Skip to content
← Back to Search

Final performance evaluation of USAID/Ecuador's program to support civil society : final report

2014EnglishPrefaced by informational memorandum | 'Prepared under RFTOP No. SOL-518-13-000009' | Evaluated project title: Strengthening civil society in Ecuador (SCS) (GF project) | Evaluated project title: Strengthening democracy in Ecuador (SD) (PC project) Redacted version Civil societyCODE: 518; Ecuador Latin America Andean Region

Metadata

Contract/Code
AID-518-A-11-00003 | AID-518-A-00-03-00054 | 518-A-00-03-00054-00
Institution
8414 - Mendez England and Associates 8538 USAID. Mission to Ecuador
Keywords
Accountability | Civic education | Civil society | Governance | Learning readiness | Political participation | Public opinion | Transparency JA34 Democratization (1632.0) | Rule of law (698.25) | Post conflict societies (285.6)
ID
PA00K2JD
File size
1661 KB
Source

Abstract

This final performance evaluation was designed to assess two projects supported by USAID/Ecuador: (1) Strengthening Civil Society in Ecuador (GF Project); and (2) Strengthening Democracy in Ecuador (PC Project).  The GF Project goal was to enhance the capacity of local CSOs to advocate for democracy-related issues and support efforts to influence legislation and policies related to the CSO sector.  Specific GF Project objectives were: (1) to strengthen the capacity of CSOs to effectively influence democratic processes, institutions, and (2) to increase adherence to democratic principles to strengthen the capacity of selected CSOs to develop more effective sustainability efforts and function more transparently.  The PF project's overall goal was to promote more effective citizen participation in key democratic processes and oversight of democratic institutions.  The project included the following key areas of activity: (1) support of advocacy, oversight, and capacity building efforts of 24 CSOs through small grant funds; (2) strengthen a national CSO network to build CSOs' capacities and promote collective action; (3) develop research studies and publications to enhance the work of the CSO sector; (4) identify and disseminate innovative practices within the CSO sector; (5) strengthen CSOs organizationally and institutionally through direct coaching and long-term formal courses; and (6) promote CSO sustainability through hands-on development of sustainability plans.  The evaluation was structured around four main categories of questions that apply to both projects, namely: (1) advocacy and oversight; (2) engagement; (3) local capacity development; and (4) sustainability.  Specific evaluation findings, conclusions and recommendations are provided with detailed analysis for each evaluation question.  (Excerpt, modified)