Violence and Women and Girls (VAWG) has emerged as one of the foremost concerns in recent years. As part of the Madhya Pradesh Urban Infrastructure Investment Programme (MPUIIP), DFID is funding the Safe Cities Initiative (referred to as ‘the Programme’) which is being delivered in 250 slums across four cities: Bhopal, Gwalior, Indore and Jabalpur. The Programme aims to create spaces where groups of women and groups of boys and men can learn skills, increase their awareness and understanding of women’s rights and the causes and consequences of VAWG.
New Concept is associated with Social Development Direct (SDDirect-UK) and Columbia University as the evaluation partner to undertake baseline and end-line impact assessment of the Programme. Safe Cities Initiative has also been designed to generate robust evidence on “what interventions work” and “what do not work” to reduce violence against women (VAW). Commissioned in June 2013 the evaluation design seeks to contribute to both
programme accountability and programme learning based on a theory of change.
The purpose of the evaluation is not only to seek evidence of the effects of the Programme overall, but to attribute these effects to specific interventions or combinations of interventions (i.e. to the three modules). To enable this attribution, the evaluation is based on a cluster Randomised Control Trial (RCT). Given the focus of the Safe Cities Initiative on working with women’s SHGs and groups of boys and men at slum-level, the slum was identified as the most logical unit of analysis. A set of evaluation hypotheses linked to the primary, secondary and intermediate outcomes – and to the existing VAW evidence base will be tested through the RCT. A mixed method approach was used at baseline. Quantitative data was collected through a household survey and qualitative through rigorous conducted Focus group discussions (FGDs).
1. Rigorous research design that was adopted by Columbia University sharpened understanding of RCT design.
2. Training was intensive in both quantitative and qualitative
3. Execution of FGDs was intensive both in terms of facilitation, note taking and report writing
4. Data collection on a sensitive issue as VAW (personal and public spaces) honed our facilitation skills further