PPDVP Evaluation Report - Pacific Prevention of Domestic Violence ...

Summy from questionnaires:Effectrveness ocross all PPDVP objectives:[I] = 1; [2] = 0; [3] = 6; [4] = 29; [5] = 29; [6] = 26; DNK = 13; N/A = 0PPDWP performance across 9 delivery elements:[I] = 0; [2] = 0; [3] = 6; [4] = 29; [5] = 45; [6] = 43; DNK = 43; N/A = 4Police Training across four questions:[I] = 0; [2] = 0; [3] = 0; [4] = 19; [5] = 22; [6] = 21; DNK = 27; N/A = 6Ranki ng Scales:(1) = vev low/poor; 121 = poor; [3] = below average; 141 = above average; 151 = good; [6] = very high/excellent.DNK = Do not know; N/A = Not applicableProgramme Objectives 4 & 5ObjecBve 4: To support the development of appropriate legislation on domestic violence and training of thejudiciory/legal profession in Samoa, Tonga, Cook Islands, Kiribati and VanuatuObjective 5: To support the development of appropriate national policy on domestic violence and incorporation ofappropriate actions in Notional Development Plans in Cook Islands, Tonga, Samoa, Kiribati and Vonuatu78. Under these objectives, the PPDVP was to support the development of appropriate nationalI egislation and policy on domestic violence, and inclusion of domestic violence in developmentplans; and to support training of the judiciary and legal profession. Achieving the Outputs underthese two objectives was outside the control of either the national Police Service or the PPDVP.Police have a role to play in these areas, and supporting this work is an appropriate objective, butpolice are not the key drivers for legislation, policy or national development plans. Each of the fiveparticipating countries either has, or is developing, relevant policies or National Plans and/orlegislation (eg Family Violence, Gender and Women's Empowerment). In-country police havegenerally been on the sidelines in this process, and it is not an appropriate area for PPDVP to be anactive participant.79. Training of the judiciary and legal profession is beyond the scope of the police and of the PPDVP.There are other organisations and programmes (such as RRRT, FWCC, PlLON and PJDP) which havethe appropriate skills and mandates, and are better suited to deliver such training. The PPDVP andthe national Police Service can and do play a useful role in providing input to this training, and thePPDVP has worked with other organisations to progress these objectives. For example the PPDVPworked closely with RRRT during the development of RRRT's current programme, provided a Pacificcase study fo; PILON's Litigation Skills Training in 2008 & 2010, and is in discussions with the PJOP tosupport the inclusion of domestic violence in judicial and courts training.so.Police are only one stakeholder in efforts to prevent domestic violence. To achieve the goal of asafer Pacific free of domestic violence, it may be necessary for donors and programmes focusing onthis issue to also consider providing and/or enhancing the existing levels of support for other (nonpolicing)stakeholders working in the field of SGBV such as domestic violence responseorganisations, NGOS and other agencies responsible for providing counselling services for victimsand offenders, and organisations and programmes delivering legislative assistance to the Pacific.In-Country Governance Systemsal. The Project Design Document envisaged a Management Group based within the Pacific PoliceService, responsible for maintaining an overview of the management and monitoring of the countryprogramme. It also envisaged a National Domestic Violence Prevention Committee or equivalent ineach participating Pacific Island Country, involving key in-country stakeholders working on theprevention of domestic violence. The rationale for this was to ensure in-country ownership andmanagement of the PPDVP country programmes. It is possible that the expectation of setting up in-- .-PPDVP Evaluation Report Page 14