, they are not hindered by as many movement restrictions. As native Sinhala speakers, they are well-positioned to provide MRE to tourists, religious pilgrims and other Sinhala-speaking persons.

However, HDU personnel face significant barriers to the conduct of MRE. Most landmine- and ERW-affected communities are Tamil-speaking but most HDU personnel do not speak Tamil; as of early 2011 the HDU included only six Tamil speakers, two of whom speak fluently. HDU personnel are not familiar with Tamil communities, and some Tamil communities fear military personnel

35 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 36: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

because of the civil conflict. HDU personnel have been trained primarily as engineers, not community educators. HDU teams lack diversity; they do not include any women or members of certain ethnic and religious communities. Finally, the HDU does not have a clearly enforced uniform policy for MRE trainings; HDU members have conducted activities while wearing fatigues, navy MoED uniforms, and civilian clothes.

As a result of these barriers, HDU personnel face limitations in their delivery of MRE. They cannot communicate adequately at the local level: they do not understand community members, community members do not understand them, and they must sometimes resort to using “body language” to communicate. On their own, HDU personnel cannot approach community leaders or organize activities well in villages. Their techniques are limited to multimedia presentations and distribution of posters and handbills; without assistance they cannot conduct question-and-answer sessions. HDU personnel admit these challenges as openly as other stakeholders.

STRENGTHS HDU personnel are dedicated to providing high-quality MRE activities to communities. HDU personnel maintain positive relationships with UNICEF and NGOs. Many HDU personnel cultivate positive relationships in the communities they serve; they sometimes play with child and youth clubs and have collaborated with local NGO chapters to organize sports clubs for local youth.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• HDU teams do not include women or representatives of several ethnic and religious communities. Most HDU personnel do not speak Tamil, and some of those who do speak Tamil are not fluent speakers. If MRE trainers are not fluent in Tamil and easily understood by trainees, uptake of MRE messages in Tamil communities will suffer.

• Urge senior HDU personnel to hire women, representatives of more ethnic and religious communities, and fluent—and preferably native—Tamil speakers. If they are unable to hire additional personnel they may be able to second experienced NGO personnel for MRE activities.

• HDU MRE activities conducted without NGO support are limited to multimedia presentations and distribution of posters and handbills; without assistance they cannot conduct question-and-answer sessions or other participatory activities.

• Continue to coordinate joint NGO and HDU MRE activities. Language and cultural barriers and the history of the conflict will not allow HDU personnel to work as well in communities, but they have much to offer when partnering with NGOs.

• At this time no clear uniform policy is enforced during MRE activities. Civilians may be particularly fearful of HDU members in fatigues, although this fear may extend beyond the uniform—according to one key informant, “the military are always the military, even if they are wearing a differently colored uniform”. UNICEF staff have been asked to monitor and encourage adherence to a uniform policy among HDU members but they are not comfortable doing so.

• Establish a standard uniform policy for MRE activities, ideally with civilian clothes or with the blue MoED uniform as a second choice. HDU—not UNICEF—personnel should monitor adherence to the uniform policy.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Coordinate MRE activities conducted by HDU personnel for Sinhala-speaking people traveling to landmine- and ERW-affected areas from unaffected parts of the country.

36 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 37: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VI.A.4.a.iii Local government and village partnersAt the community level, UNICEF and NGOs coordinate MRE activities with local government personnel (DS Secretaries and GSs), village volunteers and focal points, child animators and clubs, and village-level committees (including landmine awareness groups, Child Protection Committees, District Child Development Committees and Village Child Rights Monitoring Committees (VCRMCs)).

Other supportive local partners include school teachers and principals, (W)RDS officers and members, probation officers, religious leaders, and fishery group officers and members.

STRENGTHS Partnering with preexisting village structures such as VCRMCs and child clubs is a cost-effective and sustainable method of conducting MRE at the local level. Village partners have conducted some MRE activities in areas where NGOs have not been able to access villages, especially during emergency periods. Many local government personnel support community-based MRE by attending activities and ensuring that activities are conducted as planned.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• The functioning of VCRMCs, child clubs, and other village-based partners varies widely across the country. Some of these entities function successfully while others do not function at all due to displacement, movement, and/or resource limitations.

• Study StC’s work on the functionality of VCRMCs and other documents about village-level partners and networks. Conduct research to learn where village partners are—and are not—functioning. Strengthen village-level partners with the help of GSs and establish methods (such as mobile phone conversations) whereby NGOs can monitor the activities of their village partners and provide support as needed.

• Village volunteers do not always receive adequate incentives or recognition for their activities, leading to low morale. If people do not feel that they are being adequately recognized or compensated they will discontinue their work.

• Provide more incentives to encourage volunteers to continue their work. Incentives may include physical items (including certificates, bicycles, t-shirts, and hats), monetary compensation (including transport allowances), and recognition programs.

• Some village volunteers and networks do not have clear TORs; while they are committed to MRE they may have insufficient knowledge and/or capacity to conduct activities successfully.

• Create standardized TORs for village volunteers and focal points and ensure that all individuals have the knowledge and capacity to fulfill their assigned duties.

VI.A.4.a.iv Relationships between NGO and HDU personnelUNICEF has introduced NGO and HDU personnel to each other and helped build relationships between them through joint training programs and coordination of local activities. For many NGO and HDU personnel, whose opportunities to interact with each other were limited during the civil conflict, this is the first opportunity for partnership with members of the “other side”. Representatives of both sides agree that this relationship both improves MRE and creates a powerful peacebuilding initiative.

HDU and NGO partners work together closely in some areas and less closely in others. Based on the feedback of evaluation participants, it appears that HDU and NGO partners who work together more closely are more complimentary of each other’s work than HDU and NGO partners who do not work together as closely. Both partners acknowledge each other’s valuable contributions to MRE and compliment each other’s efforts; some even say that they cannot continue some or all of their activities without each other’s support. NGOs introduce HDU personnel to Tamil-speaking communities, mobilize people within these communities, and provide transportation to HDU personnel. HDU personnel assist NGOs with landmine sign gardens, negotiate passage for NGO personnel through military checkpoints, and introduce NGOs in Sinhala-speaking communities. Both partners feel that this collaborative work has improved relationships between communities and members of the military, and express a strong desire to continue joint programming. Other parties—such as the DMAO and district-level government personnel—agree that these relationships are vital to continuation of community-based MREs.

37 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 38: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS NGO and HDU personnel support each other’s contributions to MRE and coordinate activities together in several districts. Positive relationships between NGO and HDU personnel improve MRE programming and build peace and trust within communities.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• High-level government approvals jeopardize the ability of NGOs to conduct community-based MRE and threaten positive relationships between HDU and NGO personnel.

• Continue to support and encourage HDU-NGO relationships and discuss their benefits during high-level advocacy activities with relevant government personnel (see Section VI.A.1.b.i).

• Some NGO personnel who do not work very closely with HDU personnel expressed some discontent during evaluation interviews; one NGO representative said that his colleagues fear that the HDU is receiving credit for their work, and another said that HDU personnel are not willing to learn from NGO MRE trainers with significant field experience.

• Take “lessons learned” from areas where HDU and NGO personnel are working together closely and apply them in areas where these relationships are not as strong. Speak independently with HDU and NGO representatives to monitor the progress of these relationships.

VI.A.4.b Planning of community-based MRE activities

NGOs, the HDU and local government and village partners coordinate MRE activities with guidance and support from DMAOs and UNICEF. UNICEF has selected NGOs for work in specific districts and facilitated occasional transfers of coverage between NGOs.

UNICEF and NGOs have provided MRE during emergency periods. In 2006 and 2007, MRE staff based in Anuradhapura, Mannar, Puttalam, Trincomalee, and Vavuniya were deployed to provide MRE to displaced and newly resettling communities in Batticaloa; in 2009 and 2010, MRE teams from Anuradhapura, Batticaloa, Puttalam, and Trincomalee conducted activities in Mannar and Vavuniya. One NGO has formed MRE emergency teams who can be deployed at any time.

STRENGTHS UNICEF and NGOs have deployed staff to different districts to provide coverage during emergency periods. The handover of MRE activities from CTF to RDF (in Mullaitivu) and Sarvodaya (in Kilinochchi) was conducted smoothly over a two-month period.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• MRE operators on the ground do not always have sufficient knowledge of MRE implementing partners and activities in specific areas (“who is doing what where”). In one instance, an organization went to provide MRE to a community that had received MRE from another organization on the previous day.

• Create a clear record—via a chart, map, or diagram—of MRE implementing partners and activities in specific areas (“who is doing what where”) to find areas of low coverage and avoid duplication of MRE activities for specific populations.

• One national NGO conducting a short-term project had trouble organizing activities in communities where it did not have a local presence. Staff members wished that UNICEF had played a more active role in program planning at the local level.

• Provide sufficient planning and community coordination for short-term programs conducted by non-local partners. While the current method of targeting (see Section VI.B.2) may work well for ongoing community-based MRE, short-term programs conducted by non-local partners may need additional assistance when selecting and approaching communities.

• Some evaluation participants remarked that UNICEF and partners do not always take limited community resources into consideration when planning MRE methods.

• Select methods according to available community and implementing partner resources. A PowerPoint presentation, for example, requires electricity or a generator, a screen or other projecting surface, and dim light—resources and conditions that are not always available in target communities.

VI.A.4.c Access, approval, funding, and contracts for community-based MREVI.A.4.c.i Permissions and local access for community-based MRE38 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 39: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Physical access has always been a challenge for MRE implementing partners, although all evaluation participants operating both during and after the conflict agree that physical access has improved since the end of the conflict. MRE teams do not need to obtain special permissions to enter as many geographic areas and it is easier to secure needed permissions than during the conflict.

At the central level, NGOs must register with the NGO Secretariat at the MoD and secure MoD approval for movement in certain districts and restricted areas. MoD clearance is granted to specific individuals and vehicles for limited time periods with defined expiration dates. In certain districts, periodic SLA approval is needed from the northern or eastern headquarters; UNICEF personnel claim that receipt of approval often depends upon individual SLA personnel. GAs must approve all NGO and HDU activities conducted in their districts.

During the conflict, NGO field workers were often stopped at checkpoints by local military personnel. MRE personnel were particularly vulnerable to being stopped because they travelled without uniforms (shirts or hats, for example) and carried landmine- and ERW-related materials, which local military personnel may have found threatening. Some MRE personnel were accused of ties with the LTTE or arrested.

NGO and UNICEF personnel continue to be stopped by local military personnel, and showing proof of MoD clearance and GA permission does not always ensure passage through checkpoints. Evaluation participants believe that this is a matter of communication rather than intent; problems usually occur because local military personnel become nervous upon seeing MRE training materials or because these personnel have not received confirmation from GAs that the MRE teams have received necessary authorizations. Military personnel transfer frequently—sometimes every three months, according to one evaluation participant—which limits opportunities for local NGO and military personnel to build relationships.

HDU and UNICEF personnel, GAs, and school principals often intervene when NGO personnel are stopped at checkpoints. Some MRE teams are allowed to continue (often following significant delays) while others are not.

Access to certain areas—including the Jaffna islands, internally displaced person (IDP) camps and high security zones (HSZs)—was very restricted during the conflict. The islands have been accessible since November 2009, but permission is still required to access IDP camps and HSZs. Curfews also restricted some activities during the conflict, although this is no longer a problem.

STRENGTHS Good relationships between UNICEF and some SLA field commanders facilitate the SLA permission process. UNICEF and NGO personnel maintain strong relationships with the HDU, Gas, and other local partners, who often intervene when MRE field personnel are stopped at checkpoints.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Even with proper approval from MoD and senior SLA personnel, NGO MRE teams are often stopped by local SLA personnel. This leads to delays and cancellations of programs, which may damage the reputation of MRE providers and discourage community members from attending future MRE programming. Community members often spend significant time and other resources traveling to MRE sessions, and it is important to conduct activities as scheduled.

• Discuss physical access problems with senior SLA personnel. Acknowledge that this is a problem of communication (high-level security decisions do not always reach local security posts) rather than intent, and avoid blaming lower-level SLA personnel who are conducting their jobs as they have been instructed. Educate lower-level SLA personnel about MRE activities to increase their familiarity and comfort with MRE teams and materials.

• It is difficult for organizations not regularly involved in MRE—such as those involved in one-time media campaigns—to obtain MoD clearance.

• Assist organizations that do not regularly conduct MRE activities throughout the process of obtaining MoD clearance.

39 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 40: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VI.A.4.c.ii Presidential Task Force approvalBetween July 2009 and December 2010, UNICEF and partners were required to obtain approval from the PTF for all MA activities. All MA operators were required to submit proposals for PTF approval before transferring funds or conducting MRE activities, and approval of plans by relevant government ministries did not guarantee PTF approval. Although the PTF approval system was established to set standards for funding and project implementation and to bypass other financial bureaucracy, it led to bureaucratic delays.

PTF procedures were not clear or consistent. Submission and approval of projects sometimes depended upon whether well-connected government or military personnel were able to guide projects through the approval process. As a result, NGOs conducting similar MRE activities in different geographic areas did not receive the same approvals.

In December 2010, UNICEF informed the evaluation team that MoD clearance had been deemed sufficient for conduct of MRE activities and that PTF approval was no longer necessary. This change in policy was a result of successful high-level advocacy with the Secretary of the MoED.

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Until recently, PTF approval led to significant delays and limitations of MRE activities (see Section VI.A.4.c.ii). For many months, petitioning of high-level PTF staff by UNDP and UNICEF was not successful. Some stakeholders fear that similar bureaucratic challenges will arise in the future despite the recent resolution of the PTF issue.

• Utilize UNICEF’s good relationships with senior government and military personnel to reach government partners via high-level advocacy (see Section VI.A.1.b.i). It could be possible that these individuals do not understand the need for and benefits of MRE, and that conversations with advocates from disabled servicemen’s organizations and/or other victim assistance and advocacy groups could change their minds and secure their support.VI.A.4.c.iii Funding and contracts

UNICEF provides funding to NGOs for community-based MRE programming via contracts approved by UNICEF, the NGOs, and GAs. Until recently, PTF approval was also required. Proposals and contracts usually pass through several levels of NGO and UNICEF bureaucracy before receiving approval.

The contract approval process has often been postponed by bureaucratic setbacks within and between several parties. These setbacks include internal approval delays within NGOs (sometimes between local, district, and central personnel); internal approval delays within UNICEF (between the Child Protection Team, Supply Section, Contract Review Committee, and senior UNICEF staff); delays as different document versions are sent between NGOs and UNICEF (sometimes at the local, district/zonal, and central levels); and delays by GAs and (until recently) the PTF.These delays have caused postponement of programs and late payment of NGO staff; several NGO representatives participating in the evaluation reported working without pay for 2-, 3-, 6- and 8-month periods since 2006.

UNICEF personnel provided some short-term (3-month) contracts to cover payment gaps and continue some NGO activities, but they were forced to stop upon reaching a funding limit. One UNICEF staff member predicted that funding delays would continue in the future.

40 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 41: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• The review process for proposals and contracts in UNICEF and NGO local, district/zonal, and central levels is in disarray. Some documents pass back and forth between multiple offices within the same organization without clear chains of communication, and limited e-mail access for many personnel leads to additional delays. Some evaluation partners complained that various UNICEF and NGO offices do not provide all comments on one proposal or contract at a time and instead provide them “piecemeal”, leading to additional delays.

• Establish a clear review process for proposals, contracts, and other documents for UNICEF and NGO offices, taking into consideration e-mail access for key personnel and the necessary approvals—and unchangeable organizational structures—within each organization. Create a minimum set of review standards (e.g., “a 20-page document should be returned within 10 days”) and a review schedule for each document. UNICEF and NGO offices should provide all comments on a document at one time.

• Proposals submitted by NGOs often do not meet UNICEF standards, leading to long periods of editing.

• Set proposal standards and share expectations with NGOs. Measure the organizational needs of NGOs and incorporate sessions on writing high-quality proposals into NGO trainings (see Section VI.A.3.a). UNICEF zonal personnel should assist local NGO personnel as needed during the proposal writing process.

• Internal UNICEF bureaucracy at the central level is slowing the pace at which contracts and proposals are approved.

• Address internal UNICEF bureaucracy challenges with high-level personnel. Explain how resulting delays impact programs on the ground and discuss possible solutions. In the future, partners may be able to justify writing longer contracts with greater funding flexibility due to the changing nature of MRE field work.VI.A.4.c.iv Combined effects of access, approval, and contract delays

It is worth noting the interrelatedness of these past three factors—permissions and local access for community-based MRE, PTF approval, and funding and contracts—and their combined effect on the coordination and funding of local MRE activities and partners.

MRE activities have often been delayed by a combination of two or more of these factors. In some instances, NGOs were forced to end MRE programs early or cancel them altogether because their MoD clearance expired while they were waiting for PTF approval. The combination of contract delays (between UNICEF and partner NGOs) and PTF approval sometimes postponed payment of field staff.

Resulting payment gaps and program reductions and cancellations may lead to other serious problems:

• coverage gaps in high-risk communities;

• excessive time devoted to communication;

• poor retention of experienced MRE trainers (who will leave their organizations if not paid as promised);

• difficulties for NGO management personnel, who continue to receive requests for MRE activities but do not feel comfortable asking their staff to work without pay; and

• frustration and poor morale among all stakeholders.

These problems have been particularly acute in Jaffna District. At the time of the evaluation field work, PTF approval and contract problems had paralyzed civilian capacity for MRE. Some evaluation participants blamed either PTF approval or contract problems for the interruption, while others blamed both. NGOs were no longer receiving funding, and although some NGO personnel

41 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 42: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

continued to work without salaries most NGO MRE program activities had slowed or stopped. NGO personnel were no longer attending weekly DMAO meetings, causing a breakdown in communications among MA partners.

During this time, personnel at the UNICEF zonal office continued to receive requests for community-based MRE. They tried to cover gaps by conducting activities on their own or with HDU personnel, but this was difficult given the limitations of the HDU (see Section VI.A.4.a.ii) and the lack of NGO assistance and coordination of village-based volunteers. Limited school-based activities continued but only in certain schools targeted earlier by UNICEF and government education personnel.

MA stakeholders—including some with considerable international experience—expressed alarm at the lack of MRE programming in Jaffna, especially given its high levels of contamination and injuries (see Section IV.D.2 and Appendix B).

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• A combination of access, approval, and contract delays has effectively shut down civilian capacity for programming in some areas, notably in Jaffna District.

• Address each of these individual problems (access, approval and contract delays) according to the related recommendations in Sections VI.A.4.c.i-iii, bearing in mind the interrelatedness of some of these challenges. Encourage partners to address all relevant problems instead of shifting blame from one to another.

VI.A.4.d Resource needs of community-based MRE implementing partners

Evaluation participants mentioned four types of resource needs, as outlined in Figure 5:

Figure 5. Resource needs of MRE implementing partners

When asked about cost cutting and conservation of resources, UNICEF and NGO partners mentioned several successful measures:

42 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 43: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• methods such as incorporating MRE activities into existing village structures (including VCRMCs and child clubs);• materials such as reusable laminated flash cards; and• conservation during training activities, such as reducing provision of refreshments and conducting trainings in geographic and

physical locations that minimize transportation and lodging costs for trainers and trainees.

Some evaluation participants believe that certain relatively expensive methods—such as billboards and professionally facilitated street drama—are worth the added cost because they are particularly effective messaging tools.

STRENGTHS UNICEF and NGO partners have taken steps to reduce costs; one NGO that used to provide refreshments during drama activities, for example, now solicits community contributions instead. UNICEF, NGOs, and GAs have assisted the HDU with transportation. UNICEF provided a generous donation of vehicles, motorbikes, and multimedia equipment worth LKR 30 million to the HDU in November 2010.66

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• NGO and HDU partners experience considerable transportation shortages in the field; teams often have sufficient personnel for trainings but insufficient transportation.

• Assess transportation needs and coordinate shared transportation at the district level in collaboration with DMAOs.

• Some MRE field officers expressed a desire for life insurance, because they feel that the risks associated with their work endangers their health—and, as a result, the financial well-being of their families.

• Assess the extent to which MRE field officers are at risk of occupational injury and reduce these risks wherever possible.• Revisit the 2009 UNICEF-NGO agreement obligating NGOs to provide life and/or health insurance to field officers. Coordinate with NGOs to ensure that all field workers are adequately insured.

• NGO and HDU personnel have expressed a need for many additional resources. Costs of printing materials and other inputs have increased while some funding has decreased, and some local partners are having difficulty conducting programs with limited resources.

•Conduct a consistent, ongoing assessment of NGO, HDU, and other partner needs and provide resources as necessary and feasible.

• Programs that require significant travel and overnight stays by field staff are limited by a lack of lodgings in certain remote areas. If more lodgings were available, staff could spend less time traveling to central locations for lodgings and increase the number of programs conducted in the field.

• Coordinate with NGO and CBO staff to provide homestay or other inexpensive lodging alternatives for MRE field personnel working in remote areas.

• Some NGO personnel feel overworked, especially when trying to integrate child protection activities with MRE programming.

• Study whether obligations to conduct child protection activities are inhibiting the delivery of MRE, and assign child protection activities to other NGO and UNICEF staff as needed.

• Many NGO representatives do not feel that they have sufficient staff to achieve set goals; they would like to hire additional personnel to increase MRE coverage.

• Strengthen community-based volunteer networks to increase MRE coverage. As mentioned in Section VI.A.1.b.i, community-based MRE creates a powerful “leave behind legacy” with local networks of community-based volunteers trained in advocacy and communication skills. Community-based volunteers can provide valuable assistance—not only for MRE but for other health and social interventions. Consider the “barefoot doctor”—or “barefoot health educator—modelxx to increase MRE coverage in rural areas.

VI.A.4.e Sustainability of and contingency planning for community-based MRE activities

xx See note vi on page 5.

43 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 44: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

UNICEF and NGO partners have taken steps to increase the sustainability of community-based MRE activities by working through existing local government and CBO networks and supporting the ongoing handover of activity management to the NMAC and DMAOs (see Sections VI.A.1 and VI.A.2). However, the success of current local MRE activities depends on external funding from UNICEF, organization by NGOs, and the participation of HDU and village-based partners. Evaluation participants doubt that community-based MRE activities would continue if any of these three partners terminated their involvement.

Many evaluation participants expressed a need to increase incentives for village-level partners (see Section VI.A.4.a.iii). Although it may not be possible to provide salaries to these individuals, UNICEF and NGO partners can increase the incentives they are already providing—travel allowances and per diem and physical incentives such as t-shirts, caps and awards. It may also be possible to acknowledge the valuable contributions of village-level partners through certification programs (with paper certificates) and special recognition ceremonies.

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Current community-based MRE activities depend on the contributions of UNICEF, NGOs, the HDU, and village-level partners. These activities would be threatened by the withdrawal of support from any of these stakeholders and the introduction of additional challenges related to access, approval, and funding.

• Increase contingency planning for community-based MRE activities by discussing potential future problems at regular meetings. Create solutions to possible future scenarios, asking questions similar to the following:1) What if additional approval problems—such as those encountered with the PTF—arise for UNICEF and NGO partners in the future?2) What if UNICEF and NGO partners do not receive MoD clearance for certain geographic areas?3) What if the HDU becomes the only government-approved MRE provider?4) What if an urgent need for emergency MRE arises?5) What if the security situation changes?6) What will happen when minefields have been cleared, the presence of deminers and militarypersonnel has decreased, and returnees have settled into their new or return communities? Will people continue to practice mine-safe behaviors when they encounter suspicious objects?

• Some village volunteers feel discouraged because they are not receiving significant incentives from UNICEF and NGO partners—particularly when they see the incentives other volunteers receive from certain INGOs.

• Increase provision of incentives to village-based partners to confirm that their contributions are valued and to encourage their continued participation. Such incentives may include travel allowances and per diem, physical incentives such as t-shirts, caps, and awards, and acknowledgment through certification programs (with paper certificates) and special recognition ceremonies (which can be held in partnership with other (I)NGOs and CBOs working in the same communities).

VI.A.5 Coordination of school-based MRE

The following section describes coordination of school-based MRE conducted via the government school system (including central- to local-level coordination of school-based MRE, integration of MRE into the national government school curriculum, and training of trainers) and coordination of NGO MRE activities (also known as “school-oriented MRE”) in schools. Methods, materials, and monitoring mechanisms used for school-based MRE are available in Sections VI.C.1.c.ii, VI.C.2.c, and VI.E.1.c, respectively.

44 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 45: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VI.A.5.a Coordination of school-based MRE conducted via the government school system

Evaluation participants consider schools an excellent setting for reaching children with health and social messaging. One HDU representative, for example, told the evaluation team that school-based MRE is the best way to reach children. A UNICEF Education Section representative pointed out that conducting MRE in schools increases sustainability of messaging, because schools “will always be there” as a source of education for children and their families.

UNICEF and partners have coordinated school-based MRE through existing government education mechanisms. Government education in Sri Lanka is administered via education zones.xxi All of the 27 education zones in the Eastern and Northern Provinces have designated focal points for MRE. These MRE focal points have held review meetings with Zonal Directors of Education, Deputy Directors of Development, and other education personnel. In the past, trainings and monitoring have been conducted by in-service advisors (ISAs), former teachers who have been promoted to advisory positions.

STRENGTHS Implementation of school-based MRE via existing government education structures has resulted in conservation of resources and will improve the sustainability of MRE programming. UNICEF has fostered positive relationships with government education personnel at the central, provincial, district, and local levels. Government education personnel who met with the evaluation team understood and discussed the importance of MRE for school-aged children and seemed supportive, enthusiastic, and well-organized.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONSNone noted. None noted.VI.A.5.a.i Past coordination of school-based MREStarting in 2004, MRE was included as a supplemental component of the social studies curriculum for secondary students (grades 6 to 9) in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Some supplementary activities were conducted for primary students (Kindergarten and grades 1 to 5) as well. UNICEF and MoE partners trained teachers and trainers in the National Colleges of Education (NCoE) to conduct MRE activities and developed teacher and student training materials.VI.A.5.a.ii Integration of MRE into the national government school curriculumSchool curricula in Sri Lanka are exam-oriented and many evaluation participants believe that supplementary subjects are often neglected—particularly when teachers and other educators feel overwhelmed with other tasks. UNICEF and government education partners feared that the designation of MRE as a supplementary curriculum component limited its actual inclusion in classroom teaching. In light of this concern and the growing need to reach Sri Lankans living outside of the Northern and Eastern Provinces, UNICEF and government education partners decided to incorporate MRE into the national curriculum as a compulsory subject. The MRE curriculum has been approved by the government, and starting in January 2011, MRE will be taught within the “Environmental Studies” unit in the primary grades and the “Life Skills and Competencies” unit in the secondary grades.

In March 2010, representatives of UNICEF, MoE, the National Institute of Education (NIE), and zonal education offices held a workshop to prepare MRE syllabi for secondary students and supplementary materials for students in grades 1 through 5, 10, and 11. Partners also incorporated MRE messages into the Accelerated Learning Program, which provides remedial primary and secondary education. Education officials have pledged to include two MRE questions in school examinations, which will encourage teachers to devote sufficient time to the subject. The NIE will train teachers to teach MRE in the Teacher Training Colleges (TTCs) and the NCoE.

xxi Each education zone is administered by one Zonal Director of Education, who is assisted by Deputy Directors of Development, Planning, Admininstration and Management. In-service advisors and Assistant Directors of Education (discussed further in Section VI.E.1.c) report to the Deputy Directors.

45 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 46: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Principals and teachers participating in the evaluation believe that incorporation of MRE in the compulsory national curriculum will facilitate teaching of MRE in schools.

A risk reduction consultant hired to facilitate implementation of MRE in government schools found the following current obstacles to school-based MRE:

• a strong focus on compulsory subjects and general examinations (which currently lack MRE questions);

• feelings among teachers that MRE is less important than other subjects—and that teachers are not recognized for time spent teaching MRE—which lead to “lukewarm enthusiasm”67

• lower prioritization of MRE by teachers who feel overwhelmed with work and preoccupied with living far from their families; and

• the tendency of returnees to become accustomed to living in landmine- and ERW-affected areas—and less careful about injury risk—as time passes following resettlement;

The consultant has proposed a step-by-step process to institutionalize MRExxii and made recommendations for education authorities, school principals, and UNICEF MA personnel.

STRENGTHS Incorporation of MRE into the national curriculum as a compulsory rather than supplementary subject reflects the ability of UNICEF and government education partners to learn from past experience and maintain program flexibility. Collaboration with a national focal point for MRE within the Ministry of Education has strengthened school-based MRE programming and facilitated the incorporation of MRE into the national curriculum. In 2008 MRE was integrated into the National Guidelines for School Disaster Safety. After partners determined that mid-level education personnel were not properly informed about MRE programming, UNICEF invited Zonal and Provincial Directors of Education and other mid-level staff for special MRE briefings and trainings.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• One UNICEF Education Section representative expressed frustration that MRE has not been implemented in schools sooner.

• Develop methods to bridge coverage gaps when similar initiatives are introduced in the future. Such methods could include increased emergency MRE programming in high-risk areas.

• A risk reduction consultant hired to facilitate implementation of MRE in government schools found several obstacles to school-based MRE, including poor prioritization of MRE relative to other subjects, “lukewarm enthusiasm” among teachers, and a tendency of returnees to become less careful about high-risk behaviors following resettlement.

• Study the recommendations made by the risk reduction consultant for education authorities, school principals, and UNICEF MA personnel—as well as the additions and edits of other UNICEF personnel—and implement recommendations as appropriate to improve coordination of school-based MRE.

• Zonal and local education personnel participating in the evaluation were not fully aware of the decision to incorporate MRE into the national curriculum. Some personnel had heard about the decision but did not know how it would be implemented. None of these personnel had received any updated MRE materials.

• Provide adequate instruction and materials to ensure that all district, zonal, and local education personnel have adequate knowledge and materials to incorporate MRE into their routine teaching activities.

• Representatives of the Ministry of Healthcare and Nutrition (MoHN) and UNICEF Education Section expressed a need for general injury prevention and safety education in schools.

• Utilize lessons learned from collaborating with the MoE, NIE, and other education partners to introduce a broader school-based injury prevention and safety education program. Potential partners might include the MoHN, specific UNICEF Sections (Education, Child Protection, and Health), and NGOs addressing

xxii The consultant recommends the following steps: 1) create school selection criteria and identify target schools; 2) brief education authorities and secure their agreement; 3) conduct an orientation for students and teachers; 4) conduct school-based risk reduction; 5) conduct a school risk assessment and develop an awareness creation plan; 6) create and implement the awareness creation plan; and 7) phase out, complete and/or hand over the program. (Munas Kalden, UNICEF Risk Reduction Consultant, December 2010).

46 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 47: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

injury prevention and safety concerns. Such a comprehensive program could include an MRE module alongside sessions on prevention of falls, snake bites, drowning, etc.VI.A.5.a.iii Training of trainers for school-based MRE

UNICEF and government education partners started providing MRE training to teachers and ISAs in 2003. Additional trainings have targeted school principals, many of whom include MRE messaging in assemblies and encourage teachers to incorporate MRE into lesson plans (see Section VI.C.1.c.ii for methods used in school-based MRE). UNICEF and partners currently provide MRE training to main classroom teachers (grades 1 through 5) and social studies teachers (grades 6 and above).

The evaluation team spoke with one principal and two teachers who had attended a three-day MRE training conducted by UNICEF and Sarvodaya in July 2010. Training methods included multimedia presentations and participatory activities such as group discussions and games. Participants learned to identify target groups and select teaching methods appropriate for different populations. After the session, participants were asked to complete feedback forms.

STRENGTHS UNICEF and training partners use participatory methods to train teachers and other education personnel. Training of principals has strengthened MRE programming in schools.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Some evaluation participants believe that Sinhalese principals and teachers in landmine- and ERW-affected areas are particularly ignorant about MRE.

• Ensure that all teachers—regardless of ethnicity, language, or geographic location—are adequately trained in MRE.

• Some teachers have expressed a need for refresher trainings. • Schedule regular refresher trainings for all relevant government education personnel.

• ISAs have not received MRE manuals in the past. • Provide an MRE manual to ISAs during MRE trainings.• One evaluation participant mentioned that lecturers at the TTCs and NCoE would benefit from MRE training. NCoE lecturers were trained in 2006 and 2007 but UNICEF is unsure of the impact of this training.

• Collaborate with the NIE to provide MRE to lecturers at the TTCs and NCoE.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Collaborate with government education personnel to select the best possible times for MRE trainings. One zonal education representative told the evaluation team that teacher trainings are best provided during holiday times (April, August, and December) when teachers have more leisure time and receive stipends for trainings.

VI.A.5.b Coordination of NGO MRE activities in schools

In addition to school-based MRE conducted by government partners, NGOs conduct some MRE activities in schools (referred to as “school-oriented” MRE in this report). These activities require permission from school principals and are conducted during school assemblies, during classes, or after school. One demining agency has also conducted MRE activities during school assemblies and classes as part of its CL activities.

47 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 48: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS Some NGOs conduct MRE activities in individual classes—rather than school-wide assemblies—because the more intimate settings allow NGOs to target certain age groups with appropriate messages.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Some demining agencies have been conducting MRE activities in schools, but with messages and/or approaches different from those recommended by UNICEF (see Section VI.B.4.c.ii).

• Discourage demining agencies from disseminating incorrect MRE messages and using inappropriate training methods. Find other positive ways for demining personnel to interact with school students; options could include presentations on demining activities coordinated with dissemination of UNICEF-approved safety messages.

• Many evaluation participants believe that school-oriented MRE has been inadequate.

• Expand school-oriented MRE programming as appropriate in high-risk areas.

VI.A.6 Data collection and use for planning and implementation of MRE

According to IMAS, data collection is “an ongoing process of surveillance in support of MRE and MA programming” and may include qualitative and quantitative data about communities (landmine/ERW contamination, socioeconomic characteristics, population movement, behavior, and methods of communication) and individuals injured and killed by landmines or ERW. xxiii These data complement all other MRE components, including targeting of communities, development of messages and materials, and monitoring of MRE activities. In Sri Lanka, data are collected via two main channels: surveillance systems and knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) surveys.

VI.A.6.a Surveillance of landmine and ERW incidents and injuries

DMAOs manage the SLMAD, which includes data on landmine and ERW incidents and injuries, suspected hazardous areas, and MRE activities. When a landmine or ERW incident occurs, MA partners (often from MRE implementing organizations) travel to the incident site to file a report. The SLMAD is updated weekly with incident and casualty reports. UNICEF and other organizations follow up to ensure that victims and their families receive available resources and services.

While DMAOs are responsible for maintenance of the SLMAD, UNICEF and other MRE partners use SLMAD casualty information to target high-risk demographic groups and develop MRE messages. Thus, all MRE stakeholders should support collection of data that are as valid and thorough as possible.

xxiii United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 2: data collection and needs assessment. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NTQNF/$file/imas-2gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.

48 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 49: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• According to evaluation participants, little or no QA is conducted on the database.

• Develop standardized QA procedures to improve management of the database.

• According to evaluation participants, database contents are not adequately analyzed and regular reports based on these contents are not created or used sufficiently during the planning of MA activities.

• Develop procedures to guarantee regular analysis, reporting, and use of a minimum set of key database variables by DMAOs and other stakeholders. Explore the possibility of automated data analysis. EpiInfo, for example, can be programmed to allow people with little epidemiologic or database training to generate basic reports with a simple series of keystrokes.

• Some fields on the data collection form are not included in the database.

• Ensure that all fields are consistent on the data collection form and in the database.

• Some data elements that are critical to accurate MRE targeting are not currently included in the SLMAD.

• Review the data elements listed in the annexes to IMAS Guidebook 2 and add those that are not already included to the SLMAD and data collection form. Expand answer options for “occupation of casualty” to include specific civilian occupations (e.g., farmers, fishermen, and scrap metal collectors) and incorporate the following additional data elements: the physical location of the incident (such as a home or garden) in addition to the geographic location; the language, ethnicity, religion, and economic status of the victim; and whether or not the victim knew that his/her activity at the time of the incident was dangerous (for high-risk behaviors only). Analysis of these data elements would be beneficial to MRE and other MA programming.

VI.A.6.b Knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) surveys

Representatives of six NGO chapters in five districts discussed conducting KAP surveys before and after MRE activities in their coverage areas. NGO personnel conduct KAP surveys to determine target populations, identify knowledge gaps, and select appropriate messages and methods. NGOs do not use a standardized sampling frame to select KAP participants. Most NGOs use the SLMAD MRE KAP form (available in Appendix F), while MAG uses a more quantitative survey form with more “yes/no” and “correct/incorrect” answer options. NGOs administer fewer surveys during emergency MRE activities than during regularly scheduled programming.

STRENGTHS Many NGO partners understand and appreciate the usefulness of KAP surveys for learning about target communities and planning MRE activities.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Many MRE partners conduct KAP surveys but do not always analyze survey results or use them for program planning. One group of NGO MRE personnel participating in the evaluation did not know where their organization’s KAP results are kept.

• Require NGOs to maintain well-organized records of KAP results. Collect results in a national repository and use both aggregate and location-specific data to guide programming. Include training in KAP survey administration and submission of KAP data to the DMAOs in the NGO accreditation criteria (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii).

• Because NGOs do not use the same sampling methods, data collected in different communities and at different times cannot be compared to determine trends.

• Collaborate with representatives of all NGOs to create standardized KAP sampling methods and ensure that all NGO personnel use them.

49 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 50: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• The SLMAD KAP form has not been updated since 2003 and is missing crucial elements.

• Collaborate with DMAO personnel and other MRE stakeholders to edit the KAP form. The new version should include some questions about access to and preferences for certain types of information dissemination, which can be used to guide MRE and other UNICEF programming. The new version should also include more of the data elements recommended by IMAS in Guidebook 2. These include the following (in addition to data elements currently included in the KAP form): 1) the number of adults and children in the participant’s household2) whether or not the participant was displaced during the conflict3) whether it is more difficult living in the participant’s village than it was before the conflict4) main problems the participant faces5) the participant’s language literacy6) main information sources for adults in the participant’s community7) best ways to provide information to children in the participant’s community8) radio use (how often the participant listens, at what time of day, types of favorite radio programs, radio stations listened to most)9) whether landmines and ERWxxiv are present the area10) whether the participant has seen any landmines or ERW (if yes, what he/she did)11) what activities are stopped due to the presence of landmines and/or ERW12) whether and how people in the participant’s community use landmines and/or ERW13) true/false statements about landmine/ERW safety14) MRE received by the participant (methods, usefulness of information, behavior change following MRE, most important information needed)15) whether or not the participant knows anyone who has been injured or killed by landmines or ERW (if yes, activity at the time of the incident and whether or not the victim knew he/she was in a dangerous area) groups at high risk of landmine/ERW injurySTAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS

• Replace “UXO” with “ERW” in KAP surveys to reflect the preference of UNICEF and MRE partners. Consider asking separate questions about landmines and ERW (as in the IMAS sample KAP survey) rather than asking questions about all explosive devices at once.

VI.A.7 Integration of MRE with other programming

According to IMAS, one of the hallmarks of good MRE programming is integration with the other pillars of MA (see note xiii on page 16), incident and casualty reporting, and other development work. UNICEF also prioritizes integration of MRE and child protection programming.

VI.A.7.a Integration of MRE with other pillars of mine action

VI.A.7.a.i Integration of MRE with deminingMany evaluation participants discussed how MRE and demining teams provide useful information to each other.

Community members may not report the presence of known or suspected landmines or ERW directly to HDU and other demining personnel because of language and cultural barriers, anxiety due to the conflict, and fears of being suspected or accused of

xxiv “UXO” was changed to “ERW” in these recommendations to reflect the preference of UNICEF and MRE partners.

50 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 51: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

collecting, using, or selling explosive devices. Thus, NGO MRE field workers often serve as intermediaries between community members and demining personnel. When NGO personnel hear about suspected landmines/ERW or hazardous areas, they often complete SLMAD reporting forms and submit them to the DMAOs or relay information to UNICEF personnel who submit the forms. NGO personnel may also report suspect objects and areas to demining and/or military personnel and warn community members. MRE field personnel, community members and deminers often collaborate to create community maps (see Section VI.D.1) that are passed to the DMAOs for consideration during prioritization of demining tasks. NGO personnel sometimes follow up to ensure that landmines and ERW are removed.

Demining agency personnel who find communities in need of MRE contact NGOs, UNICEF, GAs, and DS Secretaries to request MRE activities. Sarvatra and MAG, for example, have asked CTF to conduct MRE programs in their demining areas. Such requests are often made during CL activities conducted before, during, and after demining (see Section VI.D.1).

STRENGTHS MRE and demining teams exchange information that is beneficial to each other’s programming.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONSNone noted. None noted.VI.A.7.a.ii Integration of MRE with victim assistanceLinks between MRE and VA are also highly developed.

MRE trainings often include information about VA. During one community-based MRE session in Mannar observed by the evaluation team, the trainer provided some statistics about landmine/ERW injuries, discussed VA and inclusion of injury victims and others with disabilities, and listed types and locations of service providers. CTF personnel sometimes distribute VA brochures during MRE activities. Some VA organizations and personnel contact NGO MRE personnel when they find communities in need of MRE.

In six districts (Batticaloa, Jaffna, Mannar, Mullaitivu, Trincomalee, and Vavuniya), MRE implementing organizations have invited landmine/ERW injury survivors to work as field officers, other staff members, or village volunteers. In Batticaloa, children blinded by landmines have conducted MRE activities in coordination with child clubs. Upon asking whether any of these survivors have expressed hesitation or suspicion of exploitation, the evaluation team was told that the survivors often speaking of wanting to protect their communities and feeling empowered by their inclusion. One NGO representative, a counselor who was concerned about possible exploitation of these individuals, said that many of the survivors see inclusion in MRE activities as a responsibility and/or leadership opportunity.

Some NGOs that conduct MRE also provide VA resources and services, including artificial limbs; crutches, tricycles and wheelchairs; self-employment and income-generating activities; school bags and stationery for children; and information about disability rights. NGOs may also refer survivors to one or more of the following: centers offering specific services such as the Ahavoli Family Services Centre, Jaffna Jaipur Centre for Disability Rehabilitation, Leonard Cheshire Disability Resource Centre, or the physical rehabilitation center at the teaching hospital in Batticaloa; national NGOs such as Sewalanka and Shantiham; international organizations such as the Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development, Handicap International, Hope for Children, International Organization for Migration, StC, and Terre des Hommes; government partners such as Social Service Officers and Additional GAs; and UN agencies such as UNDP and UNHCR.

Sometimes NGOs contact service providers directly to facilitate assistance: Sarvodaya in Jaffna provides information to UNICEF and World University Service of Canada for vocational trainings, while RDF in Vavuniya recently contacted an Additional GA to secure services for an amputee.

STRENGTHS

51 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 52: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Strong links between MRE and VA stakeholders connect survivors and their families with needed resources and services. NGOs invite landmine/ERW survivors to participate in MRE activities.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Increased leadership of MRE activities by the HDU may jeopardize the participation of landmine/ERW survivors in MRE activities, as their current participation depends on community-based relationships and trust built by local NGOs.

• Introduce HDU MRE personnel to interested landmine/ERW survivors to encourage their continued participation if the HDU takes over some MRE activities currently managed by NGOs.

VI.A.7.a.iii Integration of MRE with advocacyUNICEF has conducted several central-level advocacy activities. In October 2009, UNICEF held a two-day national workshop on the Ottawa (Mine Ban) Treatyxxv, the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, and the Convention on Cluster Munitions, with sponsored participants from all districts. UNICEF and the Sri Lankan Campaign to Ban Landmines conducted an MA training workshop for 35 journalists at the Sri Lanka Press Institute in March 2010.

At the local level, MRE trainers occasionally talk about the five MA pillars during trainings, and NGOs organize advocacy activities on April 4th for International Mine Action Day. School-based MRE includes supplementary material on the Ottawa Treaty for grades 10 and 11. Aside from these activities, however, evaluation participants believe that knowledge about the Ottawa Treaty is very minimal among MRE trainers; according to one participant, “they [MRE trainers] are good advocates for MRE but not good advocates for the [Ottawa] Treaty.” Poor knowledge of the Ottawa Treaty at the local level is understandable for several reasons: the treaty is not yet available in Sinhala or Tamil, the English-language version of the treaty is difficult to understand, and MRE trainers focus primarily on the core MRE messages rather than the treaty.

Several evaluation participants believe that UNICEF and MRE partners stand to gain from focusing more on advocacy for the Ottawa Treaty. They believe that Sri Lanka’s decision to accede to the treaty could lead to additional funding for MRE as well as VA and advocacy, and that UNICEF personnel and partners could use the treaty as an opportunity to learn about international humanitarian and human rights law, gaining knowledge that could be applied to other child protection and human rights activities.

UNICEF is also conducting some activities to advocate for Sri Lanka’s accession to and compliance with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

VI.A.7.b Integration of MRE with injury and incident reporting

As discussed in Section VI.A.6.a, NGOs that conduct MRE play a vital role in the reporting of landmine and ERW injuries and incidents. Some NGOs designate specific team members to conduct SLMAD reporting, while others train village volunteers to complete database forms. NGO personnel and their village partners send incident and injury reports to DMAOs, either directly or via UNICEF.

xxv “Ottawa Treaty” and “Mine Ban Treaty” are common names for the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction.

52 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 53: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• One NGO MRE team reported difficulties while collecting medical information for a SLMAD report from a hospital. Hospital personnel would not release the requested information without a letter signed by NGO, UNICEF, and Ministry-level personnel.

• Determine whether this and other data collection challenges are related to concern for patient confidentiality. Train MRE and health personnel in the necessity of omitting personal identifiers when reporting data. Communicate with representatives of health authorities (including the MoHN), hospitals, and other health care providers to ensure that SLMAD field reporters are able to collect information for injury reports.

VI.A.7.c Integration of MRE with other child protection and development programming

Ground-level integration of MRE with other child protection and development programming occurs via the activities of MRE implementing partners and the interests and experiences of their staff. Linking of MRE and these other activities by UNICEF and partners has been stronger in the Eastern Province than in the Northern Province.

NGOs CTF, EHED-Caritas, RDF, Sarvodaya, and SOND conduct activities in many program areas, as indicated in Figure 6 below:

53 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 54: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Figure 6. Partner NGO program areas

54 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

•irrigation•road and other construction

•HIV/AIDS•maternal and child health•birth control•physical disability•dengue•mental health•hospital improvement

•children and youth•women•single-headed households•Muslim communities•IDPs•orphans•school dropouts•conflict- and tsunami-affected communities

•referral for livelihood activities•vocational training•community rehabilitation and recovery•referral to social services•microcredit and no-interest loans

•sexual and gender-based violence•sexual harassment•other gender issues•early marriage•child abuse•voting and land rights•access to legal services

NGO program areas

Page 55: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Integration of MRE with other child protection and development activities occurs via several channels:

• meetings within organizations;

• employment of staff with knowledge and previous work experience in other project areas;

• cross-training of staff in other project areas (e.g., child protection and MRE personnel learn core competencies in each other’s areas of focus);

• integration of child protection and MRE topics in children’s materials such as books and play kits;

• child club activities conducted concurrently on child protection and MRE;

• selection of the same communities for MRE and education in other topics (as appropriate);

• referral of individuals and communities by MRE and child protection personnel to their organizations’ other partners (Oxfam International, government bodies, etc.);

• collaboration with VCRMCs and other village-based networks on both MRE and child protection issues; and

• village volunteer trainings conducted jointly by MRE and child protection organizations.

Government bodies also integrate MRE and child protection activities; the Department of Social Services, for example, provides resources for people affected by both landmines/ERW and child protection concerns.

Some evaluation participants discussed the extreme sensitivity of dialogue about child protection and human rights concerns and use of related terms. One government representative told the evaluation team that “’awareness’ is a bad word…the government has an allergy to the word ‘awareness’.” Some stakeholders expressed concern that integration of MRE into sensitive child protection activities leads to additional scrutiny of MRE.

STRENGTHS MRE partners utilize integration of MRE with child protection and other development concerns to strengthen skills, connect people with needed resources and trainings, and conserve UNICEF and NGO resources.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Some MRE partners fear that combining MRE with child protection issues has endangered support of MRE activities because some government stakeholders feel threatened by or uncomfortable with certain child protection issues and related terms.

• Investigate the possibility that combining MRE and child protection programming has hindered implementation of MRE activities, particularly in relation to government approvals (see Section VI.A.4.c). If this is found to be a significant problem, reconsider the decision to combine MRE and child protection activities.

• While integration of MRE and child protection programming has lowered the costs of some activities, it has added pressure to field personnel who sometimes feel overwhelmed by their responsibilities.

• Ask field personnel for input about their workloads and address their concerns as feasible. Increase training and engagement of village-level staff (perhaps through the “barefoot doctor” model, discussed in Section VI.A.4.d and in note vi on page 5) to accomplish more tasks at the local level.

VI.B Injury risk and MRE targeting, coverage, and messaging

VI.B.1 Injury risk

Enduring contamination in living and livelihood areas, high-risk behaviors, and mitigating factors related to displacement and resettlement may lead to elevated risk of landmine and ERW injury in certain populations. Stakeholders should take this into account as they plan MRE targeting and messaging.

55 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 56: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VI.B.1.a Enduring landmine and ERW contamination in living and livelihood areas

Political pressure has led to quick resettlement of displaced people within Sri Lanka, and many MA personnel fear that people are returning to areas that have not been demined according to international humanitarian standards. Landmines and ERW remain in many living and livelihood areas in northern and eastern Sri Lanka and are commonly found in areas that have already been declared “low-risk” or “released”. Evaluation participants described discovery of landmines and ERW in and around homes, gardens, schools, wells, toilets and toilet pits, and trees.

As in other conflict and post-conflict settings, many people living in contaminated areas have adapted to the presence of landmines and ERW. Evaluation participants fear that these people are overly confident and more likely to engage in high-risk behaviors.

VI.B.1.b High-risk behaviors and times

As mentioned in Section IV.D.2., the top six activities at the time of injury for victims recorded in the SLMAD between 2000 and September 2010 were household work,xxvi collecting food/water/wood, tampering, passing/standing nearby, traveling, and playing/recreation. Evaluation participants mentioned a variety of high-risk behaviors and times.

High-risk livelihood activitiesBecause demining in Sri Lanka has focused on living (rather than livelihood) areas, ordinary livelihood activities increase the risk of injury in contaminated areas. When asked to list the most common risk behaviors they knew of, evaluation participants mentioned the following livelihood activities (numbers in parentheses indicate the number of times each behavior was mentioned):

• collecting firewood (16 mentions);

• farming (digging/plowing/sowing/harvesting), cattle herding, and scrap metal collecting (6 mentions);

• collecting fruit (5 mentions);

• construction (including digging) (4 mentions);

• burning garbage, collecting sand, and collecting explosives for fishing/selling/making a trap gun (3 mentions);

• going to the toilet, cleaning land, and cleaning wells (2 mentions); and

• collecting charcoal/coconuts/jaggery/kajants/palmyra, hiding explosives for later use or sale, going to sea/beach areas for fishing, and digging wells (1 mention).

In many places, firewood collecting—mentioned most frequently as a common risk behavior—was the main income-generating activity. Sometimes people go to collect wood, fruit, or other things in areas known (and often marked) as dangerous because these areas are less likely to have been accessed by other collectors.

Children’s high-risk activitiesEvaluation participants mentioned many high-risk behaviors taken by children at play. Stakeholders in Kilinochchi had seen children playing in or near restricted and dangerous areas, while stakeholders in Jaffna said that children go to unsafe areas to play and collect fruits. Some evaluation participants claimed that the lack of sufficient recreation activities encourages children to go to contaminated areas. In some cases, children have picked up and tampered with explosive devices: one child put an ERW in an oven in order to separate it into metal parts, another hit an ERW with a stone, and a group of children threw a live grenade that they thought had already exploded.

xxvi See note xiv on page 17.

56 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 57: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Other high-risk activitiesEvaluation participants mentioned several other high-risk activities among community members:

• Traveling to unsafe areas to relieve themselves;• Removal of landmine/ERW signs and stakes (signs are removed because people have already used the land in marked areas and

do not believe that it is dangerous, while stakes are removed for use as firewood or cricket pickets);• Use of ERW in the home as household and decorative items such as flower vases; and• Looting of homes located in HSZs known to be contaminated with landmines.

High-risk timesPeople may also be at elevated risk of injury at particular times. Several evaluation participants believe that risk increases during Shramadanaxxvii (community service) days, especially if people are clearing land or burning garbage. People who let their cattle graze in paddy areas during the dry season are often forced to take their cattle to (potentially contaminated) forest areas during the rainy season. The rainy season can also be dangerous because moisture in the soil can bring buried landmines and ERW to the surface in areas where people are plowing and planting. During the 2010 dengue outbreak, collection and burning of garbage for dengue eradication increased the risk of injury.

VI.B.1.c Mitigating factors related to displacement and resettlement

Certain factors related to high levels of displacement and resettlement during and after the conflict may be increasing risk of landmine and ERW injury.

Restricted land accessThroughout landmine- and ERW-affected regions, known contaminated areas and military-occupied High Security Zones (HSZs), often protected by defensive landmine perimeters and off limits to demining agencies and the public, limit the land available for housing and livelihood activities. As of 2005, HSZs covered an estimated 15 per cent of the Jaffna peninsula and had displaced 84,625 persons. These limitations, along with displacement due to the December 2004 tsunami, have put stress on available land and encouraged people to take additional risks, such as settling in landmine- and ERW-affected areas and conducting high-risk livelihood activities.

Displacement and the loss of “human intelligence”Civilians who are not displaced during a conflict often know the locations of suspicious objects and hazardous areas near their homes. These populations learn to avoid dangerous areas and pass information about them to deminers and other MA stakeholders. This information is collectively known as “human intelligence”. The displacement of so many people during the Sri Lankan civil conflict reduced the overall availability of human intelligence in contaminated areas.

Lifted restrictions on movement and accelerated resettlementMovement to and through certain parts of Sri Lanka was restricted during the conflict by force and by choice. As a result, people were not able to move freely from one area to another within the northern and eastern parts of the country, and people from other parts of the country were not able to access these areas. This limited movement may be one reason why injury rates have been relatively low given the current level of contamination. Now that government authorities have reduced restrictions on travel and resettlement, movement to and within landmine- and ERW-affected areas is increasing. Some evaluation participants fear that rising population movement and quick resettlement (sometimes without proper demining or sufficient availability of income-generating activities) may lead to a future increase in injuries.

Fears of slowed or stopped resettlement

xxvii The Sanskrit word Shramadana means “a gift of labor” (Garfinkel, P. (2006). Buddha or bust, p. 110) or “donating one's lab[or] without material rewards” (Thodock, C. (December 2005). The Sarvodaya Shramadana movement in Sri Lanka. Culture Mandala (7:1). Available online at http://www.international-relations.com/CM7-1WB/SriLanka.htm). During Shramadana days, community members work together without compensation to complete common tasks at schools, temples, and other common locations. Many communities conduct Shramadana activities monthly or as needed.

57 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 58: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Stakeholders mentioned three scenarios in which fears of slowed or stopped resettlement have led to high-risk behaviors:

• In one instance, returnees hid ERW they found in their living areas because they feared that reporting—and subsequent demining—would slow or stop their resettlement.

• Some people travel to their homes in landmine- and ERW-contaminated areas without official permission. In at least one instance, one of these returnees found and buried an ERW, fearing punishment for going to the contaminated area without official permission.

• When one DS Secretary announced a new resettlement package, community members removed tape and other markings because they feared that acknowledgment of a landmine/ERW problem—and subsequent demining activities—would delay or prevent their resettlement.

VI.B.1.d High-risk populations

A combination of high-risk behaviors and changing trends in population movement and resettlement are putting certain people at risk. Evaluation participants mentioned the following high-risk groups:

• Men, women, and children conducting high-risk livelihood activities. Such activities may be carried out by different people in different areas; in Batticaloa, for example, men are more likely to go to the jungle for large long-term supplies of wood while women are more likely to participate in day-to-day firewood collection. In some areas poverty has forced children to drop out of school and conduct livelihood activities, which puts them at a “double risk” because they are conducting high-risk activities without receiving school-based MRE messaging.

• Child surrendees/separateesxxviii who were trained in landmine/ERW use during their time with armed groups and forces may be at particular risk.

• Former military members or others with professional landmine/ERW experience may feel more comfortable with landmines and ERW, and may engage in high-risk behaviors such as handling or tampering as a result.

• Construction workers are often paid by the hour and may be afraid that reporting a suspicious object will delay construction tasks—and that they will not be able to work or be paid as a result. In at least two instances in Jaffna, construction workers found unexploded devices near worksites and moved them without telling the appropriate authorities. A group of children later found and tampered with one of these devices; the resulting explosion killed two children and injured six.

• Indian and other foreign returnees have relatively little knowledge of MRE compared to those who were internally displaced during the conflict. One evaluation participant said that the returnees “don’t know anything” and another claimed that the returnees “have a lot of misinformation.”

• IDPs moving between landmine- and ERW-affected areas are often accustomed to living and working around landmines and ERW and may participate in high-risk behaviors as a result. This, in turn, sets a bad example for others. One evaluation participant in Jaffna said that IDPs from the Vanni come to Jaffna with significant landmine and ERW experience, and respond to MRE messaging by saying, “we already know, we’ve been dealing with this problem for 10-15 years, don’t waste my time!” Other NGO workers say that Vanni returnees in particular have many misconceptions about safe and unsafe behaviors.

• People moving from unaffected areas to affected areas for work or leisure often have had no MRE exposure and have some misconceptions about landmines and ERW; informal conversations with two Sinhalese people working in Jaffna, for example, revealed that they believe that landmines expire—and are no longer dangerous—after a certain period of time. People coming to landmine- and ERW-affected areas for work in road and building construction are particularly at risk (see above). Tourists and religious pilgrims coming from unaffected parts of the country—at rates as high as 9000 people per day 68—often travel in large buses. These buses stop on the side of the road to allow people to cook meals, relieve themselves, or rest, often in potentially dangerous areas.

xxviii “Child surrendee” and “child separatee” are terms commonly used to describe children (formerly) associated with armed forces and armed groups in Sri Lanka.

58 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 59: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• People engage in high-risk livelihood, recreational, and other activities in contaminated areas, even when they understand the risk of injury.

• Continue to adapt MRE messages to include new and changing risk behaviors.• Determine the frequency of certain high-risk behaviors (such as removing stakes and using ERW as household items) and use risk reduction measures (see Section VI.D.2) to address situations in which people continue these behaviors despite understanding the risk of injury.

• Children often play in or near known contaminated areas and tamper with landmines and ERW.

• Continue to address high-risk children’s behaviors in MRE messaging and create safe play areas and activities in high-risk regions.

• Fears of slowed or stopped resettlement have led people to engage in high-risk behaviors such as hiding landmines and ERW and removing markings.

• Determine the incidence of high-risk behaviors (such as hiding landmines and ERW and removing markings) and use CL to discuss fines and other possible methods to discourage such behaviors.

• People living in landmine- and ERW-affected areas do not have adequate access to alternative livelihood projects and often engage in high-risk behaviors as a result.

• Increase the availability of alternative livelihood projects and strengthen links between these projects and people living in landmine- and ERW- affected areas.

• Challenge: Factors such as certain livelihood activities and professions, previous military experience, and movement to or within landmine- and ERW-affected areas may lead to increased risk among particular populations.

• Recommendation: Target these high-risk populations with messages specific to the characteristics or behaviors that put them at risk.

• Challenge: No formal process or standard technical procedures are in place to clear wells. As a result, people are trying to clear wells themselves or hiring others to clear them. UNICEF MA and water/sanitation personnel have asked SLA, DMAO, and demining agency personnel for assistance with this problem but a solution has not yet been found.

• Recommendation: Urge the DMAOs and demining partners to develop standard procedures to clear wells and inform communities about these procedures. In the absence of such procedures, conduct risk reduction activities (see Section VI.D.2) to decrease the risk of injury.

• Challenge: People pass high-risk behaviors to each other. • Recommendation: Encourage MRE participants to share important MRE messages with others, and to stop others from engaging in unsafe behaviors.

• Challenge: People may be at elevated risk during certain times, such as Shramadana days and the rainy season.

• Recommendation: Target Shramadana activities through CBOs and other local stakeholders, and use risk reduction activities (see Section VI.D.2) to address high-risk behaviors undertaken during the rainy season.

VI.B.2 MRE targeting

VI.B.2.a Selection of geographic areas and communities for community-based MRE

NGO representatives select targeting areas in consultation with GSs and DMAO and UNICEF personnel. Targeted areas include communities in or near minefields and areas of known ERW contamination; areas where injuries have occurred or landmines and/or ERW have been found; known battle areas, buffer zones and villages used by the LTTE and other armed groups; and new resettlement areas.

VI.B.2.b Selection of schools for school-based MRE

59 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 60: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Government schools currently receiving school-based MRE are located in and near resettlement areas and selected in consultation with UNICEF. Government education personnel have also trained teachers working in temporary schools in IDP sites in an effort to reach resettling students through emergency MRE.

VI.B.2.c Selection of other recipients for MRE

UNICEF and MRE partners have also provided “one-time” trainings or briefings to GSs, DS Secretaries and other government personnel; staff of CBOs and local, national and international NGOs; members of the SLA and police; school teachers, principals and other government education personnel; health workers; UNDSS and other UN staff; construction workers; and children who are not attending school.

NGOs also target particular high-risk groups following landmine and ERW incidents: if a fisherman or metal collector has been injured, for example, NGOs may target others in these professions. Demining agencies sometimes ask NGO personnel to provide MRE in certain areas. NGOs are also invited to provide trainings to particular groups and organizations; personnel at the Electricity Board in Colombo and the Menik Farm IDP camp in Vavuniya have made recent MRE requests.

STRENGTHS Selection of communities and schools for MRE is conducted based on injury and contamination data and in collaboration with GSs and DMAO and UNICEF personnel. Special efforts are made to address the needs of high-risk populations. MRE partners started MRE activities for IDPs before—rather than after—people resettled. Evaluation participants with experience in other post-conflict settings believe that this decision may have reduced injury among resettling populations.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Targeting of foreign returnees is inadequate. • Target returning populations via government and NGO service

providers and GAs, DSs, and GSs.• Targeting of Sri Lankan tourists, religious pilgrims and workers from unaffected areas is inadequate.

• Target working populations via transportation and construction companies, the Ministry of Transport, and employment agencies.• Partner with the MoED, Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority, travel guide writers, travel bureaus and companies, other tourism partners, and temple personnel to target tourists and religious pilgrims.

• Child surrendees/separatees may be at increased risk of injury and do not appear to have been targeted. Vavuniya UNICEF tried to conduct MRE sessions in rehabilitation camps prior to release, but children were released quickly and without warning to communities and IDP sites.

• Target child surrendees/separatees through UN and other programs.

• Unannounced and nighttime resettlement of IDPs from camps to transit areas and from transit areas to resettlement communities has made it difficult to reach some resettling communities.

• Establish procedures for government officials (at higher levels, if needed) to inform DMAOs, NGOs, and/or UNICEF of upcoming resettlement to increase opportunities for targeting of resettling communities.

• The evaluation team found evidence of double targeting of communities and individuals. NGO personnel seem to know which areas their particular organizations have covered, but evaluation participants believe that certain more accessible communities have been targeted multiple times while some less accessible communities have not been targeted at all.

• Collaborate with the DMAOs to assign responsibility for particular communities to each MRE implementing partner, either during meetings or by other methods of communication (telephone or e-mail). Establish a strong external monitoring system (see Section VI.E.1) that is inclusive of all MRE partners. Monitor districts where different partners are conducting MRE activities to ensure that communities are being targeted appropriately.

VI.B.3 MRE coverage

60 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 61: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

It is challenging to increase the scale of MRE coverage while maintaining high standards of coordination and delivery, particularly given limited resources. In recent years, UNICEF and partners have increased the scale of MRE coverage by building NGO capacity, adding HDU teams and the Internews roadshow project, and increasing media coverage. However, many MRE organizations would like to increase staff and activities but are unable to do so due to resource constraints (see Section VI.A.4.d).

Several demining agency representatives with experience in other landmine- and ERW-affected areas are concerned that MRE coverage is insufficient given current levels of contamination, population movement, and the release of “low-risk” areas that may still be contaminated with ERW. These individuals believe that MRE media campaigns have been insufficient and that particular groups of individuals—especially returnees, workers, tourists, and religious pilgrims—are at high risk of injury.

This problem is particularly acute in the Jaffna peninsula, which has high contamination, heavy resettlement, and a steady influx of tourists, religious pilgrims, and workers from unaffected areas of the country. PTF approval and funding problems have slowed—and even stopped—MRE activities by NGOs (see Section VI.A.4.c.ii). In the words of one evaluation participant, there is no civilian capacity for MRE in the Jaffna peninsula at this time. Some school-based programs have continued and UNICEF and HDU staff have tried to bridge coverage gaps but they have been unable to do adequately; as of late September 2010 the HDU had participated in only three programs in Jaffna. This lack of coverage is particularly troubling given the fact that Jaffna District has had the most injuries of all affected districts: according to injury statistics collected in the SLMAD between 2000 and 6 September 2010, 41.2% of 661 total incidents (resulting in 37.1% of 915 total casualties) had occurred in Jaffna District.

STRENGTHS Integration of MRE into the national school curriculum will reach all children who pass through government schools, and these children will be able to spread MRE messages to others.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• MA personnel, some with experience in other international settings, believe that MRE coverage in Jaffna is too low given current levels of contamination and population movement.

• Increase MRE coverage in Jaffna with media campaigns and targeting of specific groups, including school children, high-risk workers, and tourists and religious pilgrims coming from unaffected parts of Sri Lanka.

• Some demining agency personnel fear that MRE is insufficient in their demining task areas and that civilians will be injured “on their watch” (during their work in these areas). As a result, some of these personnel are bridging gaps in MRE coverage with their own “under the radar” MRE activities. Demining agencies are not officially permitted to conduct MRE in Sri Lanka and they do not conduct activities using messages and methods agreed upon by UNICEF, partner NGOs, and government partners.

• Collaborate with demining agencies to find gaps in MRE coverage and work with DMAOs and other MRE partners to bridge these gaps. Discourage demining agencies from conducting MRE activities unless they have been accredited by the NMAC and agree to disseminate messages consistent with those used by UNICEF and partner NGOs.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Create MRE quick response teams that can address emergency MRE needs, and make these teams available when demining agencies find communities with immediate need for MRE. Due to funding constraints (see Section VI.A.4.c.iii) it may be helpful to include selection and training of these teams in the UNICEF budget.

VI.B.4 MRE messaging

VI.B.4.a Core MRE messages

As mentioned in Section VI.A.1.b.ii, MRE providers use the core MRE messages outlined in the SLMAS.

VI.B.4.b Tailoring of MRE messages for specific locations While messages delivered during MRE sessions should closely follow the core messages mentioned above, they should also be tailored in different locations and at different times to reflect changes in landmine and ERW risks, population movement,

61 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 62: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

misconceptions and misunderstandings, and other factors that may increase risk of injury within target populations. UNICEF and MRE partners should review locally adapted messages on an ongoing basis to ensure accuracy and appropriateness.

VI.B.4.c Addressing misinformation, misunderstandings and inconsistent messaging

Community members participating in the evaluation said that messages delivered during NGO MRE activities were clear and appropriate for session audiences. However, various evaluation participants mentioned some misinformation and misunderstandings that, while originating from sources external to UNICEF and partner MRE activities, should be addressed.

VI.B.4.c.i Misinformation and misunderstandings among target audiencesSome evaluation participants mentioned that low levels of injury have given people a false sense of security and decreased their desire for MRE. Others say that certain groups do not believe they are at risk. One community group claimed that some women in their communities believe that they do not need MRE because they primarily stay at home.

Evaluation participants also mentioned the following misconceptions regarding landmines and ERW:

• Clearing an area by burning will make it safe.

• A footpath or other land area that has been used once is safe to use again.

• Landmines expire and become safe after a certain amount of time.

• If someone steps on a landmine, it will not explode until he/she removes his/her foot.

• It is safer to handle an ERW than a landmine.

• Areas controlled by the SLA are safe.

Some of these misconceptions are passed along from person to person, while others have originated in the actions of characters in popular Tamil films such as Jayhinth and Dhas.

VI.B.4.c.ii Inconsistent messaging from MA stakeholdersMA partners have varying levels of knowledge and comfort related to landmines and ERW. UNICEF and NGO personnel tend to hold similar views of mine-safe behavior because they are predominantly civilians and because UNICEF has trained many NGO personnel. However, demining agency and HDU personnel conducting CL activities may feel more comfortable moving near and handling landmines and ERW. These different attitudes toward landmines and ERW have led to some inconsistencies in messages provided to MRE recipients.

Community marking of suspected landmines/ERW and hazardous areas is one area of concern. UNICEF and NGO personnel encourage people who find a suspicious object or area to leave the area immediately, seek help from a relevant authority, and warn nearby community members. They fear that encouraging community members to make their own markings will put those people at risk of injury, and that encouraging children to mark areas may lead to their marking objects and areas “as a hobby”. Some demining agency and HDU personnel, however, have encouraged community members to make their own markings. Demining agency personnel have also asked NGO personnel to accompany them to dangerous areas to show them suspected landmines and ERW or to mark the devices themselves. The NGO personnel are hesitant to do this because they have not been trained to approach or mark suspected landmines and ERW, and because they fear that these activities could set an unsafe example for other community members. Two groups of children participating in this evaluation said that they would make their own markings if they found a suspicious object.

MA partners are also giving inconsistent messages regarding what MRE is and who can deliver it. Some demining agencies are conducting MRE activities without permission or coordination with UNICEF and partner NGOs. While these agencies have good

62 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 63: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

intentions and are attempting to fill coverage gaps, referral to their activities as “MRE”—and dissemination of inconsistent messages—may be increasing risk of injury and/or discrediting MRE programming by all partners.

Demining agency and HDU personnel are setting a bad example by handling or dismantling landmines and/or ERW during MRE presentations and other outreach activities for civilians. They are acting with good intentions and their own behavior may not be dangerous because they are using “dummy” or disarmed landmines and ERW, but even with warnings such as “this is for education only” or “I am trained and I know how to do this but you should not”, civilians who see these demonstrations may understand that they, too, can handle landmines and ERW safely.

Some military personnel have also been engaging in high-risk behaviors in the presence or vicinity of civilians. These include burning land to clean it and using bullet boxes and shell cases to decorate posts. While the personnel who are doing these activities may know which landmines/ERW and areas are safe, their actions are promoting comfort with explosive devices and contradicting commonly delivered MRE messages such as avoidance of landmines and ERW.

STRENGTHS UNICEF and partner NGOs have updated messages according to changing contamination, injury trends, and newly developing risk behaviors and misunderstandings.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Misinformation and misunderstandings related to landmines and ERW prevail among target audiences.

• Continue to address misinformation and misunderstandings through local tailoring of core MRE messages. Share newly found misconceptions with other MRE stakeholders so they will be able to investigate whether these misconceptions are also present in their target areas.

• MA partners are spreading inconsistent messages about community markings.

• Work with all relevant stakeholders to develop one unified national policy for community marking of landmines and ERW and ensure that all partners are committed to this policy. This policy may decree marking by no civilians, marking by some civilians (such as NGO personnel), or marking by all civilians. If some or all civilians are expected to conduct community marking, they should be trained to mark objects and areas safely.

• Inconsistent messaging is leading to confusion over what MRE is and who is able to provide it.

• Collaborate with relevant stakeholders to define MRE and clarify who is—and is not—qualified to provide it. Demining agency personnel who are eager to conduct MRE may be able to participate in CL activities, but they must receive CL training and accreditation in the same manner as other partners (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii) before receiving approval to do so.

• Military personnel are engaging in some behaviors—such as handling ERW, burning land, and using UXO for “beautification”—that have been discouraged by MRE partners. Although they are usually doing this with items they know to be safe, they may be setting an unsafe example for civilians.

• Address these practices with higher-level military personnel and explain why these behaviors—though possibly safe for military personnel—may be setting an unsafe example for civilians. Request that military authorities create policies to dissuade their personnel from engaging in such behaviors, particularly in the presence of civilians.

• People are learning unsafe behaviors from popular Tamil films such as Jayhinth and Dhas.

• Use people’s familiarity with these films—and incorrect messages—as a teaching tool. People enjoy discussing films and it may be possible for trainers to remind people of specific scenes and then explain why the messages conveyed are incorrect.

• Low levels of injury give people a false sense of security.

• Explain some reasons for low levels of injury, remind participants that the threat of injury is very real, and provide examples of real life stories demonstrating the impact of injuries on families and communities during MRE sessions.

63 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 64: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Some women think that they are not at risk of injury because they stay at home and believe that they do not need MRE as a result.

• Remind women and other MRE participants that women are important communicators in their families because they tend to spend more time at home and because they care for their husbands, parents, and children. Even if they are not directly at risk of injury, women can share MRE messages with their families and friends.

VI.C MRE methods, techniques, and materials

VI.C.1 MRE methods and techniques

VI.C.1.a Selection of MRE methods and techniques

Evaluation participants discussed a wide range of MRE methods and techniques. Although they had many different preferences, most agreed that a variety of methods should be used and changed from time to time to maintain interest among target populations.

When selecting methods and techniques, it is important to consider two factors: trusted “key influencers” in communities and preferred—and available—methods of communication used by and within communities. A summary of qualitative data related to these preferences is available in Appendix G.

VI.C.1.b Settings and times for community-based MRE

Physical settings for community-based activities include homes, schools, government offices, workplaces, community centers, and other common areas. Emergency MRE has been conducted in IDP camps, welfare centers, and transit sites. MRE implementing partners conduct activities at special events and times such as mobile servicesxxix, religious festivals, Shramadana days, special holidays (such as Tamil Day, Puja Day, and Children’s Day), and Mine Action Day and Week celebrations. MRE activities are also conducted upon invitation and request (see Section VI.B.2).

VI.C.1.c Types and comparison of currently used MRE methods

VI.C.1.c.i Types of currently used MRE methodsAccording to IMAS, communication media fall into four main categories:

• Person-to-person or interpersonal communication, which includes direct “face-to-face” contact and “allows questions and answers and clarification of meaning”;

• Traditional media, which include performance arts such as drama, puppet shows, songs, and dance;

• Small media, which include “tools used to support larger communication initiatives or illustrate interpersonal communication” such as posters, videos, and t-shirts; and

• Mass media, which include “indirect, one-way communication without personal contact” such as radio, television, and newspapers.69

MRE implementing partners in Sri Lanka currently use the following methods, organized by type of communication:

PERSON-TO-PERSON OR

INTERPERSONAL

TRADITIONAL MEDIA

SMALL MEDIA MASS MEDIA

xxix During “mobile services”, police personnel and other authorities organize health and legal service providers to work in rural communities on specific days. Mobile services are conducted once or twice monthly in some rural areas.

64 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 65: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

COMMUNICATION• direct presentations, seminars, briefings, trainings, and orientations• question-and-answer sessions• focus group discussions• roadshows and exhibitions• house-to-house visits• community mapping• child club activities and MRE games in children’s play huts• bicycle races and other events for landmine and ERW victims• advocacy rallies and walks• Mine Action Day (or Week) and Children’s Day celebrations• informal child-to-child or child-to-parent communication

• street drama (sometimes with professional actors and/or local script development)• songs and poems• puppet shows• “fancy dress parades” with special costumes • art and song competitions• other cultural programs and activities

• billboards and wall paintings• posters, banners, and calendars• display boards with model landmines and ERW• MRE corners in schools and other central locations• mobile or stationary landmine sign gardens and landmine marking model villages• “tv shows” (film showings with video clips)• “multimedia” (PowerPoint) presentations (including provision of slides to a cinema for display before films or during intermissions)• cds and cassettes with messages and songs (for use in schools and on buses and town loudspeakers)• automatic messaging on certain Dialog cell phones• large flashcards with photos• yellow marking tape and red warning signs (for use during direct presentation)• handbills, leaflets, and brochures• books of collected children’s drawings• computer games for children (currently under development)• snake and ladder and other interactive games• mathematics formula tables• play/recreation kits • stickers and bookmarks• caps, t-shirts, raincoats, bags and cups

• media reports on landmine and ERW incidents and injuries• public service announcements on Tamil and Sinhala radio and television stations• MRE supplements and announcements in national and local newspapers

Table 4. MRE methods currently used in Sri LankaVI.C.1.c.ii Methods used for school-based MREMethods used for school-based MRE include the following:

• person-to-person or interpersonal communication methods such as play activities organized by teachers, MRE exhibitions, and assembly- or prayer-time announcements by principals, teachers, and children;

• traditional media including dramas, dances, and speeches presented by students; and• small media including bookmarks, mathematics formula tables, handbills, posters, and paintings on walls of school compounds .

School students and personnel have participated in Mine Action Day and Week celebrations and started some new MRE initiatives, including establishment of MRE corners (where students and their families can learn about landmines and ERW and report suspicious objects and areas) and organization of student teams who spread MRE messages. In Jaffna, some teachers have encouraged students to collect newspaper articles related to landmines and ERW; the students share the articles during classes and school assemblies.

Schools also provide a powerful means of reaching families, because relatives often visit schools to drop off or pick up their children or interact with teachers and other staff. Evaluation participants believe that landmine and ERW awareness has increased for

65 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 66: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

parents as well as students, especially following the establishment of MRE corners. Some teachers participating in the evaluation would like to conduct MRE activities during prize-giving ceremonies, which would be attended by parents and other family members.

VI.C.1.c.iii Comparison of currently used MRE methodsAccording to evaluation participants, preferences for different methods often vary by age, gender, geographic location, and literacy level of the target population.

Most evaluation participants ranked street drama and other cultural activities very highly for teaching both children and adults; such activities are seen as particularly effective if local community members are performing. Film showings and multimedia presentations were also found to be very effective, although they are dependent on the availability of electricity or a generator and require a screen or other viewing surface and suitable light conditions. Radio messaging also ranked highly among evaluation participants, although some participants do not have radio access.

House-to-house visits were described as useful for reaching men, women, and children if conducted at appropriate times. Group discussions were considered effective for adults because they encourage more participation than some more direct (lecture-based) presentation methods.

Small print media were considered less effective by many participants, although some claimed that well-made, colorful leaflets would be effective. Printed tools for children, such as mathematics formula tables and snake-and-ladder games, were considered more useful. Newspaper messaging was not considered particularly useful among certain populations, because many people are illiterate or do not have access to newspapers and/or time to read. Larger print media such as posters and billboards received better reviews.

See Appendix G for a more comprehensive summary of qualitative data related to preferred communication methods.

VI.C.1.d Types of currently used MRE techniques

Techniques currently used by MRE implementing partners include the following:

• Community inclusion via community risk assessment, community mapping, conversations with key community informants, community-based planning of MRE activities, inclusion of community members in street drama, and other participatory assessment activities (see Section VI.D.1);

• Inclusivity of women and diverse ethnic and religious groups among trainers;

• Using real stories and photos of injured individuals to explain how some high-risk behaviors have led to injuries and to emphasize the direct and indirect consequences of landmine and ERW injuries;

• Using positive rather than negative messages;

• Incorporating MRE into other NGO, CBO, and community activities such as resource and service distribution in IDP camps, during meetings of other NGOs and CBOs, and at Hindu temple festivals;

• Utilizing available community resources (such as VCRMCs and child clubs) and talents; and

• Changing techniques when problems arise (after HDU personnel were found touching landmines and ERW during exhibitions, for example, some NGO personnel created alternatives such as landmine sign gardens and models that can be pointed to rather than touched).

NGO partners make an effort to approach different communities and high-risk populations in culturally appropriate ways.

• Home and school visits are ideal for reaching women and children, respectively, but it is best to reach men (who are often unavailable during the day due to work) at home during the evenings or weekends or at central places such as bus stands and other gathering places. Shramadana and child club activities are used to reach children who are not attending school.66 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 67: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• NGOs approach Muslim communities through religious leaders; they have also changed the names and costumes used in street drama programs to increase reception in these communities.

• Different communities have different festivals, harvest schedules, and fasting periods. NGOs try to avoid conducting MRE activities during periods of worship or heavy work. Some partners have created seasonal calendars with planting and harvesting times in predominantly agricultural communities.

• Approaches may change according to the risks in specific communities. In communities located near demining areas, NGO personnel may meet with HDU or demining agency task commanders to discuss high-risk areas and behaviors and plan MRE activities accordingly. In newly resettled areas, NGO personnel may work with GSs to select target communities and MRE techniques.

MRE trainers also use participatory methods such as question-and-answer and hypothetical situations during community presentations. Trainers ask difficult questions (“What if you find yourself in a dangerous area?” “What if your child is playing with an ERW?” “What if someone is trying to break open a coconut with an ERW and will not listen when you ask him/her to stop?”) to encourage active participation through problem solving. Trainers also encourage participants to ask questions during sessions or at any other time, and sometimes end sessions with follow-up questions to test whether people have learned the core MRE messages.

VI.C.1.e New MRE methods and techniques suggested by evaluation participants

Evaluation participants suggested many new MRE methods and techniques for future consideration:

• Incorporating MRE into the clearance certification of sites for construction teams working in landmine- and ERW-affected areas• Hiring teachers and others with professional education experience to conduct MRE• Encouraging primary-level science and art teachers to collaborate to create school-based MRE materials• Using short MRE films in schools to teach students, parents, and participants in non-formal education activities• Inviting injury survivors to share their experiences with injury and disability in documentary films or photo stories• Training public health professionals such as medical officers, public health midwives, xxx and public health inspectors, to

distribute MRE materials and incorporate MRE messaging into their routine activities. Representatives of the MoHN recommend collaborating with the Education, Training and Research Unit at the MoHN to incorporate MRE into basic and in-service education for these professionals.

• Holding nighttime film showings for all community members (depending on the security situation)• Distributing cassette and cd players during delivery of cds and cassettes with MRE messages to schools, enabling teachers to

play messages in individual classes (rather than during large assemblies)• Distributing leaflets to all students who receive school-based MRE and encouraging them to take the leaflets home and share

them with family members and friends• Posting large billboards along the A-9 highway (especially near tourist picnic areas) and near resettlement and known

contaminated areas• Creating a landmine sign garden at the Omanthai checkpoint to target people traveling to and from Jaffna• Creating school-based MRE exhibitions with the participation of art teachers, ISAs, and students

STRENGTHS Partners have used a wide variety of MRE settings, methods and techniques, often developing different approaches to reach specific communities and populations. Local education personnel are actively engaged in conducting MRE activities and creating new MRE methods and techniques. Many school-based MRE activities reach families as well as students.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Some evaluation participants believe that the presence of uniformed military personnel at MRE sessions conducted by NGOs may intimidate civilian participants or dissuade them from

• Encourage military members who are present at community-based MRE activities to wear non-military clothing and take a more active—rather than observatory—role in trainings.

xxx One evaluation participant believes this would not be effective, because many different parties ask public health midwives to distribute information.

67 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 68: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

participating, especially during question-and-answer sessions. Civilians may feel particularly hesitant about saying anything critical of the military or government when military personnel are present. This trend may increase when the military personnel present have a more observatory—and less participatory—role.

Increased engagement of HDU personnel may also dissuade other military personnel from feeling that it is necessary to observe MRE sessions. These actions may prevent civilian participants from feeling anxious, frightened, or otherwise uncomfortable during MRE sessions.

• Some community-based presentations are taught by a large number of trainers—sometimes five or six. Given adequate transportation resources, splitting trainers into smaller teams could allow NGOs to conduct more MRE sessions in more communities.

• Establish the maximum number of trainers needed for each session, making an allowance for trainers in training. Split larger training teams into smaller groups and coordinate transportation with MRE implementing partners (see Section VI.A.4.d) to arrange additional trainings.

• Some stakeholders are concerned that MRE participants will become bored with traditional MRE methods and stop paying attention to messaging.

• Continue to change MRE methods and techniques, exploring some of the suggested options listed above. Recommendations for new materials are available in Section VI.C.2.b.

VI.C.2 Print and media materials for MRE

Materials are made by both UNICEF and NGO partners. HDU and RDF teams predominantly use materials provided by UNICEF, while CTF, EHED-Caritas, Sarvodaya, and SOND use a combination of their own and UNICEF materials. At least one demining agency conducting CL activities uses its own materials. A list of small and mass media materials used is available in Section VI.C.1.c.i.

VI.C.2.a Development, review, revision, and distribution of print and media materials for MREVI.C.2.a.i Development of print and media materials for MREMRE partners create materials according to the core messages outlined in the SLMAS (see Section VI.A.1.b.ii), making an effort to use simple and easily understandable terms and sentences. Some NGOs ask for local input: EHED-Caritas and RDF, for example, have asked children for comments and drawings for future use in books, calendars, and other materials. Telephone numbers for MA partners including NGOs, the SLA, district Kachcheris, and UNICEF are incorporated into some materials. Some NGOs use photographs of local sites and objects in order to increase community ownership and stewardship of materials. An image of a local religious building included in a leaflet, for example, may increase usage of the leaflet within a certain religious community.

Because of the historical predominance of Tamil speakers in landmine- and ERW-affected areas, most MRE materials have been made in Tamil. However, UNICEF and several NGOs have also created some MRE materials in Sinhala. The evaluation team heard about two cases of mistranslation between Tamil and Sinhala. In one case, a message was incorrectly translated from “don’t touch” in Tamil to “don’t catch” in Sinhala. An MRE participant who heard or saw the mistranslated phrase could understand that it is dangerous to catch a landmine or ERW but not that it is dangerous simply to touch it.

68 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 69: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VI.C.2.a.ii Review and revision of print and media materials for MREReview and revision of materials created by NGOs vary widely. Some NGOs informally review materials with their field and office staff, UNICEF personnel, GAs, and other partners. Others, including EHED-Caritas and CTF, have conducted more formal field tests of print materials. NGOs have made several modifications following field tests, such as adjusting the size of ERW types on one poster and correcting the color of an ERW on another.VI.C.2.a.iii Distribution of print and media materials for MRENGO partners distribute various MRE materials in different ways. NGO staff and community partners place posters in or near public places such as schools and child clubs, government and CBO offices, bus stands and train stations, markets, and water tanks, or give them to children to take home. Leaflets and stickers are distributed during or following house-to-house visits, school programs, community meetings, video programs, and special celebrations such as Mine Action Day. MRE partners provide recreation kits, games and calendars to child clubs.

VI.C.2.b New and recommended print and media materials for MRE

UNICEF and NGO partners are currently developing three new MRE materials: a new set of videos (in partnership with Young Asia Television), an interactive computer game, and print materials for school-based MRE conducted through the government school system.

Evaluation participants also recommended the introduction of new materials, including the following:

• an MRE kit for MRE trainers (kits would include MRE materials and instructions for use, and could be distributed at training of trainer sessions (see Appendix H for a photo));

• durable, reusable banners, which would contain all core MRE messages and pertinent contact information; and• a songbook with the lyrics of songs on currently used MRE cds and cassettes.

VI.C.2.c Print and media materials for school-based MRE

UNICEF and the NIE created three MRE books (primary- and secondary-level books for teachers and an activity book for students) for school-based MRE in 2004. They also created a set of posters for schools and teachers’ centers explaining age-appropriate activities that could be used to teach MRE to children at different grade levels. Many of these materials were lost in the 2004 tsunami, and a new set of books and posters was distributed in 2008. NGOs also provide schools with small print materials such as leaflets and mathematics formula tables.

STRENGTHS UNICEF and MRE partners make an effort to create fresh, new materials for MRE participants. MRE materials have been developed in both Sinhala and Tamil. NGOs value the review and revision of materials with other MRE stakeholders, and some have conducted formal field-testing. NGOs have made several modifications to improve MRE materials following field tests. Several MRE partners ask for local input from children when developing new materials.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Some materials have contained mistranslations between Tamil and Sinhala, which could lead to confusion over MRE messages—and even injury.

• Collaborate with MRE partners to determine which materials contain mistranslations. Create a professionally translated set of core messages in both Tamil and Sinhala and ensure that materials created in the future are translated and back-translated by separate professional translators. Consider the use of more wordless materials, such as a well-designed leaflet with core messages in the form of illustrations (see Appendix H).

69 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 70: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Evaluation participants criticized four currently used MRE print materials:1) Some leaflets are unattractive due to design and/or poor quality of images, printing, and paper.2) Posters placed in public places do not last a long time when exposed to the elements.3) Billboards are often faded and torn.4) Training flashcards do not contain all core MRE messages and are difficult to see from far away. Because they are slippery, they are awkward to hold and easily dropped.

• Discuss currently used materials with stakeholders and make improvements as necessary and feasible. Regarding the four specific MRE print materials criticized by evaluation participants:1) Create a centrally-produced, high-quality, colorful and attractive leaflet that contains images of all core MRE messages without words (see Appendix H for example).2) Laminate posters or print them on weather-resistant material to increase resilience to exposure.3) Discuss weatherproofing and other options to improve the durability of billboards with billboard companies.4) Create a new set of laminated training flashcards that includes all core MRE messages; risk and safe behaviors for which photographs are not available can be illustrated with drawings. Consider binding the flashcards into a flipchart (see Appendix H for example) to ensure proper order of messages, keep images flat (to improve visibility), and increase grip and usability.

• MRE partners are using different sets of materials. While decentralization of materials design can lead to greater local ownership of materials, it may result in inconsistencies in messaging and quality.

• Create a set of standards for all MRE materials and a mechanism whereby all materials are vetted in a central review process. Include commitment to the standards and review mechanism in the accreditation criteria for MRE operators (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii).

• Some materials do not include any phone numbers for relevant authorities, while others include so many numbers that viewers feel confused about whom to call.

• Determine necessary phone numbers in each geographic area and ensure that these numbers are included consistently in all MRE materials.

• Materials have not been field-tested in a consistent manner.

• Ensure that MRE partners are field-testing materials consistently and making necessary changes following testing. IMAS recommends field-testing of all materials among the target audience—not just “in the office corridor”—and provides field-testing guidelines in Guidebook 4. Include field-testing of all materials in the accreditation criteria for MRE operators (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii).• Collaborate with government education partners to create a new set of posters similar to those created in 2004 (with age-appropriate activities for different grades) for teachers and other education stakeholders.

• Film clips being used at this time do not reflect the current political climate and require editing and updating.

• Edit and update film clips and ensure that clips used in the future are appropriate and up-to-date.xxxi

• Some school officials would like to receive additional MRE materials from UNICEF.

• Create a mechanism whereby school officials can request and receive additional MRE materials as needed, possibly by phone call or text messaging.

VI.D Community liaison

CL activities conducted by UNICEF and MRE implementing partners include forging positive relationships and communication between communities and other MA partners and conducting risk reduction activities. UNICEF has also pledged to support CL personnel attached to demining teams.

VI.D.1 Community relationships and communications with partners

UNICEF and MRE partners build relationships between communities and MA partners such as NGOs, the HDU, and demining agencies by emphasizing the value of mutual information exchange among all partners. Through MRE, communities are able to learn about landmines, ERW, and safe behavior, while MA partners can learn about local landmine and ERW contamination. Relationship-building activities include communication before, during, and after demining; community mapping; community inclusion in planning of MRE activities; and troubleshooting.

xxxi UNICEF and MRE partners are in the process of creating a new set of updated film clips.

70 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 71: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Communication before, during, and after deminingDemining agencies conduct some CL activities when they receive new demining tasks. Deminers from Horizon, for example, start new demining tasks by approaching village leaders and other community members. The deminers tell community members where they will be working, explain their marking systems, discuss which areas are safe and unsafe, encourage people to report if they learn about additional contamination, and urge community members to practice mine-safe behavior. They continue MRE messaging during and after demining.

Community mappingMRE field personnel meet with community members and deminers to create maps including notable community features (such as roads, bodies of water, schools and other common buildings, and religious sites) as well as known and suspected areas of landmine and ERW contamination. Maps are certified by DMAOs, displayed in public places, and revised over time as demining continues and additional hazardous areas are found. Community mapping encourages communication between community members and other MA stakeholders.

Community inclusion in planning of MRE activitiesSome MRE implementing partners emphasize community inclusion when planning MRE activities. RDF, for example, first meets with village leaders and other key informants when planning MRE activities in new communities.

TroubleshootingMRE implementing partners have grown adept at troubleshooting when conflicts arise between communities and MA partners. RDF, for example, has acted as an intermediary between demining personnel and community members during conflicts over personal conduct and land access.

VI.D.2 Development of risk reduction strategies

People living and/or working in landmine- and ERW-contaminated areas often continue to engage in known high-risk activities in order to provide for themselves and their families—sometimes despite fully understanding the risk of injury. In such cases, MRE messaging alone is not sufficient to decrease or stop high-risk behavior. According to IMAS, risk reduction seeks to provide “specific interim strategies promoting individual and community behavioral change…to reduce the impact of mines/UXO on individuals and communities until…the threat is removed.”70 One of the most developed risk reduction initiatives is MAG’s Safer Village project, which has sought to reduce high-risk behaviors through communication and provision of alternative livelihood activities.

Evaluation participants mentioned several successful risk reduction initiatives:

• provision of fuel-efficient stoves, which has reduced the frequency of firewood collection;

• identification of low-risk areas for firewood collection;

• provision of latrines to reduce open-air defecation in high-risk areas;

• establishment of safe play areas to discourage children from playing in high-risk areas; and

• clearance of small pathways providing access for sand collection.

Participants also identified several high-risk activities and circumstances that could be addressed at least partially by risk reduction strategies:

• the lack of demining and clearance capacity during demining agency stand-down periods, which illustrates the need for a 24-hour quick response team;

• collection of firewood, sand, water, fruit, and other items in high-risk areas; and

• wildlife management problems (see Section VI.F.2), which encourage people to work in high-risk areas.

71 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 72: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS Some challenges, such as removal of landmine/ERW signs, markings, and stakes from demining sites, have been resolved via CL. Creation and use of community maps have encouraged village participation in MRE. Evaluation participants believe that MRE has helped civilians feel more comfortable when interacting with SLA personnel. Military personnel and civilians had few opportunities to interact with each other during the conflict, and many evaluation participants see CL including members of both “sides” as a powerful peacebuilding initiative. Evaluation participants believe that risk reduction initiatives such as the Safer Village project have reduced engagement in high-risk behaviors in some areas. Demining personnel refer individuals and families with non-MA needs to relevant services.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Although UNICEF pledged to support CL personnel attached to demining teams, representatives of three demining agencies told the evaluation team that they had developed TORs and Memoranda of Understanding but never received the personnel. One demining agency representative had been waiting for a Programme Cooperation Agreement from UNICEF for six months prior to the evaluation team’s visit.

• Hire and train CL personnel promised to demining agencies and coordinate their integration with demining teams.

• People continue to engage in high-risk behaviors (see Section VI.B.1) despite knowing that these behaviors may result in injury.

• Strengthen the risk reduction capacity of MA partners by increasing funding, training, and other resources. Continue and increase support of alternative livelihood activities for people living in landmine- and ERW-affected areas.• Develop community risk assessments to measure needs for MRE and risk reduction activities at the local level.xxxii

• Some people have removed landmine/ERW signs, markings, and stakes in areas considered safe because of past community use.

• Ensure that community members understand the importance of demining by proper authorities and the risk incurred by removal of landmine/ERW signs, markings, and stakes. Discuss punitive measures (such as fines) for removal of landmine/ERW signs, markings, and stakes with relevant government authorities.

• Some community members have become frustrated when demining agencies have blocked off living and livelihood areas for demining. In one case, community members put 100 demining stakes in a well because demining work was blocking access to a livelihood area.

• Provide a forum in which community members can discuss frustrations related to demining and land access, and try to find alternative solutions through risk reduction activities (see Section VI.D.2).

• Some community members’ fear of the military discourages them from disclosing important information about landmines and ERW to HDU and other personnel. This may be particularly true when HDU personnel are wearing fatigues. However, some evaluation participants believe that wearing other outfits would not make a difference; according to one participant, “the military is the military, even in civilian clothes.”

• Encourage the HDU leadership to finalize a clear dress code for HDU personnel conducting MRE in communities. It would be ideal for HDU members to wear civilian clothes—or at least the navy MoED uniforms—rather than fatigues.• Support continued and increased collaboration between HDU and NGO personnel. HDU and NGO personnel and community members agree that communities are more receptive to HDU personnel if NGO personnel are present.

• Most HDU members are not able to communicate adequately with Tamil-speaking communities.

• Encourage the HDU to hire additional Tamil speakers and continue to work closely with NGO personnel who speak both Tamil and Sinhala.

• Some communities receive very little information about demining progress or future demining plans. Demining agencies are given specific tasks by the DMAOs, but community members want all living and livelihood areas to be cleared at once. Inadequate communication and unrealistic expectations cause frustration and strain relationships between community members and demining personnel.

• Improve communication between DMAOs and GSs, who can share information about demining priorities and schedules with community members.

xxxii UNICEF has developed SOPs for community risk assessments. The SOPs have been used in some districts but UNICEF MA personnel believe that it may be difficult for some NGO personnel to conduct the assessments without further guidance.

72 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 73: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Completion of demining tasks is not always followed by proper land handover processes. According to IMAS, public handover ceremonies are an important element of CL.

• Collaborate with DMAOs and demining partners to create a formal land and resource handover process, as outlined in IMAS Guidebook 6, including prior liaison with community leaders, a public event, and parallel MRE activities.

VI.E Monitoring and evaluation of MRE activities

VI.E.1 Monitoring of MRE activities

VI.E.1.a Internal monitoring of community-based MRE by NGOs and UNICEF

NGO field offices maintain records of their MRE activities, which they send to their central offices and respective UNICEF zonal offices. Designated data management personnel within the NGOs enter MRE records into the SLMAD (see Section IV.D.1). UNICEF zonal offices then send reports on NGO and HDU activities to the UNICEF central office. Some NGOs also create monthly or annual reports, which are shared with UNICEF.

VI.E.1.b Central monitoring of community-based MRE

UNDP and DMAO representatives who participated in the evaluation acknowledged weaknesses in past MRE monitoring by the DMAOs, including superficial (or nonexistent) monitoring criteria, understaffing, and poor training of QA officers.

Steps have been taken to address these concerns. DMAO QA officers are being trained at this time, and UNDP has tripled the field staff it supports since May 2009—including specific MRE QA personnel.

NGO representatives fill out SLMAD reporting forms and travel to DMAOs weekly or monthly to enter their MRE activity records into the database. Some evaluation participants mentioned that monitoring personnel need a standardized monitoring checklist that measures quality—in addition to quantity—of MRE activities. MAG is currently revising the MRE monitoring forms used by NGO personnel.

VI.E.1.c Monitoring of school-based MRE

In the past, a UNICEF school-based MRE consultant established monitoring tools for principals, teachers, and ISAs. However, the forms were long—some as many as five pages—and were not used as a result. The MRE focal point for the Eastern Province recently solicited assistance from ISAs and principals to create new monitoring tools for the schools targeted during the current school-based MRE campaign.

At this time, UNICEF trains ISAs and Assistant Directors of Education (ADEs) to conduct provincial-level monitoring; the ISAs and ADEs then train teachers and principals to conduct zonal-level monitoring. According to the current monitoring scheme, ISAs complete monitoring forms, which are certified by principals and forwarded to the provincial level. ADEs at the provincial level collect the forms and send monitoring summaries to UNICEF.

UNICEF recently hired a consultant who will facilitate the incorporation of MRE into the national curriculum and coordinate monitoring of school-based MRE.

73 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 74: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHS Many UNICEF and NGO personnel understand the need for strong monitoring of field activities. UNICEF MA officers and NGO personnel are able to access the SLMAD. Monitoring of school-based MRE is conducted in partnership with ISAs, ADEs, and principals, who are already established stakeholders in the government education system. Government education personnel are willing to incorporate feedback from UNICEF and other partners as they finalize monitoring tools.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• MRE monitoring criteria currently used by DMAO QA officers are superficial and do not measure the quality of MRE activities.

• Collaborate with MRE stakeholders to create a new MRE monitoring checklist that is IMAS-based, simple to use, and useful for program planning. According to IMAS, monitoring should track and monitor program activities and how these capabilities are being applied as well as changes in the landmine/ERW threat and operating environment (including changes in priorities, target groups, behavior, victim surveillance, victim assistance, and humanitarian demining).71 Use IMAS Guidebook 7 for guidance, exclude information that will not be used, and provide results to all relevant stakeholders.

• NGO and DMAO personnel are spending a lot of time reporting on NGO MRE activities, but little is being done with monitoring information in the SLMAD; according to one DMAO representative, MRE activity forms are “entering a big black hole.”

• Use geographic information system (GIS) technology to overlay population or resettlement data with MRE activities conducted. This will allow partners to study and improve MRE targeting and coverage. SLMAD personnel at the DMAOs are able to create maps by combining database contents with GIS technology.

• Some DMAO staff members do not feel well-informed about MRE activities in the field.

• Ensure that all relevant DMAO staff members are well-informed about MRE activities in the field, through provision of SLMAD reports and/or updates at DMAO meetings (see Section VI.A.2.a).

• One UNICEF representative told the evaluation team that monitoring is only required for NGOs that are not performing well. This is a misunderstanding: all implementation partners require monitoring, regardless of performance.

• Inform all UNICEF and other MRE stakeholders of the benefits—and necessity—of monitoring. Clarify that all programs and organizations require monitoring, regardless of past and present success.

• Transportation problems make it difficult for NGOs to monitor field activities, particularly in rural areas.

• Convene a workshop to discuss NGO transportation problems and discuss possible solutions, such as transportation coordination among NGOs and other local partners.

• It is difficult for ISAs to reach schools located far from towns. Some ISAs have asked for additional funds to pay traveling expenses for monitoring activities. UNICEF has promised to provide LKR 500 per month for ISAs to visit schools, although one evaluation participant fears that monitoring will stop when the funding runs out.

• Collaborate with government education partners to consider more cost-effective monitoring methods. Consider integrating monitoring of MRE into existing government education monitoring structures.

VI.E.2 Evaluation of MRE activities

VI.E.2.a Past evaluations of MRE activities

Evaluations of UNICEF’s MRE activities were previously conducted by Ms. Anusha Fonseka, Prof. Kalinga Tudor Silva, and Prof. Asoka Jayasena in 2004 and by Mr. Marco Ramazzotti in 2007. Summaries of the recommendations made by these evaluation teams are available in Appendices I and J.

74 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 75: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

The current evaluation team reviewed the findings and recommendations of the 2004 and 2007 evaluation teams and analyzed how previous recommendations were incorporated into MRE programming. The evaluation team found that some recommendations had been implemented successfully, while others have not been adequately addressed.

Of the 2004 and 2007 evaluation recommendations deemed directly or indirectly relevant to current MRE needs, the evaluation team found that significant progress has been made to address the following recommendations (taken verbatim from the report texts):

from the 2004 report:

• “Tailor-made MRE for specially vulnerable target groups…[and particularly] the ‘adult working male’ target group)…

• “Drama/animation component of the programmes should be given prominence…

• “The community context, knowledge, attitudes and practices, needs, risks and opportunities must be better understood by MRE agencies working in each area…

• “In the short and medium term, the problems of IDPs and new settlers must receive priority attention…

• “The step already taken to incorporate MRE to the national school curriculum should be strengthened…

• “Encourage the communities to carry MRE messages to new entrants in their villages…

• “Other areas where advocacy is needed are social protection for mine victims and their families.”72

from the 2007 report:

• “The analysis of the vulnerable groups should follow the change in warfare…

• “A specific campaign explaining what MRE is all about should be addressed to the Security Forces, which should stop harassing UNICEF partner organisations…

• “MRE should become part of the school curriculum. More teachers should be trained in MRE…

• “The provision of jobs, and income generating opportunities is essential for survivors…

• “Poor survivors should get some support for their treatment and for travelling to and from hospitals and rehabilitation centres… • “Coverage should be enlarged…• “Efforts should be made to win the full support of the Ministry at the central and provincial levels.”73

The evaluation team found that improvement is needed in addressing the following recommendations (also deemed directly or indirectly relevant to current MRE needs and taken verbatim from the report texts):

from the 2004 report:

• “Other possible long-term strategies include integration of MRE in the work of community extension workers such as health, agriculture workers, GNs etc….

• “There are many temporary visitors to Jaffna from overseas. In addition there are also those southern people who visit the Northeast for sightseeing and pilgrimage…

• “Those who travel to Vanni go through SLA and LTTE checkpoints xxxiii in Omanthai, (Vavuniya) and Muhamaalai (Jaffna). Leaflets/brochures could be distributed to these entrants as and when they arrive. In addition, large billboards may be displayed close to the traveler waiting areas within these check points…

• “Small Quick response teams should be singled out from among de-miners and they should have stronger linkages with MRE teams.”74

xxxiii People are no longer required to stop at checkpoints as they were when the 2004 report was written. Regardless, some MRE partners have planned to create mine sign gardens and erect billboards in some of these areas.

75 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 76: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

from the 2007 report:

• “Trip-wire home-made guns should be eliminated…xxxiv

• “There is the need to put up many more posters and to distribute more handbills and leaflets. Radio and TV transmissions on MRE in Tamil and Sinhala should be continued…

• “More monitoring should be done on MRE…

• “MRE training of Security Forces should become a new specific sector of MRE activity.”75

VI.E.2.b Future evaluations of MRE activities

VI.E.2.b.i Impact evaluation of MRE activitiesMany MA stakeholders in Sri Lanka are interested in conducting an impact evaluation of MRE activities. The EU and other donors are interested in what results have been achieved through MRE implementation and quantification of these results to inform future funding. MA personnel in Sri Lanka and other countries are interested in determining which MRE methods and techniques are best for reducing the risk of injury from landmines and ERW.

Measurement of impact requires examination of whether an intervention (MRE, in this case) has affected a related health outcome (injury from landmines and ERW). Theoretically, this relationship could be measured in one of two ways:

1) Select victims of landmine and ERW injuries from areas of equal levels of risk and compare those who received and did not receive MRE prior to injury; or

2) Compare populations in areas of equal risk who have and have not received MRE and study the rates of injury in both populations.

Exposure to MRE could be measured as a dichotomous variable (“did receive MRE” and “did not receive MRE”) or expanded to three or more levels by creating a scale using exposure hours or another measurement of MRE exposure (e.g., no MRE exposure, less than 5 hours of exposure, more than 5 hours of exposure). SLMAD MRE monitoring data could be used to locate study populations.

Both of these approaches, however, would require a relatively high injury rate to provide a sample size capable of producing statistically significant findings in a reasonable amount of time (study period). The injury rate in Sri Lanka is low compared to rates in several other landmine- and ERW-affected populations, which means that it would be unlikely that an adequate sample size could be obtained during a reasonable study period. Thus, it is not realistic to conduct a study to rigorously measure the direct impact of MRE on injury rates at this time.

A possible, albeit less direct, measure of impact would be an assessment of how MRE affects high-risk behaviors associated with landmine and ERW injury. Such a study would attempt to measure whether people who have been exposed to MRE engage in fewer high-risk behaviors, on the assumption that people who engage in high-risk behaviors are more likely to be injured by landmines or ERW than people who do not engage in these behaviors. Ideally, the evaluation team would compare one population who had been exposed to MRE with one who had not been exposed to MRE and study differences in reported behaviors. As with option (2) above, an evaluation team could also compare populations with ranges of exposure (expanding MRE exposure beyond a dichotomous variable). The two or more study groups would not need to live in different communities; the evaluation team could, for example, study two groups (one with and one without MRE exposure) within one community.

One difficulty of conducting any impact evaluation of MRE is that it is challenging to find populations who have not been exposed to MRE in some way. “Contamination” might occur between people and populations who have received MRE and those who have not. For example, people who have not received MRE directly may receive indirect MRE messaging (via friends and relatives, for example), which could interfere with study results.

xxxiv Advocacy for a local ban on trap guns (see Appendix C) is included in the new NSMASL.

76 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 77: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

This type of study also raises a question about whether it would be ethical to deny a population an intervention (MRE) that could potentially prevent serious injury or death. Such ethical challenges must be addressed before any impact evaluation is conducted.

VI.E.2.b.ii Evaluation of MRE needs and communication strategiesThe UNICEF Communications Section receives many requests for expensive projects, but communications personnel are not certain that such projects result in significant behavior change or other benefits. A recent request for hoarding boards along the A-9 highway targeting visitors to the Northern Province, for example, would cost LKR 8 million. The Communications Section is considering conducting a survey comparing messaging and awareness in the northern and eastern parts of Sri Lanka (which have previously been targeted with MRE) with messaging and awareness in other parts of the country. Written TORs for the evaluation include the following research questions:

• Where are the gaps in MRE messaging?

• Have people outside of the northern and eastern parts of the country received MRE?

• What has worked well for MRE in the northern and eastern parts of the country?

• How aware are people in the northern and eastern parts of the country of the pillars and core messages of MA?

• Is it true that people know about landmines and ERW but do not fear them?

• Would it be a good idea to give out leaflets at checkpoints on the way to the northern and eastern parts of the country?76

As with an impact evaluation, this evaluation could require significant resources—especially if communities in many geographic areas of the country were targeted.

The MA team at the UNICEF central office has also considered hiring a local company to conduct qualitative research on the reach and impact of current MRE materials.

STRENGTHSNone noted.

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Focus MA resources and attention on internal program improvements and postpone conducting an impact evaluation. Given the amount of financial and human resources such an evaluation would take, it is necessary to determine whether a) the findings would justify the costs, and b) this is the right time for such an evaluation. Given other challenges faced by MRE partners in Sri Lanka, the evaluation team recommends postponing plans for an impact evaluation at this time and reconsidering it in the future, if desired. • Collaborate with colleagues in the Communications Section and other UNICEF Sections to conduct a broader survey on preferred sources of information for different kinds of social and health issues. Many questions raised by representatives of the UNICEF Communications Section—regarding key influencers, use of technology, and preferred information methods—are also applicable to many topics external to MRE. If several UNICEF sections (Child Protection, Health, Education, etc.) collaborated on such a study, the findings could be used to provide communities with messages on a wide range of topics. The evaluation team found that community members seemed comfortable speaking openly about key influencers and communication methods (see Appendix G).

VI.F Additional community considerations

When reviewing past MRE activities and planning for the future, UNICEF and partners should pay close attention to the opinions and concerns of communities. Such concerns may include topics directly related to MRE, such as community acceptance and impressions of MRE activities, as well as topics unrelated to MRE, such as community needs, challenges, and concerns.

77 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 78: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

It is important for stakeholders to consider these needs, challenges, and concerns for two reasons:

1) Landmines and ERW often are not the primary concerns of affected communities. Displaced or recently resettled communities, for example, are likely to be most concerned about locating family and friends, securing work, and finding household resources. As long as such pressing concerns continue unaddressed, it will be more difficult for implementing partners to advance MRE programming.

2) Additional community needs, challenges, and concerns are often indirectly related to landmine and ERW contamination and high-risk behavior. Poverty and resulting child labor, for example, may force children to leave school, raising their risk of injury through participation in high-risk livelihood activities and lack of exposure to school-based MRE activities. Water scarcity may lead people to enter high-risk areas to collect water. These concerns, though only indirectly related to MRE, must be considered—and addressed, if possible—when planning MRE activities.

VI.F.1 Community acceptance and impressions of MRE

Many community members participating in the evaluation are pleased with past MRE activities that taught people how to protect themselves. They thanked the MRE implementing partners and expressed an interest in continuation of MRE programs.

The evaluation team heard about a few cases in which community members asked UNICEF and NGO staff members to leave upon arrival to conduct MRE activities. All of these situations seem to have occurred because community members were upset that other MA (demining) activities were blocking access to livelihood areas. These community members wanted to go to the landmine- and ERW-contaminated areas, and their frustration caused disinterest in MRE activities.

STRENGTHS Overall, community views of MRE heard by the evaluation team were overwhelmingly positive.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Some UNICEF and NGO personnel have been asked to leave communities upon arrival to conduct MRE activities.

• Investigate each situation in which UNICEF and/or NGO personnel have been asked to leave communities and determine exactly why they were asked to leave in each case. Address concerns with community leaders and MA stakeholders and conduct risk reduction activities as needed.

VI.F.2 Community needs, challenges, and concerns

Key informant interviews and group discussions with community members and NGO workers revealed many different community concerns:

Concerns for specific populations

• Children are affected by child labor and school dropout

• Child sexual violence is a problem and there are not enough child rights protection officers to address such problems

• Communities do not have adequate resources to provide organized activities for children

• The elderly and disabled face health and social challenges

• Single-headed households are economically vulnerable

Development concerns in rural areas

• People do not have sufficient access to roads or public transport

• People without access to media feel isolated and as though they are “in the dark”

• Electricity is not available in all communities

78 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 79: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Displacement

• Some people have been displaced multiple times

• Some people who have been displaced for 20 years are still waiting for basic facilities

• People displaced by HSZs who have been living with host families in Jaffna are being asked to leave because tourists and religious pilgrims from other parts of Sri Lanka can pay more for their lodgings

Health, water, and sanitation

• People cannot access health facilities, especially during the night

• People do not have adequate wells or toilets and they become sick from drinking water

• People must travel long distances for water

Land access and family income

• HSZs, contaminated areas, and demining areas are blocking access to livelihood activities

• Farming incomes have decreased while commodity prices have increased

• HSZs prevent GS Divisions from functioning

• Income generation activities provided by NGOs and CBOs are insufficient

Pessimism and frustration following the conflict

• Some people believe that “the war has ended but the conflict has not”

• Government and military actions during and after the conflict have resulted in cynicism among some Tamil communitieso Some evaluation participants believe that government officials are intentionally resettling Tamil people before

sufficient demining can be ensured because government personnel do not care if Tamil people are injuredo Some evaluation participants believe that the government will never release Tamil-owned land currently in HSZs,

and that it will instead settle Sinhalese people in these areas

• Unequal distribution of resources among displaced and resettling communities has led to frustration among returnees and others

Wildlife management

• Elephants and wild boars destroy homes and crops, chase people, and prevent people from going to the forest for vegetable cultivation

• People live in fear for their families, homes, and livelihoods

• The government has provided electric fences and (fire) crackers in some areas but such measures have been insufficient to protect communities

79 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 80: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

STRENGTHSNone noted.

CHALLENGES RECOMMENDATIONS• Challenges unrelated to landmines and ERW trouble communities and prevent uptake of MRE messages.

• Speak with community members and other stakeholders about community concerns. Network with NGOs, CBOs, and government partners to educate all stakeholders about community challenges and available resources, and ensure that MRE field officers know how to refer individuals in need to available services.

• Post-conflict reconciliation is needed throughout the country. While many communities wish to “move on”, residual feelings of anger and frustration—in addition to the physical effects of the conflict—continue to hurt communities. As long as such problems persist, MRE and other education initiatives will not be as effective as hoped.

• Encourage and increase peacebuilding initiatives such as partnerships between HDU and NGO personnel (see Section VI.A.4.a.iv).

STAND-ALONE RECOMMENDATIONS• Use connections with the government, NGOs, CBOs, and communities to create a safe forum in which frustrations may be voiced and heard. Educate MRE stakeholders about such efforts and establish a related mechanism to connect individuals and communities with available resources.

80 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 81: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VII. Summary of recommendations(References to sections of origin in parentheses; a list of key recommendations is available at the end of the Executive Summary).

National coordination activities• Utilize UNICEF’s strong relationships with senior government and military personnel to secure permission to allow MRE activities

to continue as planned. Engage the assistance of government-affiliated personnel (such as representatives of the HDU and DMAOs), non-HDU deminers, and advocates from disabled servicemen’s organizations and/or other victim assistance and advocacy groups who are supportive of and knowledgeable about community-based MRE activities. (VI.A.1.b.i, VI.A.4.c.ii)

• Collaborate with NMAC and other central government personnel to engage district-level government personnel who are not currently supporting MA programming. (VI.A.1.c)

• Encourage the hiring of NMAC and DMAO personnel who have the skills, experiences, and competencies recommended by IMAS (available in Appendix D). The NMAC and DMAOs may wish to consider hiring NGO workers with significant field experience for such positions. (VI.A.1.a, VI.A.2.a)

• Discuss the trend of highly qualified candidates foregoing government employment in favor of positions in international organizations with government and other development partners. Consider options such as increasing pay and improving training within government positions and seconding UNICEF and/or NGO personnel to the NMAC. (VI.A.1.a, VI.A.2.a)

• Collaborate with government authorities to minimize bureaucratic delays in the hiring of NMAC and DMAO staff, and consider the seconding of UNICEF and/or NGO personnel to the NMAC and DMAOs until permanent personnel can be hired. (VI.A.1.a, VI.A.2.a)

• Conduct periodic assessments of NMAC program ownership, effectiveness, and responsiveness in order to monitor the sustainability of the NMAC and its ability to operate independently of external support. (VI.A.1.a)

• Create a clear, transparent process for accreditation of MRE partners. Publish accreditation criteria and distribute them to all relevant stakeholders. Inform NMAC and DMAO staff of the current state of the accreditation process. (VI.A.1.b.iii)

• Monitor UNICEF’s central activities immediately following the departure of one of two central UNICEF MA staff members departure and reassess the decision to abolish his position. It may be necessary to provide additional support to the remaining primary staff member by seconding an NGO staff member to UNICEF and/or funding an additional MRE officer at the NMAC. (VI.A.1.d)

• Review MRE goals stated in the SLMAS and NSMASL with all partners and develop strategies to achieve all unified goals. Remind MA partners of the importance of working toward unified goals. (VI.A.1.a)

• Collaborate with MRE partners to finalize a standard set of terms for use and make necessary changes in the curriculum of core messages, national-level MA and MRE documents, and MRE training materials. (VI.A.1.b.ii)

• Establish contingency plans for continuation of regular communications during times of political instability. Plans should include increased use of remote communication methods such as telephone conferencing or real-time Internet communication. (VI.A.1.b.iv)

District and zonal coordination activities• Evaluate differences in coordination across districts and develop “lessons learned” from districts where the shift to district

government (GA)-coordinated MA has been successful. Replicate successful policies (such as UNICEF’s support of an office assistant in the Batticaloa Kachcheri) in other districts where the shift to government coordination has been more difficult. (VI.A.1.c, VI.A.2.b)

• Finalize the decision regarding placement of UNICEF MA focal points in UNICEF zonal offices or DMAOs. The evaluation team recommends placement in the DMAOs, which would improve government MRE capacity and enhance coordination with other MA activities. If stakeholders decide that the UNICEF MA focal points should split their time between the two locations, adherence to a regular weekly schedule with equal time in each office will improve time management and communication with partners in both offices. (VI.A.1.c , VI.A.2.a)

• Establish a set of DMAO meeting rules and norms to ensure that meetings are conducted in a manner that respects and values the input of all attendees. (VI.A.2.a)

• Design and implement an accreditation process for all DMAO MRE and QA officers in accordance with IMAS standards to ensure the quality of MRE provision and monitoring. (VI.A.2.a)

• Create clear, consistent TORs and SOPs for all DMAO personnel to ensure that staff members correctly understand the scope of and best practices for their MA responsibilities. (VI.A.2.a)

• Assess the workloads of UNICEF MA focal points and reassign non-MRE child protection responsibilities to other UNICEF staff in locations in which MRE is urgently needed at this time—especially in areas with increased resettlement and insufficient MRE

81 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 82: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

coverage. (VI.A.2.b) • Develop standardized handover procedures for successive UNICEF MA focal points. Secure additional support from other zonal

child protection personnel to continue basic MA activities—such as presence at DMAO meetings—during interim periods. (VI.A.2.b)

Training and capacity building of MRE partners• Establish refresher trainings for all NGO and HDU MRE trainers on a regularly scheduled basis. (VI.A.3.a.i)• Collect training feedback in a consistent and confidential manner, preferably on paper, and use both positive and negative

feedback to guide future trainings. Discuss feedback immediately following trainings, while memories are fresh and trainers are not occupied with other activities. (VI.A.3.a.ii)

• Continue to evaluate the changing landmine/ERW situation in different geographic areas, closely monitoring levels of contamination and other risk factors, to update MRE training curricula and provide refresher trainings as needed. (VI.A.3.a.iii)

• Develop capacity building trainings related to additional topics of interest, including newly identified explosive devices, psychosocial support, and human rights issues. (VI.A.3.a.iii)

• Contact training project beneficiaries and UNICEF zonal staff early in the planning process for future training projects; involvement at an early stage will secure better buy-in from participants, create stronger projects, facilitate better communications, and circumvent the impression among participants that the projects are being “imposed” upon them by an external source. Require participation by UNICEF staff as needed. (VI.A.3.b)

• Invite MRE trainers with field experience to facilitate future trainings, which will build better rapport with current NGO personnel and allow participants to learn from past successes and challenges. (VI.A.3.b)

• Hire some NGO field personnel as QA evaluators during future capacity building projects. (VI.A.3.b)• Compare indicators measured in the ongoing MAG-UNICEF capacity building project with the indicators recommended for

training needs assessments by IMAS (see Appendix E) and edit ongoing and future project indicators as necessary. (VI.A.3.b)

Coordination of community-based MRE• Create a clear record—via a chart, map, or diagram—of MRE implementing partners and activities in specific areas (“who is

doing what where”) to find areas of low coverage and avoid duplication of MRE activities for specific populations. (VI.A.4.b)• Strengthen community-based volunteer networks to increase MRE coverage. Community-based MRE creates a powerful “leave

behind legacy” with local networks of community-based volunteers trained in advocacy and communication skills. Community-based volunteers can provide valuable assistance—not only for MRE but for other health and social interventions. Consider the “barefoot doctor”—or “barefoot health educator—modelxxxv to increase MRE coverage in rural areas. (VI.A.4.d)

• Discuss physical access problems with senior SLA personnel. Acknowledge that this is a problem of communication rather than intent, and avoid blaming lower-level SLA personnel who are conducting their jobs as they have been instructed. Educate lower-level SLA personnel about MRE activities to increase their familiarity and comfort with MRE teams and materials. (VI.A.4.c.i)

• Provide sufficient planning and community coordination for short-term programs conducted by non-local partners. Plan additional time for MoD clearance, facilitate clearance at the central level, and assist with transportation and accommodation arrangements. (VI.A.3.b, VI.A.4.c.i)

• Establish a clear review process for proposals, contracts, and other documents for UNICEF and NGO offices, taking into consideration e-mail access for key personnel and the necessary approvals—and unchangeable organizational structures—within each organization. Create a minimum set of review standards and a review schedule for each document. UNICEF and NGO offices should provide all comments on a document at one time. (VI.A.4.c.iii)

• Set proposal standards and share expectations with NGOs. Measure the organizational needs of NGOs and incorporate sessions on writing high-quality proposals into NGO trainings (see Section VI.A.3.a). UNICEF zonal personnel should assist local NGO personnel as needed during the proposal writing process. (VI.A.4.c.iii)

• Address internal UNICEF bureaucracy challenges with high-level personnel. Explain how resulting delays impact programs on the ground and discuss possible solutions. In the future, partners may be able to justify writing longer contracts with greater funding flexibility due to the changing nature of MRE field work. (VI.A.4.c.iii)

• Select methods according to available community and implementing partner resources. (VI.A.4.b)• Assess transportation needs and coordinate shared transportation at the district level in collaboration with DMAOs. (VI.A.4.d)• Assess the extent to which MRE field officers are at risk of occupational injury and reduce these risks wherever possible.

(VI.A.4.d)

xxxv See note vi on page 5.

82 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 83: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Revisit the 2009 UNICEF-NGO agreement obligating NGOs to provide life and/or health insurance to field officers. Coordinate with NGOs to ensure that all field workers are adequately insured. (VI.A.4.d)

• Conduct a consistent, ongoing assessment of NGO, HDU, and other partner needs and provide resources as necessary and feasible. (VI.A.4.d)

• Coordinate with NGO and CBO staff to provide homestay or other inexpensive lodging alternatives for MRE field personnel working in remote areas. (VI.A.4.d)

• Ask field personnel for input about their workloads and address their concerns as feasible. Study whether obligations to conduct child protection activities are inhibiting the delivery of MRE, and assign child protection activities to other NGO and UNICEF staff as needed. Increase training and engagement of village-level staff (perhaps through the “barefoot doctor” model, discussed in Section VI.A.4.d and in note vi on page 5) to accomplish more tasks at the local level. (VI.A.4.d, VI.A.7.c)

• Increase contingency planning for community-based MRE activities by discussing potential future problems at regular meetings. (See Section VI.A.4.e for a list of questions about possible future scenarios). (VI.A.4.e)

• Assist NGOs in the development of clear hiring criteria, possibly in a capacity building workshop. Organize trainings on personnel management with MRE partners and foster openness in their recruiting and hiring processes. (VI.A.4.a.i)

• Create clear, consistent TORs and SOPs for paid staff and volunteers and make them widely available. (VI.A.4.a.i) • Consider the social norms of trainers and host communities when planning future MRE programming and plan to eliminate

distractions. If trainees are distracted, they may be less likely to absorb necessary MRE messages. Addressing this challenge may be as simple as acknowledging potentially distracting differences in dialect and dress at the beginning of each training and encouraging participants to alert trainers if messages are not understood. (VI.A.4.a.i)

• Assess NGO coverage needs and increase funding for staff expansion as necessary (see Section VI.A.4.d). (VI.A.4.a.i) • Urge senior HDU personnel to hire women, representatives of more ethnic and religious communities, and fluent—and

preferably native—Tamil speakers. If they are unable to hire additional personnel they may be able to second experienced NGO personnel for MRE activities. (VI.A.4.a.ii)

• Encourage the HDU leadership to finalize a clear dress code for HDU personnel conducting MRE in communities, ideally with civilian clothes or with the blue MoED uniform as a second choice. HDU—not UNICEF—personnel should monitor adherence to the uniform policy. (VI.A.4.a.ii, VI.D.2)

• Continue to coordinate joint NGO and HDU MRE activities and discuss their benefits during high-level advocacy activities with relevant government personnel. Language and cultural barriers and the history of the conflict will not allow HDU personnel to work as well in communities, but they have much to offer when partnering with NGOs. (VI.A.4.a)

• Coordinate MRE activities conducted by HDU personnel for Sinhala-speaking people traveling to landmine- and ERW-affected areas from unaffected parts of the country. (VI.A.4.a.ii)

• Take “lessons learned” from areas where HDU and NGO personnel are working together closely and apply them in areas where these relationships are not as strong. Speak independently with HDU and NGO representatives to monitor the progress of these relationships. (VI.A.4.a.iv)

• Study StC’s work on the functionality of VCRMCs and other documents about village-level partners and networks. Conduct research to learn where village partners are—and are not—functioning. Strengthen village-level partners with the help of GSs and establish methods (such as mobile phone conversations) whereby NGOs can monitor the activities of their village partners and provide support as needed. (VI.A.4.a.iii)

• Create standardized TORs for village volunteers and focal points and ensure that all individuals have the knowledge and capacity to fulfill their assigned duties. (VI.A.4.a.iii)

• Increase provision of incentives to village-based partners to confirm that their contributions are valued and to encourage their continued participation. Such incentives may include travel allowances and per diem, physical incentives such as t-shirts, caps, and awards, and acknowledgment through certification programs (with paper certificates) and special recognition ceremonies (which can be held in partnership with other (I)NGOs and CBOs working in the same communities). (VI.A.4.a.iii, VI.A.4.e)

Coordination of school-based MRE• Develop methods to bridge coverage gaps when similar initiatives are introduced in the future. Such methods could include

increased emergency MRE programming in high-risk areas. (VI.A.5.a.ii)• Study the recommendations made by the risk reduction consultant for education authorities, school principals, and UNICEF MA

personnel—as well as the additions and edits of other UNICEF personnel—and implement recommendations as appropriate to improve coordination of school-based MRE. (VI.A.5.a.ii)

• Provide adequate instruction and materials to ensure that all district, zonal, and local education personnel have adequate knowledge and materials to incorporate MRE into their routine teaching activities. (VI.A.5.a.ii)

83 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 84: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Utilize lessons learned from collaborating with the MoE, NIE, and other education partners to introduce a broader school-based injury prevention and safety education program. Potential partners might include the MoHN, specific UNICEF Sections (Education, Child Protection, and Health), and NGOs addressing injury prevention and safety concerns. Such a comprehensive program could include an MRE module alongside sessions on prevention of falls, snake bites, drowning, etc. (VI.A.5.a.ii)

• Ensure that all teachers—regardless of ethnicity, language, or geographic location—are adequately trained in MRE. (VI.A.5.a.iii)• Schedule regular refresher trainings for all relevant government education personnel. (VI.A.5.a.iii)• Provide an MRE manual to ISAs during MRE trainings. (VI.A.5.a.iii)• Collaborate with the NIE to provide MRE to lecturers at the TTCs and NCoE. (VI.A.5.a.iii)• Collaborate with government education personnel to select the best possible times for MRE trainings. One zonal education

representative told the evaluation team that teacher trainings are best provided during holiday times (April, August, and December) when teachers have more leisure time and receive stipends for trainings. (VI.A.5.a.iii)

• Discourage demining agencies from disseminating incorrect MRE messages and using inappropriate training methods. Find other positive ways for demining personnel to interact with school students; options could include presentations on demining activities coordinated with dissemination of UNICEF-approved safety messages. (VI.A.5.b)

• Expand school-oriented MRE programming as appropriate in high-risk areas. (VI.A.5.b)

Data collection and use for planning and implementation of MRE• Develop standardized QA procedures to improve management of the SLMAD. (VI.A.6.a) • Develop procedures to guarantee regular analysis, reporting, and use of a minimum set of key SLMAD variables by DMAOs and

other stakeholders. Explore the possibility of automated data analysis. EpiInfo, for example, can be programmed to allow people with little epidemiologic or database training to generate basic reports with a simple series of keystrokes. (VI.A.6.a)

• Ensure that all fields are consistent on the SLMAD data collection forms and in the database. (VI.A.6.a)• Review the data elements listed in the annexes to IMAS Guidebook 2 and add those that are not already included to the SLMAD

and data collection form. Expand answer options for “occupation of casualty” to include specific civilian occupations (e.g., farmers, fishermen, and scrap metal collectors) and incorporate the following additional data elements: the physical location of the incident (such as a home or garden) in addition to the geographic location; the language, ethnicity, religion, and economic status of the victim; and whether or not the victim knew that his/her activity at the time of the incident was dangerous (for high-risk behaviors only). Analysis of these data elements would be beneficial to MRE and other MA programming. (VI.A.6.a)

• Require NGOs to maintain well-organized records of KAP results. Collect results in a national repository and use both aggregate and location-specific data to guide programming. Include training in KAP survey administration and submission of KAP data to the DMAOs in the NGO accreditation criteria (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii). (VI.A.6.b)

• Collaborate with representatives of all NGOs to create standardized KAP sampling methods and ensure that all NGO personnel use them. (VI.A.6.b)

• Collaborate with DMAO personnel and other MRE stakeholders to edit the KAP form. The new version should include some questions about access to and preferences for certain types of information dissemination, which can be used to guide MRE and other UNICEF programming. The new version should also include more of the data elements recommended by IMAS in Guidebook 2 (see Section VI.A.6.b for a list of recommended additions). (VI.A.6.b)

Integration of MRE with other programming• Investigate the possibility that combining MRE and child protection programming has hindered implementation of MRE

activities, particularly in relation to government approvals (see Section VI.A.4.c). If this is found to be a significant problem, reconsider the decision to combine MRE and child protection activities. (VI.A.7.c)

• Introduce HDU MRE personnel to interested landmine/ERW survivors to encourage their continued participation if the HDU takes over some MRE activities currently managed by NGOs. (VI.A.7.a.ii)

• Determine whether data collection challenges are related to concern for patient confidentiality. Train MRE and health personnel in the necessity of omitting personal identifiers when reporting data. Communicate with representatives of health authorities (including the MoHN), hospitals, and other health care providers to ensure that SLMAD field reporters are able to collect information for injury reports. (VI.A.7.b)

Injury risk and MRE targeting, coverage, and messaging• Increase MRE coverage in Jaffna with media campaigns and targeting of specific groups, including school children, high-risk

workers, and tourists and religious pilgrims coming from unaffected parts of Sri Lanka. (VI.B.3)

84 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 85: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Collaborate with demining agencies to find gaps in MRE coverage and work with DMAOs and other MRE partners to bridge these gaps. Discourage demining agencies from conducting MRE activities unless they have been accredited by the NMAC and agree to disseminate messages consistent with those used by UNICEF and partner NGOs. (VI.B.3)

• Target returning populations via government and NGO service providers and GAs, DSs, and GSs. (VI.B.2.c)• Target working populations via transportation and construction companies, the Ministry of Transport, and employment

agencies. (VI.B.2.c)• Partner with the MoED, Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority, travel guide writers, travel bureaus and companies, other

tourism partners, and temple personnel to target tourists and religious pilgrims. (VI.B.2.c)• Target child surrendees/separatees through UN and other programs. (VI.B.2.c)• Establish procedures for government officials (at higher levels, if needed) to inform DMAOs, NGOs, and/or UNICEF of upcoming

resettlement to increase opportunities for targeting of resettling communities. (VI.B.2.c)• Collaborate with the DMAOs to assign responsibility for particular communities to each MRE implementing partner, either

during meetings or by other methods of communication (telephone or e-mail). Establish a strong external monitoring system (see Section VI.E.1) that is inclusive of all MRE partners. Monitor districts where different partners are conducting MRE activities to ensure that communities are being targeted appropriately. (VI.B.2.c)

• Determine the frequency of certain high-risk behaviors (such as removing stakes and using ERW as household items) and use risk reduction measures (see Section VI.D.2) to address situations in which people continue these behaviors despite understanding the risk of injury. (VI.B.1.d)

• Continue to address high-risk children’s behaviors in MRE messaging and create safe play areas and activities in high-risk regions. (VI.B.1.d)

• Determine the incidence of high-risk behaviors (such as hiding landmines and ERW and removing markings) and use CL to discuss fines and other possible methods to discourage such behaviors. (VI.B.1.d)

• Increase the availability of alternative livelihood projects and strengthen links between these projects and people living in landmine- and ERW- affected areas. (VI.B.1.d)

• Target high-risk populations with messages specific to the characteristics or behaviors that put them at risk. (VI.B.1.d)• Urge the DMAOs and demining partners to develop standard procedures to clear wells and inform communities about these

procedures. In the absence of such procedures, conduct risk reduction activities (see Section VI.D.2) to decrease the risk of injury. (VI.B.1.d)

• Target Shramadana activities through CBOs and other local stakeholders, and use risk reduction activities (see Section VI.D.2) to address high-risk behaviors undertaken during the rainy season. (VI.B.1.d)

• Continue to address misinformation and misunderstandings through local tailoring of core MRE messages. Share newly found misconceptions with other MRE stakeholders so they will be able to investigate whether these misconceptions are also present in their target areas. (VI.B.4.c.ii)

• Work with all relevant stakeholders to develop one unified national policy for community marking of landmines and ERW and ensure that all partners are committed to this policy. This policy may decree marking by no civilians, marking by some civilians (such as NGO personnel), or marking by all civilians. If some or all civilians are expected to conduct community marking, they should be trained to mark objects and areas safely. (VI.B.4.c.ii)

• Collaborate with relevant stakeholders to define MRE and clarify who is—and is not—qualified to provide it. Demining agency personnel who are eager to conduct MRE may be able to participate in CL activities, but they must receive CL training and accreditation in the same manner as other partners (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii) before receiving approval to do so. (VI.B.4.c.ii)

• Address high-risk practices among military personnel with their superiors and explain why these behaviors—though possibly safe for military personnel—may be setting an unsafe example for civilians. Request that military authorities create policies to dissuade their personnel from engaging in such behaviors, particularly in the presence of civilians. (VI.B.4.c.ii)

• Use people’s familiarity with Tamil films such as Jayhinth and Dhas (and the incorrect messages within them) as a teaching tool. People enjoy discussing films and it may be possible for trainers to remind people of specific scenes and then explain why the messages conveyed are incorrect. (VI.B.4.c.ii)

• Explain some reasons for low levels of injury, remind participants that the threat of injury is very real, and provide examples of real life stories demonstrating the impact of injuries on families and communities during MRE sessions. (VI.B.4.c.ii)

• Remind women and other MRE participants that women are important communicators in their families because they tend to spend more time at home and because they care for their husbands, parents, and children. Even if they are not directly at risk of injury, women can share MRE messages with their families and friends. (VI.B.4.c.ii)

• Create MRE quick response teams that can address emergency MRE needs, and make these teams available when demining agencies find communities with immediate need for MRE. Due to funding constraints (see Section VI.A.4.c.iii) it may be helpful to include selection and training of these teams in the UNICEF budget. (VI.B.3)

85 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 86: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Continue to adapt MRE messages to include new and changing risk behaviors. (VI.B.1.d)• Encourage MRE participants to share important MRE messages with others, and to stop others from engaging in unsafe

behaviors. (VI.B.1.d)

MRE methods, techniques, and materials• Encourage military members who are present at community-based MRE activities to wear non-military clothing and take a more

active—rather than observatory—role in trainings. Increased engagement of HDU personnel may also dissuade other military personnel from feeling that it is necessary to observe MRE sessions. These actions may prevent civilian participants from feeling anxious, frightened, or otherwise uncomfortable during MRE sessions. (VI.C.1.e)

• Establish the maximum number of trainers needed for each session, making an allowance for trainers in training. Split larger training teams into smaller groups and coordinate transportation with MRE implementing partners (see Section VI.A.4.d) to arrange additional trainings. (VI.C.1.e)

• Continue to change MRE methods and techniques, exploring some of the suggested options listed above. Recommendations for new methods, techniques, and materials are available in Sections VI.C.1.e and VI.C.2.b. (VI.C.1.e)

• Collaborate with MRE partners to determine which materials contain mistranslations. Create a professionally translated set of core messages in both Tamil and Sinhala and ensure that materials created in the future are translated and back-translated by separate professional translators. Consider the use of more wordless materials, such as a well-designed leaflet with core messages in the form of illustrations (see Section VI.C.2.c). (VI.C.2.c)

• Create a centrally-produced, high-quality, colorful and attractive leaflet that contains images of all core MRE messages without words (see Appendix H for example).

• Laminate posters or print them on weather-resistant material to increase resilience to exposure.• Discuss weatherproofing and other options to improve the durability of billboards with billboard companies.• Create a new set of laminated training flashcards that includes all core MRE messages; risk and safe behaviors for which

photographs are not available can be illustrated with drawings. Consider binding the flashcards into a flipchart (see Appendix H for example) to ensure proper order of messages, keep images flat (to improve visibility), and increase grip and usability. (VI.C.2.c)

• Create a set of standards for all MRE materials and a mechanism whereby all materials are vetted in a central review process. Include commitment to the standards and review mechanism in the accreditation criteria for MRE operators (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii). (VI.C.2.c)

• Determine necessary phone numbers in each geographic area and ensure that these numbers are included consistently in all MRE materials. (VI.C.2.c)

• Ensure that MRE partners are field-testing materials consistently and making necessary changes following testing. IMAS recommends field-testing of all materials among the target audience—not just “in the office corridor”—and provides field-testing guidelines in Guidebook 4. Include field-testing of all materials in the accreditation criteria for MRE operators (see Section VI.A.1.b.iii).

• Collaborate with government education partners to create a new set of posters similar to those created in 2004 (with age-appropriate activities for different grades) for teachers and other education stakeholders. (VI.C.2.c)

• Edit and update film clips and ensure that clips used in the future are appropriate and up-to-date.xxxvi (VI.C.2.c)• Create a mechanism whereby school officials can request and receive additional MRE materials as needed, possibly by phone

call or text messaging. (VI.C.2.c)

Community liaison• Hire and train CL personnel promised to demining agencies and coordinate their integration with demining teams. (VI.D.2)• Strengthen the risk reduction capacity of MA partners by increasing funding, training, and other resources. Continue and

increase support of alternative livelihood activities for people living in landmine- and ERW-affected areas. (VI.D.2)• Develop community risk assessments to measure needs for MRE and risk reduction activities at the local level.xxxvii (VI.D.2)• Ensure that community members understand the importance of demining by proper authorities and the risk incurred by

removal of landmine/ERW signs, markings, and stakes. Discuss punitive measures (such as fines) for removal of landmine/ERW signs, markings, and stakes with relevant government authorities. (VI.D.2)

• Provide a forum in which community members can discuss frustrations related to demining and land access, and try to find alternative solutions through risk reduction activities (see Section VI.D.2). (VI.D.2)

xxxvi UNICEF and MRE partners are in the process of creating a new set of updated film clips.xxxvii UNICEF has developed SOPs for community risk assessments. The SOPs have been used in some districts but UNICEF MA personnel believe that it may be difficult for some NGO personnel to conduct the assessments without further guidance.

86 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 87: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Improve communication between DMAOs and GSs, who can share information about demining priorities and schedules with community members. (VI.D.2)

• Collaborate with DMAOs and demining partners to create a formal land and resource handover process, as outlined in IMAS Guidebook 6, including prior liaison with community leaders, a public event, and parallel MRE activities. (VI.D.2)

Monitoring and evaluation of MRE activities• Collaborate with MRE stakeholders to create a new MRE monitoring checklist that is IMAS-based, simple to use, and useful for

program planning. According to IMAS, monitoring should track and monitor program activities and how these capabilities are being applied as well as changes in the landmine/ERW threat and operating environment (including changes in priorities, target groups, behavior, victim surveillance, victim assistance, and humanitarian demining). xxxviii Use IMAS Guidebook 7 for guidance, exclude information that will not be used, and provide results to all relevant stakeholders. (VI.E.1.c)

• Use geographic information system (GIS) technology to overlay population or resettlement data with MRE activities conducted. This will allow partners to study and improve MRE targeting and coverage. SLMAD personnel at the DMAOs are able to create maps by combining database contents with GIS technology. (VI.E.1.c)

• Ensure that all relevant DMAO staff members are well-informed about MRE activities in the field, through provision of SLMAD reports and/or updates at DMAO meetings (see Section VI.A.2.a). (VI.E.1.c)

• Inform all UNICEF and other MRE stakeholders of the benefits—and necessity—of monitoring. Clarify that all programs and organizations require monitoring, regardless of past and present success. (VI.E.1.c)

• Collaborate with government education partners to consider more cost-effective monitoring methods. Consider integrating monitoring of MRE into existing government education monitoring structures. (VI.E.1.c)

• Focus MA resources and attention on internal program improvements and postpone conducting an impact evaluation. Given the amount of financial and human resources such an evaluation would take, it is necessary to determine whether a) the findings would justify the costs, and b) this is the right time for such an evaluation. Given other challenges faced by MRE partners in Sri Lanka, the evaluation team recommends postponing plans for an impact evaluation at this time and reconsidering it in the future, if desired. (VI.E.2.b.i)

• Collaborate with colleagues in the Communications Section and other UNICEF Sections to conduct a broader survey on preferred sources of information for different kinds of social and health issues. Many questions raised by representatives of the UNICEF Communications Section (see Appendix G)—regarding key influencers, use of technology, and preferred information methods—are also applicable to many topics external to MRE. If several UNICEF sections (Child Protection, Health, Education, etc.) collaborated on such a study, the findings could be used to provide communities with messages on a wide range of topics. (VI.E.2.b.i)

Additional community considerations• Investigate each situation in which UNICEF and/or NGO personnel have been asked to leave communities and determine exactly

why they were asked to leave in each case. Address concerns with community leaders and MA stakeholders and conduct risk reduction activities as needed. (VI.F.1)

• Speak with community members and other stakeholders about community concerns. Network with NGOs, CBOs, and government partners to educate all stakeholders about community challenges and available resources, and ensure that MRE field officers know how to refer individuals in need to available services. (VI.F.2)

• Encourage and increase peacebuilding initiatives such as partnerships between HDU and NGO personnel. (VI.F.2)• Use connections with the government, NGOs, CBOs, and communities to create a safe forum in which frustrations may be

voiced and heard. Educate MRE stakeholders about such efforts and establish a related mechanism to connect individuals and communities with available resources. (VI.F.2)

Trap gun use and injury• Implement recommendations made in the Saferworld Report (see Appendix C) as appropriate and feasible. (Appendix C)• Address the use of trap guns via a two-pronged approach, with legal intervention at the central level and introduction of

additional income generation activities at the local level. (Appendix C)• Examine and clarify existing laws related to the legality of trap gun-related weapons, explosives, and the killing of various

animals. (Appendix C)

xxxviii United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 7: monitoring. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NZSSR/$file/imas-7gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.

87 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 88: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Incorporate trap gun education into community- and school-based MRE activities conducted by UNICEF and partners (including training of trainers (see Sections VI.A.3.a and VI.A.5.a.iii), development of core messages (see Section VI.B.4.a), and creation of materials (see Section VI.C.2). (Appendix C)

• Educate the public about trap guns via media campaigns. (Appendix C)• Monitor trap gun injuries via existing government-facilitated injury surveillance and/or the SLMAD. (Appendix C)• Anticipate a future increase in trap gun proliferation and use and plan activities accordingly. (Appendix C)• Consider the following individuals and entities as potential partners in addressing trap gun use and injury: the South Asia Small

Arms Network-Sri Lanka; the National Commission Against the Proliferation of Illicit Small Arms, the Department of Wildlife Conservation (as per the Saferworld report); police and judicial medical officers; and RDS and WRDS officers and members. (Appendix C)

88 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 89: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

VIII. Acknowledgments

The evaluation team would like to thank everyone who contributed to the evaluation with either technical and logistical assistance or provision of invaluable time and input during key informant interviews and group discussions.

Evaluation participants include representatives of the Community Trust Fund, Danish Demining Group, District Mine Action Office (Jaffna), District Mine Action Office (Vavuniya), Eastern Human Economic Development-Caritas, European Commission, Horizon India, Humanitarian Demining Unit, International Campaign to Ban Landmines, Internews, Mines Advisory Group, Ministry of Economic Development, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Healthcare and Nutrition, Ministry of Social Services, Rural Development Foundation, Sarvodaya, Social Organization Networking for Development, the HALO Trust, United Nations Children’s Fund, and United Nations Development Programme.

Additional participants include district government personnel; provincial, zonal, and local education personnel; social care center and hospital staff; village government and development officers; religious leaders; community-based organization representatives and volunteers; students and child club members; and countless other community members.

Special thanks to Marina Gandhi, Munas Kalden, Sebastian Kasack, Mihlar Mohammad, Yatharthany Tharmasri, K. Vasanthakumar, and Maria Vathanie.

89 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 90: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

IX. List of references

ABC News (20 May 2009). Up to 100,000 killed in Sri Lanka’s civil war: UN. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/05/20/2576543.htm.

Central Intelligence Agency (8 December 2010). The world factbook: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ce.html.

Fonseka, A., Silva, KT, Jayasena, A. (July 2004). Mine risk education project of UNICEF: a formative evaluation.

Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (8 December 2010). Sri Lanka: country statistics. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.internal-displacement.org/countries/srilanka.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (1999). Landmine monitor 1999 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=1999&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2001). Landmine monitor 2001 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2001&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2003). Landmine monitor 2003 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2003&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2004). Landmine monitor 2004 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2004&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2005). Landmine monitor 2005 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2005&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2006). Landmine monitor 2006 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2006&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2007). Landmine monitor 2007 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2007&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

90 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 91: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2009). Landmine monitor 2009 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2009&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

International Campaign to Ban Landmines (3 October 2010). Personal communication with Landmine Monitor Country Researcher.

Kalden, M. (December 2010). Feedback on school-based MRE. Internal document.

The Ministry of Economic Development (September 2010). The national strategy for mine action in Sri Lanka. Internal document.

The Ministry of Economic Development and the United Nations Children’s Fund (3 November 2010). UNICEF donates 30 million rupees of supplies and equipment to Ministry of Economic Development de-mining unit. Press release. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://www.unicef.org/srilanka/SL_PR_MRE_30M_DMinin.pdf.

Ramazzotti, M. (November 2007). Mid term evaluation of the EC support to mine risk education and survivor assistance through UNICEF in Sri Lanka. Final report. Internal document.

Saferworld (2008). The Trap. Documentary film (dir. Prasanna Ratnayake).

Saferworld (March 2008). Trap guns in Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka Mined Area Database (2010). Summary statistics, 1 January 2000 – 2010.

United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (September 2010). Evaluation of UNICEF mine risk education activities: Terms of Reference (draft). Internal document.

United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (16 September 2010). Personal communication with Programme Communication Specialist.

United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (October 2010). Personal communication with Mine Action Specialist.

United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (December 2010). Personal communication with Mine Action Specialist.

United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (December 2010). Personal communication with Mine Action Specialist and Mine Action Program Officer.

The United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) Protocol II on prohibitions or restrictions on the use of mines, booby-traps and other devices (10 October 1980). Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/510?OpenDocument.

The United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) Protocol V on explosive remnants of war (28 November 2003). Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/610?OpenDocument.

United Nations Department of Safety and Security (8 September 2008). Casualties from Claymore attacks in Sri Lanka, 2006 – 8 September 2008. Internal document.

United Nations Evaluation Group (April 2005). Norms for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved 8 August 2010 from http://www.escwa.un.org/divisions/pptcd/upload/uneg.pdf.

91 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 92: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

United Nations Evaluation Group (April 2005). Standards for Evaluation in the UN System. Retrieved 8 August 2010 from http://www.uneval.org/papersandpubs/documentdetail.jsp?doc_id=22.

United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 1: an introduction to mine risk education. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://ocha-gwapps1.unog.ch/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NRPJC/$file/imas-gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.

United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 2: data collection and needs assessment. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NTQNF/$file/imas-2gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.

United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 4: public information dissemination. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NXRPX/$file/imas-4gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.

United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 6: community mine action liaison. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NZSJK/$file/imas-6gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.

United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 7: monitoring. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NZSSR/$file/imas-7gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.

United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 10: coordination. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900SID/RURI-6P3QKQ?OpenDocument.

X. Appendices

Appendix A. Maps of Sri LankaAppendix B. Summary of landmine and ERW injury trends and risk factorsAppendix C. Findings and recommendations related to trap gun use and injuryAppendix D. Recommended skill, experience, and competency areas for NMAC and DMAO staffAppendix E. Recommended skill, experience, and competency areas for training needs assessmentsAppendix F. Sri Lanka Mined Area Database MRE KAP formAppendix G. Summary of qualitative data about key community influencers and methods of communicationAppendix H. Examples of MRE materials used in other settingsAppendix I. Recommendations from the 2004 evaluation of MRE activities by Fonseka, Silva, and JayasenaAppendix J. Recommendations from the 2007 evaluation of MRE activities by Ramazotti

92 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 93: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix A. Maps of Sri Lanka

93 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Map A1. Geographic location of Sri Lanka

Source: CIA World Factbook, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ce.html

Map A2. Districts of Sri Lanka

Colors indicate provinces and bullets indicate district headquarters.

Source: 141Sercon,http://www.sercononline.com/promos/sep/fnst/images/sri_b.jpg

Page 94: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix B. Summary of landmine and ERW injury trends and risk factorsNote: Some table cells may not total 100% due to rounding.

Table 5. Number of incidents in districts, most highly affected districts, mortality rateSource: Sri Lanka Mined Area Database, 1 January 2000 – 6 September 2010

YearNumber of incidents in

districtsMost highly affected districts (incidents)

Most highly affected districts (casualties) Mortality rate

2000 125 incidents in 7 districts Of 125 incidents:27.2% in Kilinochchi24.8% in Mullaitivu24.0% in Jaffna11.2% in Batticaloa

Of 167 casualties:25.2% in Kilinochchi25.2% in Mullaitivu21.6% in Jaffna18.6% in Batticaloa7.2% in Mannar

Of 167 casualties:10. 8%

2001 162 incidents in 10 districts Of 162 incidents:45.7% in Jaffna25.9% in Kilinochchi11.7% in Mullaitivu4.3% in Batticaloa

Of 211 casualties:42.2% in Jaffna21.3% in Kilinochchi13.3% in Mullaitivu6.6% in Batticaloa

Of 211 casualties:12.3%

2002 110 incidents in 18 districts Of 110 incidents:55.5% in Jaffna11.8% in Kilinochchi4.6% in Mullaitivu3.6% in Mannar3.6% in Vavuniya

Of 154 casualties:50.0% in Jaffna9.7% in Kilinochchi7.8% in Mullaitivu4.6% in Trincomalee

Of 154 casualties:17.5%

2003 78 incidents in 13 districts Of 78 incidents:53.9% in Jaffna19.2% in Kilinochchi5.1% in Anuradhapura5.1% in Vavuniya2.6% in Colombo2.6% in Mannar2. 6% in Polonnaruwa2. 6% in Trincomalee

Of 111 casualties:45.1% in Jaffna18.9% in Kilinochchi11.7% in Anuradhapura6.3% in Vavuniya

Of 111 casualties:22.5%

2004 48 incidents in 12 districts Of 48 incidents:41.7% in Jaffna16.7% in Batticaloa10.4% in Kilinochchi6.3% in Mannar6.3% in Mullaitivu

Of 56 casualties:33.9% in Jaffna14.3% in Kilinochchi12.5% in Batticaloa7.1% in Anuradhapura7.1% in Mannar7.1% in Mullaitivu7.1% in Trincomalee

Of 56 casualties:30.4%

2005 35 incidents in 6 districts Of 35 incidents:54.3% in Jaffna11.4% in Kilinochchi11.4% in Vavuniya8.6% in Ampara8.6% in Mullaitivu5.7% in Mannar

Of 39 casualties:59.0% in Jaffna15.4% in Kilinochchi12.8% in Ampara12.8% in Mannar5.1% in Vavuniya

Of 39 casualties:12.8%

94 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 95: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

YearNumber of incidents in

districtsMost highly affected districts (incidents)

Most highly affected districts (casualties) Mortality rate

2006 22 incidents in 7 districts Of 22 incidents:36.4% in Jaffna18.2% in Batticaloa18.2% in Trincomalee9.1% in Mullaitivu9.1% in Vavuniya4.6% in Kilinochchi4.6% in Puttalam

Of 63 casualties:41.3% in Batticaloa22.2% in Trincomalee14.3% in Jaffna11.1% in Puttalam

Of 63 casualties:36.5%

2007 15 incidents in 6 districts Of 15 incidents:40.0% in Trincomalee26.7% in Batticaloa13.3% in Jaffna6.7% in Anuradhapura6.7% in Kilinochchi6.7% in Mannar

Of 24 casualties:41.7% in Trincomalee29.2% in Batticaloa16.7% in Anuradhapura8.2% in Jaffna

Of 24 casualties:25. 0%

2008 7 incidents in 3 districts Of 7 incidents:57.1% in Jaffna28.6% in Mannar14.3% in Vavuniya

Of 8 casualties:62.5% in Jaffna25.0% in Mannar12.5% in Vavuniya

Of 8 casualties:12.5%

2009 45 incidents in 8 districts Of 45 incidents:57.8% in Mullaitivu17.8% in Jaffna8.9% in Batticaloa4.4% in Anuradhapura4.4% in Mannar

Of 59 casualties:54.2% in Mullaitivu20.3% in Jaffna13.6% in Batticaloa6.8% in Anuradhapura

Of 59 casualties:6.8%

2010 14 incidents in 5 districts Of 14 incidents:42.9% in Mannar28.6% in Jaffna14.3% in Kilinochchi7.1% in Puttalam7.1% in Vavuniya

Of 23 casualties:73.9% in Jaffna8.7% in Kilinochchi8.7% in Mannar4.4% in Puttalam4.4% in Vavuniya

Of 23 casualties:21.7%

Total (2000-2010)

661 incidents in 20 districts Of 661 incidents:41.2% in Jaffna17.7% in Kilinochchi13.6% in Mullaitivu7.0% in Batticaloa

Of 915 casualties:37.1% in Jaffna15.5% in Kilinochchi13.3% in Mullaitivu10.7% in Batticaloa

Of 915 casualties:17.2%

95 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 96: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Table 6. Device type, gender of casualty, age of casualtySource: Sri Lanka Mined Area Database, 1 January 2000 – 6 September 2010

Year Device type (incidents) Device type (casualties) Gender of casualty Age of casualty2000 Of 125 incidents:

29.6% antipersonnel landmines (APM)0.0% antitank landmines (ATM)25.6% unexploded ordnance (UXO)44.8% unknown

Of 167 casualties:24.0% APM0.0% APM27.5% UXO48.5% unknown

Of 167 casualties:89.8% male9.0% female1.2% unknown

Of 167 casualties:5.4% ≤ 9 years old18.0% 10-17 years old55.7% 18-45 years old13.8% ≥ 46 years old7.2% unknown

2001 Of 162 incidents:8.0% APM0.0% ATM7.4% UXO84.6% unknown

Of 211 casualties:8.5% APM0.0% ATM6.2% UXO85.3% unknown

Of 211 casualties:85.8% male14.2% female0.0% unknown

Of 211 casualties:3.8% ≤ 9 years old15.6% 10-17 years old48.3% 18-45 years old19.9% ≥ 46 years old12.3% unknown

2002 Of 110 incidents:25.4% APM0.9% ATM20.9% UXO52.7% unknown

Of 154 casualties:20.1% APM2.0% ATM27.9% UXO50.0% unknown

Of 154 casualties:83.8% male12.3% female3.9% unknown

Of 154 casualties:9.1% ≤ 9 years old15.6% 10-17 years old37.7% 18-45 years old11.7% ≥ 46 years old26.0% unknown

2003 Of 78 incidents:44.9% APM2.6% ATM26.9% UXO25.6% unknown

Of 111 casualties:36.0% APM2.7% ATM35.1% UXO26.1% unknown

Of 111 casualties:77.5% male17.1% female5.4% unknown

Of 111 casualties:8.1% ≤ 9 years old16.2% 10-17 years old26.1% 18-45 years old24.3% ≥ 46 years old25.2% unknown

2004 Of 48 incidents:33.3% APM2.1% ATM29.2% UXO35.4% unknown

Of 56 casualties:23.2% APM5.4% ATM46.4% UXO25. 0% unknown

Of 56 casualties:85.7% male12.5% female1.8% unknown

Of 56 casualties:3.6% ≤ 9 years old10.7% 10-17 years old42.9% 18-45 years old14.3% ≥ 46 years old28.6% unknown

2005 Of 35 incidents:45.7% APM0.0% ATM34.3% UXO20.0% unknown

Of 39 casualties:43.6% APM0.0% ATM35.9% UXO18.0% unknown

Of 39 casualties:82.1% male18.0% female0.0% unknown

Of 39 casualties:5.1% ≤ 9 years old18.0% 10-17 years old61.5% 18-45 years old5.1% ≥ 46 years old10.2% unknown

2006 Of 22 incidents:36.4% APM4.6% ATM13.6% UXO45.5% unknown

Of 63 casualties:14.3% APM11.1% ATM6.4% UXO68.3% unknown

Of 63 casualties:52.4% male30.2% female17.5% unknown

Of 63 casualties:3.2% ≤ 9 years old6.4% 10-17 years old17.5% 18-45 years old22. 2% ≥ 46 years old50.8% unknown

2007 Of 15 incidents:13.3% APM20.0% ATM26.7% UXO40.0% unknown

Of 24 casualties:12.5% APM29.2% ATM33.3% UXO25.0% unknown

Of 24 casualties:75.0% male20.8% female4.2% unknown

Of 24 casualties:4.2% ≤ 9 years old16.7% 10-17 years old33. 3% 18-45 years old20.8% ≥ 46 years old25.0% unknown

96 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 97: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Year Device type (incidents) Device type (casualties) Gender of casualties Age of casualties2008 Of 7 incidents:

57.1% APM0.0% ATM14.3% UXO28.6% unknown

Of 8 casualties:37.5% APM0.0% ATM37.5% UXO25.0% unknown

Of 8 casualties:87.5% male12.5% female0.0% unknown

Of 8 casualties:25.0% ≤ 9 years old25.0% 10-17 years old50.0% 18-45 years old0.0% ≥ 46 years old0.0% unknown

2009 Of 45 incidents:22.2% APM0.0% ATM6.7% UXO71. 1% unknown

Of 59 casualties:17.0% APM0.0% ATM8.5% UXO74.6% unknown

Of 59 casualties:40.7% male8.5% female50.9% unknown

Of 59 casualties:3.4% ≤ 9 years old8.5% 10-17 years old25.4% 18-45 years old5.1% ≥ 46 years old57.6% unknown

2010 Of 14 incidents:7.1% APM0. 0% ATM50. 0% UXO42.9% unknown

Of 23 casualties:4.4% APM0.0% ATM13.0% UXO82.6% unknown

Of 23 casualties:65.2% male34.8% female0.0% unknown

Of 23 casualties:4.4% ≤ 9 years old30.4% 10-17 years old39.1% 18-45 years old21.7% ≥ 46 years old4.4% unknown

Total (2000-2010)

Of 661 incidents:25.7% APM1.2% ATM20.0% UXO53.1% unknown

Of 915 casualties:20.2% APM2.5% ATM22.4% UXO54.9% unknown

Of 915 casualties:79.0% male14.8% female6.2% unknown

Of 915 casualties:5.7% ≤ 9 years old15.3% 10-17 years old41.2% 18-45 years old16.1% ≥ 46 years old21.8% unknown

97 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 98: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Table 7. Occupation of casualty, activity at time of incident, receipt of MRE prior to incidentSource: Sri Lanka Mined Area Database, 1 January 2000 – 6 September 2010

Year Occupation of casualty Activity at time of incident Receipt of MRE prior to incident2000 Of 167 casualties:

98.8% civilian1.2% unknown

Of 167 casualties:25.8% unknown17.4% household workxxxix

15.6% collecting food/water/wood12.0% tampering6.0% playing/recreation

Of 167 casualties:3.0% yes17.4% no79.6% unknown

2001 Of 211 casualties:97.6% civilian1.4% government official0.5% military0.5% unknown

Of 211 casualties:20.4% household work16. 1% traveling12.8% passing/standing nearby10.9% tampering10.4% collecting food/water/wood

Of 211 casualties:4.7% yes46.9% no48.3% unknown

2002 Of 154 casualties:90.9% civilian5.8% military0.7% aid worker0.7% other2.0% unknown

Of 154 casualties:16.9% collecting food/water/wood16.9% tampering14.3% passing/standing nearby13.0% household work7.1% farming9.7% unknown

Of 154 casualties:16.9% yes29.2% no53.9% unknown

2003 Of 111 casualties:72.1% civilian5.4% other2.7% military1.8% aid worker18.0% unknown

Of 111 casualties:24.3% other23.4% unknown14.4% tampering9.0% passing/standing nearby9.0% playing/recreation6.3% collecting food/water/wood

Of 111 casualties:8.1% yes30.6% no61.3% unknown

2004 Of 56 casualties:67.9% civilian7.1% military1.8% aid worker23.2% unknown

Of 56 casualties:28.6% other17.9% unknown10.7% tampering8.9% collecting food/water/wood7.1% passing/standing nearby7.1% traveling

Of 56 casualties:21.4% yes23.2% no55.4% unknown

2005 Of 39 casualties:61.5% civilian2.6% mine action personnel35.9% unknown

Of 39 casualties:25.6% other15.4% unknown12.8% collecting food/water/wood 12.8% playing/recreation10.3% household work10.3% passing/standing nearby5.1% farming5.1% tampering

Of 39 casualties:61.5% yes30.8% no7.7% unknown

xxxix See note xiv on page 17.

98 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 99: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Year Occupation of casualty Activity at time of incident Receipt of MRE prior to incident2006 Of 63 casualties:

15.9% civilian1.6% mine action personnel82.5% unknown

Of 63 casualties:61.9% unknown17.5% other11.1% household work3.2% collecting food/water/wood3.2% farming3.2% playing/recreation1.6% passing/standing nearby

Of 63 casualties:9.5% yes30.2% no60.3% unknown

2007 Of 24 casualties:50.0% civilian4.2% military45.8% unknown

Of 24 casualties:25. 0% other16.7% playing/recreation16.7% traveling12.5% tending animals12.5% unknown8.3% collecting food/water/wood4.2% household work4.2% military

Of 24 casualties:29.2% yes54.2% no16.7% unknown

2008 Of 8 casualties:37.5% civilian12.5% government official12.5% mine action personnel37.5% unknown

Of 8 casualties:37.5% playing/recreation25.0% traveling12.5% collecting food/water/wood12.5% demining12.5% other

Of 8 casualties:37.5% yes62.5% no0.0% unknown

2009 Of 59 casualties:27.1% civilian72.9% unknown

Of 59 casualties:57.6% unknown10.2% other6.8% passing/standing nearby6.8% playing/recreation5.1% hunting/fishing5.1% tampering3.4% household work3.4% traveling

Of 59 casualties:11.9% yes22.0% no66.1% unknown

2010 Of 23 casualties:30.4% civilian4.4% government official65.2% unknown

Of 23 casualties:39.1% traveling30.4% other17.4% household work8.7% unknown4.4% collecting food/water/wood

Of 23 casualties:13.0% yes13.0% no73.9% unknown

Total (2000-2010)

Of 915 casualties:76.6% civilian2.0% military0.8% other0.6% government official0.4% aid worker0.3% mine action personnel19.3% unknown

Of 915 casualties:20.7% unknown12.8% household work12.8% other10.7% collecting food/water/wood10.5% tampering8.5% passing/standing nearby

Of 915 casualties:12.2% yes31.2% no56.6% unknown

99 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 100: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix C. Findings and recommendations related to trap gun use and injury

Although trap guns cause a significant number of injuries in Sri Lanka every year, little has been done to study their effects or address their proliferation. Because of their indiscriminate nature and other similarities with landmines and ERW, UNICEF and other partners hope to use some of the resources and infrastructure developed for mine action to address trap gun proliferation and injury. This appendix outlines the trap gun problem in Sri Lanka, summarizes the evaluation team’s findings related to trap guns (from key informant interviews in Colombo and group discussions in the field), and provides recommendations to reduce the impact of trap guns.

Definition, history and use

According to a paper published by Saferworld in 2008, a trap gun is a weapon “made from a metal pipe, explosives (usually taken from firecrackers and other readily available explosive chemicals or explosive remnants of war) and metal pellets. The trigger mechanism is a basic trip system, that when disturbed by the movement of a person or an animal, fires the gun.”77

During the civil conflict, local government officials provided Sinhalese communities adjoining LTTE-held areas with training and raw materials to assemble trap guns in order to protect their homes.78 The government did not collect the trap guns following the conflict, and use has continued—and possibly increased—since the end of the conflict.

According to the Saferworld report, trap guns are used for four primary reasons:

• to capture various animals for meat for consumption;

• to capture various animals for meat, skin, bones, tusks, and other body parts for profit;

• to capture or drive away wild boar, deer, porcupines, and leopards to protect crops from damage; and

• to secure the perimeters of land used for illicit logging, gem mining, chena (slash and burn) agriculture, and cannabis cultivation.79

Evaluation participants mentioned two primary uses of trap guns in their communities: trapping of wild boars and deer for meat to eat or sell, and trapping of wild boars to stop crop damage. One individual may set multiple traps; one evaluation participant mentioned that he found one person who was setting 18 traps simultaneously.

According to evaluation participants, trap gun assembly and placement patterns vary according to use. If an individual is trapping animals for meat, he/she may leave a trap gun out for a long time and check the trap periodically until an animal is killed. Agriculturalists who are using trap guns to stop crop damage, however, are more likely to set up guns every evening and remove them every morning.

During field work, trap gun use was confirmed in Ampara, Batticaloa, Kilinochchi, Mannar, Mullaitivu, Puttalam, Trincomalee, and Vavuniya. Evaluation participants in Jaffna said that trap guns had not been used there because the materials had never been available.

Evaluation participants believe that trap guns have been used predominantly in Sinhalese communities. One participant in a group discussion in Ampara said that trap gun use in majority Tamil areas has increased since Sinhalese people started moving into these areas following the conflict.

Within affected districts, trap guns are used in or near forest or jungle areas where wildlife are more prevalent. One evaluation participant believes that a study of poverty indicators and trap gun proliferation would reveal that trap guns are used in the poorest areas of the country.80 Trap guns are primarily used by men; one discussion group participating in the evaluation mentioned that men sometimes set trap guns without the knowledge of the women in their households.

100 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 101: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Injuries and other effects of trap gun use

Trap gun users do not typically tell others where they are placing trap guns because they are afraid of prosecution or punishment. Likewise, they do not usually mark their trap guns due to fears that animals could see and avoid the trap guns or that other people could find and steal the trap guns. As a result, people and animals are at risk of trap gun injury.

According to the Saferworld report, police personnel recorded 506 incidents involving trap guns between 1999 and 2005 (districts not indicated): 329 attempted homicides, 144 homicides, 27 injuries (“grievous hurt”), 5 robberies, and 1 abduction. 81 According to the documentary The Trap, up to 250 patients are treated each year for trap gun injuries at the Teaching Hospital in Anuradhapura. 82

Evaluation participants knew of incidents in which people lost limbs in 3 districts (Ampara, Batticaloa, and Mannar) and others in which cattle and dogs were killed. One evaluation participant said that during a recent visit to Hambantota he had found someone who had been injured by a trap gun in one out of every five or six households. 83 Trap gun users are often injured by their own weapons.

In addition to injuries, trap gun proliferation and use have resulted in increases in the trade of illicit explosives and the production of gun barrels.

Similarities between trap guns and landmines/ERW

Several characteristics of trap guns result in comparisons with landmines and ERW:

• These weapons are indiscriminate by nature: after they have been assembled or used, they can injure any person or animal who comes into contact with them.

• These weapons often affect the income generators (or “breadwinners”) in households and result in some similar injury patterns, including traumatic limb amputation.

• Injuries from these weapons are often associated with high-risk livelihood activities, often conducted by individuals who fully understand the risk of injury.

• These weapons can limit or deny access to living and livelihood areas.

Addressing the problem of trap guns: current attempts and recommendations

In the past, some stakeholders have attempted to address wildlife problems that lead to trap gun use with methods such as traditional night watches (pel rekima), use of firecrackers, and electric fencing. However, each of these solutions leads to other problems (see the Saferworld report) and none of them address economic needs that result in some trap gun use. No trap gun-specific messages or materials have been distributed during MRE activities, although UNICEF and NGO partners have expressed an interest in addressing this problem.

The Saferworld report included the following recommendations for reducing trap gun use and injury:

• enforcement of existing firearm and wildlife laws by encouraging and sufficiently outfitting law enforcement personnel;

• deactivation of trap guns along wildlife paths;

• assertive prosecution and penalization of trap gun manufacturers and users (as a deterrent to future use);

• community-level awareness campaigns;

• creation of efficient and safe alternative means of crop protection;

• establishment of a welfare fund that would insure farmers in the case of crop destruction by wildlife;• generation of viable alternative livelihoods (through vocational training, apprenticeship, micro-credit, employment advice and

services, development of rural transport/communications/economic infrastructure) to deter people from conducting illegal activities such as illicit logging and cannabis cultivation;

101 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 102: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• reduction of human-wildlife interaction via establishment of new parks and conservation areas, policing of wildlife corridors, and redevelopment of wildlife habitats;

• consultation with and involvement of affected communities to encourage local ownership of the problem and solutions;

• secondary vegetative fences as an additional barrier to wildlife; and

• provision of firearm licenses—and a legal method of obtaining appropriate firearms—to smaller-plot farmers for crop protection.xl

In addition to implementation of these suggestions as appropriate and feasible, the evaluation team makes the following recommendations:

• Address the use of trap guns via a two-pronged approach, with legal intervention at the central level and introduction of additional income generation activities at the local level.

• Examine and clarify existing laws related to the legality of trap gun-related weapons, explosives, and the killing of various animals.

• Incorporate trap gun education into community- and school-based MRE activities conducted by UNICEF and partners (including training of trainers (see Sections VI.A.3.a and VI.A.5.a.iii), development of core messages (see Section VI.B.4.a), and creation of materials (see Section VI.C.2).

• Educate the public about trap guns via media campaigns.• Monitor trap gun injuries via existing government-facilitated injury surveillance and/or the SLMAD.• Anticipate a future increase in trap gun proliferation and use and plan activities accordingly. (Evaluation participants believe

that trap gun use may rise with the increasing availability of supplies and decreasing presence of government security forces.)• Consider the following individuals and entities as potential partners in addressing trap gun use and injury: the South Asia Small

Arms Network-Sri Lanka; the National Commission Against the Proliferation of Illicit Small Arms, the Department of Wildlife Conservation (as per the Saferworld report); police and judicial medical officers; and RDS and WRDS officers and members.

xl At this time, a farmer of five or more acres is able to obtain a firearm license from his/her district GA or the Ministry of Defence.

102 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 103: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix D. Recommended skill, experience, and competency areas for NMAC and DMAO staff

According to IMAS, MRE management and operations personnel “typically need the following skills, experience and competencies (taken verbatim from IMAS Guidebook 10):

• field experience in conducting MRE;• a relevant background, e.g., education, psychology, media, communications, development;• good communication skills;• good computer skills;• good research and analysis skills;• experience of managing an organisation;• report writing skills;• the ability to manage budgets; and• the ability to quickly acquire new skills and understand new concepts.”84

103 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 104: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix E. Recommended skill, experience, and competency areas for training needs assessments

According to IMAS, training needs assessments of MRE personnel should include the following areas (taken verbatim from IMAS Guidebook 10):

• “General skills:o Project management;

o Finance management;

o Human resource management;

o Administration;

o Logistics;

o Strategic planning tools, including logical framework planning;

o Monitoring and evaluation;

o Organisation governance;

o Fundraising and project proposal writing;

o Computer skills;

o English language training (useful for accessing international guides and participating in conferences, workshops, or

trainings);o Knowledge of the principles and techniques of

community participation and stakeholder involvement; participatory training, and gender and minority group participation;

o Experience in running meetings and facilitating workshops; and

o Awareness of disability rights.

• Mine action skills:o Overview of the five pillars of mine action, including observation of field work;

o IMAS for MRE, including the guiding principles of MRE;

o Principles and tools for participatory community data gathering;

o Communication strategies;

o Training of trainers;

o Knowledge of the IMSMA; and

o Experience of MRE training, including:

mines and ERW present in the country, international safety messages, theory of risk taking, target groups, tackling behavioural changes, psychological, social and economic impact of mines and ERW, communication channels and methodologies, development of materials for target groups, field-testing, and

working with networks.”85

104 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 105: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix F. Sri Lanka Mined Area Database MRE KAP form

The following questions and instructions are taken verbatim from the Sri Lanka Mined Area Database MRE KAP form; some formatting has been changed to conserve space.

Interviewer name: Date:Organization: Location/village: DS:District:

Introduce yourself to the interviewee and explain: who you are, for which organization you work, purposes of this interview.

First of all, you ask some information about the person you are going to interview. Explain that all information is confidential, and that his/her name will not be asked.Age: Sex: M F

Occupation:Education level:

Start now the questionnaire. Use the instructions in italic to complete it. Whenever there is a � , tick the appropriate answer.

1. Have you ever heard about mines/UXOs?Yes

No

If you have can you describe them?

2. What can mines/UXO do? (Do not read answers; tick what the person mentions)Kill you

Maim you

Nothing

Don’t know

Others (specify) ___________________________

3. Where mines and UXOs are most likely to be?Trenches

Abandoned houses

Military posts

Destroyed bridges

Riverbanks

Water points

Bunds

Shorelines

I don’t know

Others (specify)________________________

105 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 106: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

4. How are places where there are mines and UXOs marked? (Wait for the response and tick the mentioned one. DO NOT READ OPTIONS!!)Red sign with a skull

Barbed wire

Animal skull

Painted trees

Skull and crossbones

Red or Yellow tape

Others (specify)________________________________

5. What would you do if you see a mine and you were in a safe place? (Wait for the response and tick the mentioned one. DO NOT READ OPTIONS!!)Run away/go back

Continue my way

Go and tell a friend/neighbours

Go and tell the local authorities (administrator, military, police)

Go and tell parents

Go and tell teachers

Mark the spot in some way

Take the mine/UXO to authorities/police

Take the mine/UXO home

Don’t know

Others (specify)__________________________________________

6. What would you do if you think you are in a minefield? (Wait for the response and tick the mentioned one. DO NOT READ OPTIONS!!)Stop, stand still and shout for help

Go to a safe area

Retrace my steps carefully

Don’t know

Others (specify)___________________________________________

7. If you saw a friend or family member lying injured in a minefield, what would you do? (Do not read answers; tick what the person mentions)Run to their assistance

Run away

Get an expert/deminer

Inform local authority /military

Go and tell somebody

Don’t know

Others (specify)__________________________________________

106 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 107: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

8. What makes a mine/UXOs explode? (Do not read answers; tick what the person mentions)Playing with it

Throwing things at the mine

Fire

Pressure of foot

Movement of the mine

Pulling a trip wire

Animal step on

Don’t know

Others (specify)__________________________________________

9. How can you avoid a mine/UXO accident? (Do not read answers; tick what the person mentions)Walking on known/used paths

Asking locals about dangerous areas

Keep away from suspicious/marked areas

Don’t know

Others (specify)_____________________________________

10. Why do people risk going into dangerous areas? (Do not read answers; tick what the person mentions)Farming

Grazing cattle

Fetching water

Collecting firewood

Fishing

Collecting coconuts

Rebuilding the house Clearing the gardens

Hunting

Making a journey

For the fun

Don’t know

Others (specify)_____________________________________

The questionnaire is now finished.Thank the interviewee for his/her time and patience before moving on.

107 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 108: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix G. Summary of qualitative data about key community influencers and methods of communication

The evaluation team conducted some qualitative listing and ranking activities with key informants and group discussion participants to learn about key community influencers and methods of communication within communities.

Listing and ranking of key influencers within communities

The evaluation team asked key informants and group discussion participants to list trusted “key community influencers”, who were defined as highly trusted individuals with whom other community members feel comfortable sharing information. Such individuals can be targeted for dissemination of important MRE messages in the future.

Five discussion groups—three groups of community members and two groups of NGO personnel—listed the following “key influencers” within communities (each individual or organization was mentioned once unless otherwise indicated by the number of mentions in parentheses):

Figure 7. Key community influencers mentioned by group discussion participants

These discussion groups and other evaluation participants shared the following additional thoughts about key community influencers:

• Key influencers often depend upon the type of information transferred. Doctors, public health midwives, health department chiefs, health volunteers, NGOs addressing health issues, and other health personnel are key influencers in health-related matters such as HIV/AIDS, dengue, and maternal health. Religious leaders are key influencers in religious matters, mobile servicesxli personnel are key influencers regarding legal services, and NGOs are key influencers in child protection issues. GSs, NGOs, and RDS officers and members are key influencers in matters of land and livelihoods.

• Preferences for key influencers within certain communities may depend upon religion and gender roles. Christian priests may be more influential in Christian circles than Hindu priests are in Hindu circles. Gender roles are stricter in Jaffna than in the Eastern Province, which may affect whether key community influencers include women.

xli See note xxix on page 63.

108 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 109: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• Individuals who come from or live in specific communities are better key influencers than those who visit communities on a short-term basis. Some people who visit multiple communities for work, such as government-appointed health personnel, may be knowledgeable about certain topics but are less likely to know about specific community characteristics than those who live or work exclusively in those communities.

• Each community has its own trusted key influencers who are not necessarily political leaders or other prominent figures. It is necessary to communicate with each community to find these key influencers, and it is important to speak with community members—not just community leaders—to “really learn about what is going on”.

• Views of the police as key influencers vary widely. Some evaluation participants listed the police as trusted key influencers, while others stated that police officers are not trusted due to allegations of corruption. One evaluation participant said that the police are trying to improve relationships with communities via training in child protection issues and the establishment of women’s and children’s desks in police stations.

Listing and ranking of preferred information sources

The evaluation team also asked key informants and group discussion participants to list preferred information sources for health and social issues. Follow-up probes asked about the preferences of men, women, and children and use of and access to technology. Research on preferred information sources can be used to deliver important health and social messages to different communities.

Evaluation participants listed the following preferred information sources, organized according to the four communication channels outlined by IMAS (see Section VI.C.1.c.i):

Person-to-person or interpersonal

communication Traditional media Small media Mass media• (focus) group discussions• direct presentations• house-to-house visits• exhibitions

• drama• songs• cultural activities• puppet shows

• leaflets• handbills• stickers• posters• mathematics formula tables• billboards and hoarding boards• t-shirts• school materials such as books and handouts• “tv show” or film showings with video clips• documentary films and “photo stories”• PPT (multimedia) presentations

• loudspeaker announcements (from 3-wheelers, temples, mosques, or town centers)• newspapers• television• radio• text messages

Table 8. Preferred information sources within IMAS communication channels

109 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 110: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Evaluation participants also mentioned the following individuals, organizations, settings, and other entities as sources of information about health and social issues:

Individuals Organizations Settings Other• parents• relatives/family members• friends • neighbors• GSs• police officers• school teachers• health and other volunteers• public health midwives• public health inspectors

• government• NGOs• child protection committees• child clubs• Sri Lanka Red Cross Society• RDS• WRDS• medical, livelihood and health organizations

• schools (especially morning/evening assemblies and prayer times)• Shramadana activities• NGO and CBO meetings• cleaning and health meetings• religious buildings (temples, churches, and mosques)• telephones

• political campaigns• legal messages (such as fines for illegal behavior)

Table 9. Other preferred information sourcesSeven groups of community members ranked the most important information sources used by men, women, and children. The most popular choices are listed below:

Figure 8. Most important information sources used by men, women, and children

One group ranked the most important information sources for IDPs: they are (in decreasing order of effectiveness): street drama, house-to-house visits, Shramadana activities (see note xxvii on page 56), film showings, and child club activities.

110 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 111: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Comparison of preferred information sources and communication methods

Key informants and group discussion participants also compared different information sources and communication methods.

Preferences for different information sources and communication methods often depend upon literacy and geographic and financial access. People in rural areas often have less access to certain methods of communication due to a lack of roads and/or electricity. As with key influencers (see above), preferred sources of communication may vary by topic discussed (e.g., health, livelihoods, legal issues). It is important for MRE stakeholders to understand community preferences for and access to various information sources and communication methods when selecting techniques for dissemination of MRE messages.

The remainder of this appendix discusses some of the strengths, weaknesses, and comparisons of various information sources and communication methods according to evaluation participants.

Person-to-person communication

Person-to-person communication was mentioned by several evaluation participants as a good information source within communities. Person-to-person interaction can happen between relatives, friends, neighbors and other acquaintances, teachers, government personnel, health personnel, police, child club members, NGO and CBO officers and members, and other individuals and organizations. Children were mentioned as a particularly good source of information because they often repeat messages learned in school to their families.

Participants in one community group said that information flows in a particular pattern between men and women. Men work away from the home during the day while women stay closer to home. Women talk to each other during the day and trade information, which they share with their husbands and other male family members after work hours. Men take the new information they have learned back to work with them during the day and tell other men.

Information may flow in a particular way in each individual community; members of a community-based child rights committee in an IDP camp said that information flows from them to the camp leader to the GS, who relays the information to NGOs. Likewise, if the GS receives important information he passes it to the camp leader, who shares it with the child rights committee.

Evaluation participants mentioned house-to-house visits as an effective method of person-to-person contact. Good timing for house-to-house visits often depends upon the target population; evening and weekend visits may be best to reach children and adults who are at school or work during the day.

Key informants and group discussion participants also mentioned group discussions as a good source of person-to-person transfer of information, especially among adults. Some evaluation participants believe that people are more likely to ask questions during group discussions than during lecture-style presentations.

Street drama and other cultural activities

Many key informants and group discussion participants mentioned street drama as an effective way to reach all people—including men, women, children, and illiterate individuals. Street drama is considered a particularly good method because it holds everyone’s attention and often incorporates participation from local community members. Other cultural activities such as songs, puppet shows, dance, and poetry are also effective communications methods. These traditional media may be followed by question-and-answer sessions which provide an opportunity for asking questions, learning about local communities, and reporting suspicious objects and areas.

111 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 112: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

One disadvantage of street drama in particular is that it may require significant time to plan and practice, as well as payment for costumes and props, assistance by professional drama personnel, and transportation of NGO and/or professional drama personnel to target communities. Some MRE partners have reduced resource expenditures for street drama by teaching communities themselves (rather than hiring professional drama personnel) and collecting all costumes, props, and refreshments within communities rather than buying them elsewhere.

Films

Many key informants and group discussion participants mentioned that films are popular sources of information. One advantage of films is that they are reviewed more during production than some other communication materials; some evaluation participants argued that because they go through more layers of review, films are more likely to be “polished” than dramas. Films are more expensive to produce than some other communication methods, but they can be copied and distributed widely to television channels, cinemas, schools, and NGOs following production. One key informant recommended collaborating with local non-profit production companies rather than large, expensive companies to reduce costs and allow for more local input during production.

Key informants and group discussion participants believe that films are particularly interesting for children. Education personnel participating in the evaluation believe that teachers may feel too busy to conduct some MRE methods but can easily show films to their classes. One education stakeholder shared that most schools in her zone have the capacity to show films, and that teachers often can bring equipment from home if necessary technology is not available in schools.

Radio and television

Several evaluation participants mentioned radio as a popular information source, although many people do not have access to radios. Some participants said that radios are more popular among males while others said that radios are more popular among females. Participants in one community group prefer radio news broadcasts from the British Broadcasting Corporation and the International Broadcasting Corporation Tamil because they believe that radio stations based in Sri Lanka are more likely to be biased and controlled by political parties.

Evaluation participants also mentioned television as a popular information source, although many people lack television access. In most rural communities visited during the evaluation, only a few—or no—families have access to television, either due to lack of electricity or because they do not own television sets. Some evaluation participants believe that this reduced access increases the communal aspect of television viewing, because it leads people to congregate together to watch television rather than watch individually or with family in the home.

According to evaluation participants, different population groups prefer different types of television programs. Tamil movies produced in India are very popular among all viewers, while women prefer teledramas and children prefer cartoons. Gender may also affect how and where people watch television: in one area of relatively high television ownership, women were said to be more likely to watch television alone in the home, while men were said to be more likely to watch television in groups in public places.

Ownership of radios and televisions varies between and within communities; radio ownership was more common in some areas while television ownership was more common in others. Radios are more widely available than televisions in areas without electricity, perhaps because radios can run on battery or solar power while televisions cannot. Some evaluation participants prefer radio to television because they can work while listening to the radio but cannot work while watching television.

Telephones

Telephone ownership appears relatively high in communities visited during field work. Telephone ownership tends to be lower in rural areas than in town areas. However, participants in some rural areas said that telephone ownership is high; in one community,

112 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 113: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

participants said that “even cattle rearers have phones.” People are more likely to have mobile phones than land lines. Access to electricity affects mobile phone ownership because people cannot charge phones without electricity, although some people travel to homes with solar power or other villages (with electricity) to charge phones.

Telephone ownership and use are higher among adults than among children, and older children are more likely than younger children to use phones. Phones are used for talking, texting, and taking pictures, although some participants said that young people are more likely than older adults to use phones for texting and taking pictures. One woman said that she receives Tamil text messages on her phone but she is unable to read them because they are transliterated into the Latin alphabet.

Participants in one community group believe that telephones are a good source of information, but they are concerned that their children are using mobile phones to look at and share sexually explicit material.

Computers and the Internet

Computer ownership is more common in town areas than in rural areas. In one town area, evaluation participants said that computer ownership and Internet connectivity are common in homes, cafes, computer centers, and schools. In other evaluation areas, computer access was very low or nonexistent.

Multimedia presentations and public film showings

Many evaluation participants mentioned public multimedia (PowerPoint) presentations and film showings as good information sources because they attract large crowds of people. However, both methods are limited because they require certain resources—a screen or other flat, light background, a relatively dark viewing area, audiovisual equipment (computers, televisions and/or DVD players), and electricity or a generator—which may not be available in target areas. In some instances, MRE programs have been completely interrupted when equipment or electric current have failed.

Several evaluation participants said that nighttime film showings would be very successful if feasible with local security conditions. Nighttime showings allow all family members to attend (including those who are at work or school or otherwise engaged during the day) and draw high attendance because of the popularity of film. MAG conducted nighttime film showings successfully in the past when the security situation was better; approximately 2000 people attended one past film showing held in conjunction with a religious event. Community members enjoyed watching the films, and at the end of each showing they would tell the organizers about landmines and ERW they had seen in their villages.

Print media

Some key informants and group discussion participants believe that print media are effective, though limited in that they may not be available among high-risk populations or appropriate for illiterate individuals.

Many evaluation participants agree that newspapers are not the best method for reaching target populations. Newspaper readership is low in many communities for several reasons:

• many community members—including workers who engage in high-risk activities—do not have time to read newspapers;

• newspapers do not arrive in communities in a timely manner;

• community centers and libraries, which traditionally provide newspaper access, are currently closed; and

• people must buy multiple newspapers to access local, district, and national news, which deters them from reading any newspapers at all.

113 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 114: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Some evaluation participants believe that leaflets and handbills are effective while others do not. One key informant said that people who cannot read might take an offered leaflet and ask someone else to read it to them later. Another key informant said that people will definitely take leaflets home but might dispose of them without reading them.

Several evaluation participants mentioned that posters are a good source of information, although posters hanging in public places do not always last well over time. Printed materials such as board games and mathematics formula tables are good materials for reaching children.

Loudspeaker announcements

Many key informants and group discussion participants mentioned loudspeaker announcements as an effective information source. Mobile loudspeakers are mounted on three-wheelers, while stationary loudspeakers are located in temples, mosques, and town centers. Loudspeakers are used by religious and government officials, the police, and public health inspectors.

Loudspeakers are effective because they reach all people within hearing distance at the same time. However, loudspeakers are used predominantly for funerals and religious proceedings in some areas, and some evaluation participants believe that people do not always listen to the actual words in broadcasted messages. Participants in one community group said that they sometimes pay more attention during repeat announcements of the same messages.

T-shirts

Some key informants and focus group participants believe that t-shirts are an effective method of communicating messages, while others believe that t-shirts are only effective for those who receive them.

114 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 115: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix H. Examples of MRE materials used in other settings

MRE kits

MRE trainers in some settings use special MRE kits distributed by UNICEF and partners. These kits contain MRE training materials and other tools (such as marking signs and paint) that are used during trips to the field. In Nepal, kits include a card which explains the use of all kit components (below left). Numbered kits are distributed to MRE trainers in duffel bags (below right) and tracked by the UNICEF Nepal central office.

Figure 9. Images of MRE kits used in NepalTop left: Card explaining MRE kit components (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal Mine Action Joint Working Group (MAJWG)Top right: Nepali MRE trainer with an MRE kit (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal MAJWG)

Banners

MRE partners in some settings use large banners. If printed on thick, durable materials, banners can be rolled for easy transportation and reused many times. Inclusion of all core messages may help ensure that no important messages are forgotten during MRE sessions.

115 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 116: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Figure 2. Images of MRE banners used in the Democratic Republic of the CongoTop left: MAG MRE trainers explaining images of landmines and ERW on a banner in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) (side 1 of 2) (Source: Raphael Debotte)Top right: School children learning from a banner with images of landmines and ERW on a banner in the DRC (side 2 of 2) (Source: Raphael Debotte)Bottom left: 1 of 2 parts of a MAG banner used in DRC. Messages include potential locations of landmines and ERW; visual signs of potential landmine/ERW contamination; and consequences of landmine/ERW incidents. (Source: Raphael Debotte)Bottom right: 2 of 2 parts of a MAG banner used in DRC. Messages include high-risk behaviors, correct behaviors, and markings used to indicate dangerous areas. (Source: Raphael Debotte)

Leaflet without words

Well-designed, colorful leaflets printed on high-quality paper can contain core MRE messages communicated via illustrations rather than written words. Leaflets without words are useful among illiterate individuals and speakers of different languages. Leaflets can be passed out at community- and school-based MRE activities, where recipients can be encouraged to share the leaflets with friends and family. The leaflet shown below is used in Nepal and contains the following images (based on core MRE messages):

• photographs of 13 types of landmines and ERW;• cartoon drawings of six risk behaviors and three positive behaviors;• a photograph of a child injured by a landmine or ERW; and• an explanation that landmines and ERW can be dangerous at distances up to and exceeding 1000 meters.MRE trainers in Nepal also receive a leaflet user guide (below left) with detailed instructions clarifying how to explain each image in the leaflet.

116 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 117: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Figure 11. Images of a wordless MRE leaflet used in NepalTop left: 1 of 2 parts of wordless leaflet used in Nepal (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal MAJWG)Top right: 2 of 2 parts of wordless leaflet used in Nepal (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal MAJWG)Bottom left: User guide describing how to explain images in the wordless MRE leaflet (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal MAJWG)Bottom right: MRE trainer sharing wordless MRE leaflet with community members in Nepal (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal MAJWG)

Flipchart

MRE trainers in Nepal use flipcharts (see below) during community- and school-based MRE sessions. Flipcharts ensure that MRE messages are delivered in a consistent order to all audiences. Flipcharts can also be designed to stand on their own on flat surfaces, allowing trainers to move freely during trainings and holding images still for session participants.

In Nepal, each page in the MRE flipchart is double-sided; the audience side contains a large color picture while the trainer side contains a small black-and-white version of the same picture and a corresponding script. Trainers are encouraged to speak without reading directly from the script, which is meant to be used for prompting. An introduction for the trainer explains the purpose of the flipchart and provides tips for creating a dynamic performance, such as asking questions and encouraging participants to describe what is happening in the images. Some slides are created to target specific age groups; trainers may spend more or less time explaining particular slides as appropriate for different audiences.

117 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 118: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Figure 3. Images of MRE flipcharts used in NepalLeft: MRE trainers using an MRE flipchart for community-based MRE in Nepal (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal MAJWG)Center: School principal using an MRE flipchart for school-based MRE in Nepal (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal MAJWG)Right: MRE flipchart displayed during Training of Trainers session in Nepal (Source: UNICEF Nepal and the Nepal MAJWG)

118 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 119: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix I. Recommendations from the 2004 evaluation of MRE activities by Fonseka, Silva, and Jayasena

The following recommendations are taken verbatim from the report text.

“Tailor-made MRE for specially vulnerable target groupsProgrammes should be conducted during appropriate hours in order to reach out to the ‘adult working male’ target group. This target group has to be given special consideration when deciding on the time, venue and the tools used for training. Mine risks encountered by farmers, fishermen, casual wage labourers, those collecting forest products and other such categories must be addressed as relevant in such programmes.

Appropriate and optimum mix of MRE tools for each setting must be identified and applied.Tools have to be revised and modified from time to time to keep the interest alive. Excessive familiarity with a billboard for instance, may lead to a reduction of its attraction. As such tools should be modified in keeping with the mood of times. Unnecessary repetition should be avoided. Drama/animation component of the programmes should be given prominence particularly in programmes targeting children and those from lower educational backgrounds. Efforts should be made to share and exchange experiences among different partner organizations about the effectiveness of their various interventions. Periodic monitoring must seek to assess relative effectiveness of different interventions in each setting. Formative research with identified target groups must be used in developing appropriate tools for a given context.

Community-based needs assessment preceding MRE, must be strengthened.The community context, knowledge, attitudes and practices, needs, risks and opportunities must be better understood by MRE agencies working in each area. This may be done through a rapid assessment along the lines currently done by MAG in preparation for demining. Possibilities for collaborating with MAG in this regard must be explored. This assessment will enable MRE agencies to better orient the MRE programmes to the requirements and felt needs of the target populations. The partners or at least the project must have an in-house social science capacity to help facilitate such assessments.

MRE strategies for short, medium and long term must be carefully developedIn the short and medium term, the problems of IDPs and new settlers must receive priority attention in MRE and mine action in general. As long as de-mining takes place, there would be a need for MRE. Even when de-mining is over it would not necessarily mean that the land is 100% clear of mines. As such there should be a mechanism to provide MRE on a long term basis. The step already taken to incorporate MRE to the national school curriculum should be strengthened. Other possible long-term strategies include integration of MRE in the work of community extension workers such as health, agriculture workers, GNs etc .

Temporary visitors to Northeast must be given adequate warning about mine risk There are many temporary visitors to Jaffna from overseas. In addition there are also those southern people who visit the Northeast for sight seeing and pilgrimage. These groups have to be targeted through appropriate mass/small media. An MRE brochure may be kept in the air craft for each passenger, in flights operating from Jaffna to Colombo. Alternatively they could be distributed at the airports. UNICEF could co-ordinate with the airline companies and/or the aviation authorities.

Those who travel to Vanni go through SLA and LTTE checkpoints in Omanthai, (Vavuniya) and Muhamaalai (Jaffna) Leaflets/brochures could be distributed to these entrants as and when they arrive. In addition, large billboards may be displayed close to the traveler waiting areas within these check points.

Quick Response Teams (QRT) to be strengthened through mine action offices

119 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 120: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Small Quick response teams should be singled out from among de-miners and they should have stronger linkages with MRE teams. These de-miners should pay visits to communities along with MRE trainers, preferably at the time of community needs assessment mentioned above. This would facilitate better coordination between demining and MRE.

Returnee IDPs to be given adequate MRE MRE training should be strengthened in IDP welfare centers so that the IDPs may return to their original villages equipped with knowledge about mine risk. Relevant maps / information could be used in this respect. This is because reaching small batches of people with MRE after they settle down can be difficult. Another step in this respect would be to encourage the communities to carry MRE messages to new entrants in their villages.

Approaches to contain unauthorized demining and tampering of UXOs.Different approaches to address this problem include identifying and enforcing appropriate legal measures against these activities, training community members in basic demining and promoting a better fit between community expectations and official demining operations. Only the last of these options can be recommended as an immediate solution to this problem. The validity, effectiveness and possible adverse consequences of any legal interventions and/ or community-based basic demining must be carefully assessed before advocating either of these strategies.

Advocacy towards appropriate policy formulationIn collaboration with its partners and other stakeholders the project must try to advocate to all relevant parties to affirm their commitment to existing international conventions against use and stockpiling of landmines. An initial dialogue regarding this issue can take place among the key partners. Other areas where advocacy is needed are social protection for mine victims and their families, promoting social networks supportive of mine action in general and long-term sustainability of MRE activities.”

120 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 121: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

Appendix J. Recommendations from the 2007 evaluation of MRE activities by Ramazzotti

The following recommendations are taken verbatim from the report text.

“4.10.2.1 Main PointsImprovements are required with regards to

• collaboration by the Ministry of Education on MRE in schools. (no cost improvement)• collaboration by the Security Forces to the SL NGOs doing MRE. (no cost improvement)• advocacy, which should be intended and managed as an integral part of MRE. Advocacy should also focus on the need to

disarm or disband the Karuna faction, or for it to be absorbed into the Security Forces (since they can be considered as mercenaries). (additional costs)

• monitoring MRE activities. (additional costs). • Reporting by UNICEF field officials to the UNICEF Colombo office should be facilitated and made more secure.• MRE planning should be done with reference to the specific war situation of the country and with an advanced assessment

of people’s needs; MRE should cover all types of warfare and all social groups in danger; it should be reformulated as not limited to mines and UXOs but as an overall security strategy for the civil population. (no cost or minimal cost for improvement)

• Full de-mining operations should be resumed as soon as possible. • Resettlement should not be imposed on IDPs in areas too quickly de-mined or in villages and paddy fields not de-mined yet. • UNICEF should be taking a leading role in survivor assistance as the surviving population is a very small one. (improvement

with small costs, management by local partner organisations)UNICEF should draw all possible lessons from this Sri Lankan experience and reformulate its policies in conflict situations.

4.10.2.2 Detailed recommendations

• The worsening of the situation requires more advocacy and more MRE.• A new analysis of warfare is required • UNICEF and the MRE project require denunciation of re-mining practices against declarations on the contrary by both parties at

war. All re-mining should stop. • Cluster bombs should have been denounced as an escalation in warfare (advocacy), and they should have been included in MRE.

All use of cluster bombs should stop.• UNICEF should draw correct conclusions from the identification of cluster bombs. All Embassies and international aid agencies in

SL should be informed of the present use of mines and cluster bombs, of changes in warfare, of new social groups of victims • The elimination of mines/UXOs must find its solution with the SL government providing explosives to de-miners. Trip-wire

home-made guns should be eliminated. Village de-miners should be controlled.• People and children should be made aware of the different arms used in town warfare and of the need to take cover at the first

sign of danger. MRE activities should include town warfare.• In case of air and artillery bombardments, MRE should teach people to take cover and avoid glass splinters. Possibly, people

should be taught to dig trenches. Bombardments of the civilian population should stop.• The analysis of the vulnerable groups should follow the change in warfare• MRE in emergency situations requires new and specific guidelines.• The timing for MRE and the conditions to conduct MRE should be partially changed. • In case of mine accidents, advice on how to deal with survivors should be realistic, adequate to the real situation on the ground. • A specific campaign explaining what MRE is all about should be addressed to the Security Forces, which should stop harassing

UNICEF partner organisations.• UNICEF should fully adapt the MRE project to the new situation created in 2005.• MRE should become part of the school curriculum. More teachers should be trained in MRE.

• A clarification on the meaning and on the role of MRE should be made with those Education officials who feel that MRE is against Security Forces

• There is the need to put up many more posters and to distribute more handbills and leaflets. Radio and TV transmissions on MRE in Tamil and Sinhalese should be continued.

121 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 122: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

• In Sri Lanka there is an increasing need to perform advocacy.• Churches, mosques, kovils – Hindu temples, Buddhist temples should be used for MRE.• More monitoring should be done on MRE.• Recommendations contained in the 2004 evaluation:

- MRE planning should have been done with reference to the specific war situation of the country;- A tailor-made MRE for beneficiary groups should have been organised after undertaking a prior needs assessment- Revision and updating of the content of the MRE message should have been done, taking into account the constantly

changing realities on the ground.• The provision of jobs, and income generating opportunities is essential for survivors. There is the need for providing raw

materials for the construction of new limbs. It is important to create a survivor database. • Poor survivors should get some support for their treatment and for travelling to and from hospitals and rehabilitation centres. • The UNICEF strategy of including MRE into Child Protection cannot be implemented in a war situation.• The EC and UNICEF should provide adequate documentation for the evaluation.• The EC and UNICEF should timely organise meetings between key informants and the evaluator.• The evaluator should be allowed more time for his evaluation.• The MRE coverage of communities, community members and school children, should be better documented. Coverage should

be enlarged.• MRE for the adult community should be improved. • Where MRE is done by teachers, and found not to be satisfactory, UNICEF should make an effort to convince principals and

teachers that MRE is an important subject for all components of SL society. Efforts should be made to win the full support of the Ministry at the central and provincial levels.

• Town people should receive MRE and the necessary future MRE approach to should be different from the one used for rural people.

• MRE training of Security Forces should become a new specific sector of MRE activity• UNICEF and partner organisations should train more volunteers from towns and from IDP camps. To achieve its long term

objectives, UNICEF should probably give additional support to its partner organisations. • There is a new need to teach people how to behave during town battles or during air – artillery bombardments, how to defend

themselves taking cover (mainly in town) against shelling and glass splinters, with trenches (mainly in rural areas). People should be made aware of the new armaments which are or are going to be used.

• Collaboration between the GoSL and LTTE should be re-created and advocacy by UNICEF and partner organisations should be used to re-start a peace initiative, also facilitating MA and MRE activities.”

122 Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities

Page 123: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

XI. References

Page 124: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

1 Central Intelligence Agency (8 December 2010). The world factbook: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ce.html.2 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2001). Landmine monitor 2001 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2001&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.3 The Ministry of Economic Development (September 2010). The national strategy for mine action in Sri Lanka. Internal document.4 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka.5 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2001). Landmine monitor 2001 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2001&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.6 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka.7 The Ministry of Economic Development (September 2010). The national strategy for mine action in Sri Lanka. Internal document.8 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka.9 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2004). Landmine monitor 2004 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2004&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.10 Ibid.11 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2009). Landmine monitor 2009 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2009&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.12 The Ministry of Economic Development (September 2010). The national strategy for mine action in Sri Lanka. Internal document. Confirmed by UNICEF MA personnel on 1 December 2010.13 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (1999). Landmine monitor 1999 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=1999&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.14 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2004). Landmine monitor 2004 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2004&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.15 The Ministry of Economic Development (September 2010). The national strategy for mine action in Sri Lanka. Internal document.16 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2006). Landmine monitor 2006 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2006&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.17 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2007). Landmine monitor 2007 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2007&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.18 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2006). Landmine monitor 2006 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2006&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.19 Ibid.20 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.21 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2007). Landmine monitor 2007 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-

monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2007&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2009). Landmine monitor 2009 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2009&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.22 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-

monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2001). Landmine monitor 2001 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2001&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2009). Landmine monitor 2009 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2009&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.23 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka.24 The Ministry of Economic Development (September 2010). The national strategy for mine action in Sri Lanka. Internal document.25 Ibid.26 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (1999). Landmine monitor 1999 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=1999&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.27 Ibid.

Page 125: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

28 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (1999). Landmine monitor 1999 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-

monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=1999&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2004). Landmine monitor 2004 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2004&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.29 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.30 Ibid.31 Ibid.32 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2009). Landmine monitor 2009 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2009&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.33 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.34 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2004). Landmine monitor 2004 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2004&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.35 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2006). Landmine monitor 2006 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2006&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.36 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.37 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2001). Landmine monitor 2001 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2001&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.38 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.39 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2001). Landmine monitor 2001 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2001&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.40 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.41 Ibid.42 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2001). Landmine monitor 2001 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2001&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.43 Ibid.44 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2004). Landmine monitor 2004 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2004&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.45 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-

monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2003). Landmine monitor 2003 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2003&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2004). Landmine monitor 2004 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2004&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2005). Landmine monitor 2005 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2005&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2006). Landmine monitor 2006 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2006&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2007). Landmine monitor 2007 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2007&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.46 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.47 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2007). Landmine monitor 2007 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-

monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2007&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. 48 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2009). Landmine monitor 2009 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2009&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.

Page 126: Evaluation of UNICEF Sri Lanka Mine Risk Education Activities · Key strengths and challenges of UNICEF Sri Lanka’s MRE activities and recommendations by the evaluation team are

49 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.50 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2007). Landmine monitor 2007 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-

monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2007&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2008). Landmine monitor 2008 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2008&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=. 51 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2000). Landmine monitor 2000 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2000&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka.52 Sri Lanka Mined Area Database (2010). Summary statistics, 1 January 2000 – 6 September 2010.53 Ibid.54 Sri Lanka Mined Area Database (2010). Summary statistics, 1 January 2000 – 12 December 2010.55 Sri Lanka Mined Area Database (2010). Summary statistics, 1 January 2000 – 6 September 2010.56 Ibid.57 Ibid.58 United Nations Department of Safety and Security (8 September 2008). Casualties from Claymore attacks in Sri Lanka, 2006 – 8 September 2008. Internal document.59 United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (December 2010). Personal communication with Mine Action Specialist.60 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2001). Landmine monitor 2001 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2001&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.61 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (2002). Landmine monitor 2002 report: Sri Lanka. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.the-monitor.org/index.php/publications/display?act=submit&pqs_year=2002&pqs_type=lm&pqs_report=sri_lanka&pqs_section=.62 United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (December 2010). Personal communication with Mine Action Specialist and Mine Action Program Officer.63 United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (September 2010). Evaluation of UNICEF mine risk education activities: Terms of Reference (draft). Internal document.64 Ibid.65 Ibid.66 The Ministry of Economic Development and the United Nations Children’s Fund (3 November 2010). UNICEF donates 30 million rupees of supplies and equipment to Ministry of Economic Development de-mining unit. Press release. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://www.unicef.org/srilanka/SL_PR_MRE_30M_DMinin.pdf.67 Kalden, M. (December 2010). Feedback on school-based MRE. Internal document.68 United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (October 2010). Personal communication with Mine Action Specialist.69 United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 4: public information dissemination. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NXRPX/$file/imas-4gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.70 United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 6: community mine action liaison. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NZSJK/$file/imas-6gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.71 United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 7: monitoring. Retrieved 8 December 2010 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900sid/RURI-6NZSSR/$file/imas-7gen-nov05.pdf?openelement.72 Fonseka, A., Silva, KT, Jayasena, A. (July 2004). Mine risk education project of UNICEF: a formative evaluation.73 Ramazzotti, M. (November 2007). Mid term evaluation of the EC support to mine risk education and survivor assistance through UNICEF in Sri Lanka. Final report. Internal document.74 Fonseka, A., Silva, KT, Jayasena, A. (July 2004). Mine risk education project of UNICEF: a formative evaluation.75 Ramazzotti, M. (November 2007). Mid term evaluation of the EC support to mine risk education and survivor assistance through UNICEF in Sri Lanka. Final report. Internal document.76 United Nations Children’s Fund Sri Lanka (16 September 2010). Personal communication with Programme Communication Specialist.77 Saferworld (March 2008). Trap guns in Sri Lanka.78 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (3 October 2010). Personal communication with Landmine Monitor Country Researcher.79 Saferworld (March 2008). Trap guns in Sri Lanka.80 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (3 October 2010). Personal communication with Landmine Monitor Country Researcher.81 Saferworld (March 2008). Trap guns in Sri Lanka.82 Saferworld (2008). The Trap. Documentary film (dir. Prasanna Ratnayake).83 International Campaign to Ban Landmines (3 October 2010). Personal communication with Landmine Monitor Country Researcher.84 United Nations Mine Action Service (November 2005). IMAS mine risk education best practice guidebook 10: coordination. Retrieved 10 February 2011 from http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/lib.nsf/db900SID/RURI-6P3QKQ?OpenDocument.85 Ibid.