REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS TO PILOT A SAFE CITY FREE OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND GIRLS INITIATIVE IN INDIA

1.          Background[i] :

 

Across the world, in both developing and developed countries, women and girls experience various forms of gender-based violence in both private and public life. Based merely on their gender, on being born female, their lives are too often characterized by a continuum of violence that extends from the home to public spaces. Whether on city streets, public transportation or in their own neighborhoods, women and girls are subjected to various types of violence and abuse ─ from sexual harassment, both physical and verbal, to sexual assault and rape. Such daily occurrences limit the rights and freedoms of women as equal citizens to enjoy their neighborhoods and cities, and to exercise their rights to mobility, education, work, recreation, collective organization and participation in political life. Despite affecting countless millions of women, with often disruptive and devastating consequences, this phenomenon has long been tolerated as a regular facet of city life.  Whereas gender-based violence in the private domain is now widely recognized as a human rights violation, violence against women in public spaces remains a largely neglected issue, with few laws or policies in place to address it[ii].

 

Studies available from around the world confirm that high proportions of women are assaulted or fear assault in public spaces. In São Paolo, Brazil, a woman is assaulted every fifteen seconds.[iii] In Lima, Peru, only 12 per cent of women surveyed reported that they could move freely without fear of aggression.[iv] In Kenya, two of every five abused women report that they believe there is “nothing they can do to make Nairobi safer.”[v] Close to 60 per cent of women surveyed in Montreal, Canada, reported that they were afraid of walking alone in their neighborhood at night (compared to 17 per cent of men).[vi] While the data

available is limited, these statistics demonstrate the widespread and universally common problem of women’s insecurity in cities and the need to make them safer from a gender perspective.

 

Globalization, Urbanization and Insecurity: Violence in urban settings has become a common characteristic of living in cities, affecting the quality of life of all its inhabitants. Over the past decades of globalization, cities have experienced rapid transformations as a result of the economic, social, cultural, technological and communications shifts that urbanization processes bring with them, including changing patterns of social behavior and interaction.[vii] This includes rising insecurity: Over the past five years, 60 per cent of all urban residents in developing countries have been victims of crime[viii]. The issue of urban safety is especially critical today, since more than 50% of the world’s population lives in cities, equivalent to 3.4 billion people. Urban safety is also closely inter-related with poverty and inequality, both within cities and across countries: many of the world’s urban dwellers live in developing countries,[ix]including the vast majority of the one billion slum dwellers[x].

 

While many cities are the engines of economic wealth and employment and centers of cultural life, they are also marked by growing and pronounced socio-economic inequalities. Urbanization is a complex process of development that can lend itself to exclusion and social segregation. This is graphically depicted by how urban spatial distribution has evolved: cities are by and large characterized by the juxtaposition of wealthy urban developments with high quality public spaces, and low-income areas with poor quality services and degraded and abandoned public spaces. This geographic and physical disparity is closely associated with social segregation, as manifested in the high degree of stigmatization faced by city residents from poor areas, especially young people and others belonging to racial, ethnic or migrant groups, who are often blamed for urban insecurity and violence. In turn, these ostracized groups experience insecurity and fear in wealthier neighborhoods, which have literally and visually become fortresses of security.

 

In urban settings, intersections of insecurity occur based on, and are compounded by, factors such as gender, race and class identities and/or nationality status.  Generalized violence also ‘hides’ specific forms of violence against specific groups – such as against women and other socio-economic and ethnic minorities.  Concerns with urban crime often focus on protecting property rather than lives, with acts of violence against women and girls, or other minority and excluded groups, considered as isolated cases by indiscriminate perpetrators.  Gender-based violence in public spaces is thus accepted as part and parcel of overall violence, rather than recognized as rooted in the social structure of unequal power relations and gender discrimination.

 

The City Experience from a Gender Perspective: The socio-economic inequalities of urban life tend to mask root gender inequities and male-female differences of urban life. Women’s experiences of city life – beyond the fears and risks of outright violence and assault – are influenced by various forms of gender-based discrimination and abuse that are manifested in modern city life in more subtle ways, including exclusion from political and socio-economic participation and limited access to services in the context of economic development and privatization.

 

Women and men perceive and experience urban violence in different ways, with women’s reported perceptions of risks and insecurity often higher by comparison to men’s. The perception of insecurity fuels a cycle of fear, whereby women will avoid public spaces and this retreat from the public sphere in turn reinforces fear. At the same time, male violence is accepted as a ‘normal’ part of societal and gender relations, including high levels of urban male-to-male violence. Violence against women in public spaces is also rooted in the perception in many societies that women should not be out alone, especially at night, reinforcing men’s sense of entitlement to exercise harassment and violence as a means of exerting control and enforcing these gender norms. This is a common phenomenon in many parts of the world rooted in traditional notions of masculinity, widespread in the ‘machista’ cultures of Latin America as elsewhere. Another example is found in some societies of the Middle East and Asia practicing ‘purdah’, whereby women’s mobility is restricted by family codes prohibiting them from leaving the home unaccompanied.

 

Women not only perceive and experience cities differently then men, but they also use public spaces in different ways. Women often go shorter distances but to more diverse destinations in fulfilling their productive and reproductive roles, while men tend to go longer distances to a fixed destination that is their workplace. The use of public spaces, by sex, age and other factors, also fluctuates at different times of the day, and at different times of the year, for instance, based on seasonal work, school schedules, or other socio-economic and migration patterns. These additional factors are critical to consider in order to understand different societal groups’ perceptions and risks of harassment and violence. 

 

Furthermore, while women of all social and economic strata experience gender-based violence in public spaces, women and girls living in poverty or belonging to especially excluded groups bear the brunt of risks and dangers. This includes the fact that women living in impoverished areas have limited access to sewage systems, water, and other basic services, which require their mobility to ensure basic necessities are met, despite the absence of dignified and safe conditions.  Poor women who live in insecure neighborhoods are more likely to need to commute to or from work and educational opportunities at very early or late hours, or work as sellers in open markets; and, especially in peri-urban areas, may be exposed to the risks of sexual assault in the course of their daily routines such as for water collection. Low-income migrant women in xenophobic societies, displaced and refugee women, including in post-conflict or unstable situations, or women belonging to other minority or stigmatized groups (based on sexual orientation or other identities), face additional risks because of their ethnicity, nationality, age or other status, among other factors that place them at double and triple disadvantage. Young women stepping out of the bounds of strict gender norms for work, study or recreation, including at night, face particular risks and fears of harassment and violent acts.

 

Engendering Local Governance and Development through Women’s and Community’s Empowerment: Despite the context of urban violence, cities offer women multiple opportunities for female autonomy, as they are often also the stage for expanded freedoms from rigid gender norms and controls on their life choices and personal development. This underscores the notion that, by definition, cities based on principles of democracy, good governance[xi] and equality should work to eradicate violence against women and promote their empowerment and equal rights as citizens.[xii]

 

Beginning in the 1970s, ‘Take Back the Night’ became a prominent rallying theme for the women’s movement in large cities across the United States.[xiii] By the mid-1980s, various European cities began to address the issue, influenced by the demands of municipal women’s committees and feminist groups. One such example was in the United Kingdom, where the Councils of London, Manchester and Derby implemented a ‘safe cities’ governmental programme in 1988, part of Action for Cities Initiatives, launched to foster socio-economic development of urban centres concerned with increasing insecurity and violence. Another noteworthy example was in the Netherlands, where the Housing Ministry developed surveys that covered the issue of female security as a central tenet of governance.

 

These initiatives were echoed by feminists in Canada, where in 1989,  the original women’s safety audit was developed by the Metro Toronto Action Committee on Public Violence Against Women and Children (METRAC), with strong support from the local government, women’s and feminist groups, and backed by adequate resources, as a gender-specific response to growing concern about violence against women[xiv]. The ‘safety audit’ methodology began to be developed and adapted to diverse communities, in Toronto as well as in other regions of the world. The Toronto ‘safety audit’ experience empowered women from impoverished communities through training to assess their own neighborhoods for safety and to propose and demand practical responses in consultation with local authorities (e.g. improved street lighting, increased police presence, alternative security measures spawned by the community, etc.).

 

Today, the ‘safety audit’ methodology is widely considered a ‘best practice’ tool for informing policy-makers, empowering community members and setting in motion joint planning processes that can influence policy development and promote safety improvements for all community members. It is recognized by various international organizations, including the World Bank, the European Union, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, UN Habitat, the World Health Organization, the International Centre for the Prevention of Crime, and the European Forum for Urban Safety.[xv] Among its reported benefits are that it empowers marginalized communities, and enables multi-stakeholder partnerships and consensus-building; while serving to strengthen capacities and facilitate joint action. 

 

Other related methodologies, such as the ‘exploratory walks’, were implemented by Basque local authorities in Spain, integrating a strong focus on community women’s perspectives and perceptions of fear in cities. Similar experiences began to flourish in other parts of Canada and Spain, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Argentina, Brazil, India, Tanzania and elsewhere, further encouraged by the worldwide impetus to tackle the issue of women’s rights in urban settings. Two major civil society networks have taken the lead in working on Safe Cities for women ─Women in Cities International (based in Canada) and the Women and Habitat network in Latin America, both of which are linked under the global Huarirou Commission, an advocacy and lobby network-of-networks.

 

Increased mobilization on the issue of improving women’s safety in cities has led to a series of international conferences dedicated to the issue. The first was held in May 2002[xvi], followed by the Second International Conference on Safer Cities for Women and Girls (November 2004),[xvii] each with corresponding declarations adopted.[xviii] Networking events and panels were also organized around the June 2006 World Urban Forum III in Vancouver, in which the UNIFEM-supported programme in Latin America was also disseminated.

 

To date, Safe Cities for women initiatives have been undertaken across the world by grassroots and community groups,[xix] albeit many of small scope (e.g. covering a neighborhood block), as well as by a select number of local governments. The lady-only buses in Bangkok, for example, are well-recognized examples of a novel approach to promote women’s safety in public transport.[xx] Initiatives have also started up in recent years in Mexico D.F., Rio de Janeiro and other major cities of the world.

 

A safer cities approach views women’s safety within the larger ambit of urban design, urban governance and crime prevention thus working on a multi –pronged approach in order to bring about change. It affirms the importance of developing accountability frameworks for local governance that affirm the human rights of women and girls and secure their freedom from gender-based violence, freedom of movement, personal safety and security, and their rights to enjoy cities and the opportunities they offer. It also seeks to demonstrate how women’s expanded access to participation in public and political life can help transform social and public norms about women’s roles and contributions to enhanced local governance. Framed within a human rights-based, gender-responsive and culturally-relevant approach, it also aspires to support State Parties and local authorities in complying with the ‘due diligence’ standard of accountability[xxi] for preventing and responding to violence against women and girls, in line with existing human rights standards and instruments.

 

The Indian Context

 

According to the Indian National Crime Records Bureau's unique 'Crime Clock 2005’ which tracked criminal activities over 2004, the country reported one molestation every 15 minutes; one crime against women every 3 minutes; one dowry death every 77 minutes; one rape every 29 minutes; one murder every 16 minutes; and one sexual harassment case every 53 minutes.

http://wecanendvaw.org/Pdf/we_can_publication/presskit-v06.pdf

 

Violence against women is a serious problem in India. Overall, one third of women age 15-49 have experienced physical violence and about 1 in 10 have experienced sexual violence. In total, 35% have experienced physical or sexual violence. This figure translates into millions of women who have suffered, and continue to suffer, at the hands of husbands and other family members.

 The National Family Health Survey (NFHS)  Report III (2007)

  

Despite improving education levels and consistent economic growth, every form of violence against women including female foeticide, rape, abduction, trafficking, dowry death, domestic violence, and witchhunting, has been increasing. 10 million missing girls in India and this number is rising. Dowry deaths rose from 6822 in 2002 to 7026 in 2004. In 2005, highest number of dowry deaths were registered in Uttar Pradesh, followed by Bihar, and Madhya Pradesh. NFHS-3 shows that more than half of all Indian women believe that husbands can beat wives if they have an appropriate reason and 37% admit to being victims of spousal violence. Data from National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reveals little or no change in crime trends in rape and molestation. In 84–89% of the rape cases in the years 2002–04, the victim knew the offenders. In 9% cases, the offender was the father, family member, or close relative, highlighting the prevalence of incestuous and child sexual abuse. Abduction and trafficking for sexual and other exploitations accounted for 19.4% and 7.2% cases registered in 2005. Campaigns and stricter laws notwithstanding, 8.3% of registered cases in 2005 were dowry deaths, a fall of 0.3% from 2004. Despite the high incidence of VAW, reporting is rare and conviction rates for reported cases, abysmally low; conviction rate for cruelty by husband was 19.2% and 25.5% each for dowry and rape.[xxii]

 

Crime and violence are among the defining characteristics of many fast-growing modern cities. While crime may have impacts on the whole population, marginalized groups are much more vulnerable. Poverty is a major determining factor in terms of exclusion and denial of rights in cities. The poor face particular sorts of vulnerabilities based on where they live, their inability to approach the police, their lack of rights as workers often within the informal sector.  Women face the fear of sexual violence as a constant threat to their ability to move around, to work and their general well-being. Women may be vulnerable to being trafficked, or because of their cultural, migratory or minority status, or as single mothers. The intersection of these different identities further marginalizes them.

 

In 2006, a series of safety audits were conducted in Delhi by Jagori in 25 areas of the city including middle and lower income residential areas, resettlement colonies, markets, public transport, university, commercial areas etc.[xxiii] From these audits the following emerged as central safety concerns for women and girls in the city. These include poor urban environment - dark or badly lighted streets, derelict parks, badly maintained public spaces, inadequate signage, lack of public toilets.

 

Some of the more specific issues raised were:

v    Empty streets at night because of early closing of shops and businesses;

v    Residential, commercial and slums are often distantly located;

v    Long stretches of isolated roads;

v    Lack of a tradition of street life;

v    Poor public transport and rude/unhelpful/abusive behaviour of bus drivers and conductors, and fellow passengers;

v    Insufficient presence and unresponsive/aggressive attitudes of police and civic authorities;

v    Ideas and beliefs about appropriate behaviour, leading to reluctance to protest in cases of public violence;

v    A ‘macho’ culture and a lack of respect for women and women’s rights, leading to cases of violence being ignored or trivialised by the general public as well as those in positions of authority;

v    A very high level of perceived insecurity by women and girls while using public spaces

 

In the Eleventh Plan, for the first time, women are recognized not just as equal citizens but as agents of economic and social growth. The approach to gender equity is based on the recognition that interventions in favour of women must be multi-pronged and they must: (i) provide women with basic entitlements, (ii) address the reality of globalization and its impact on women by prioritizing economic empowerment, (iii) ensure an environment free from all forms of violence against women (VAW)—physical, economic, social, psychological etc., (iv) ensure the participation and adequate representation of women at the highest policy levels, particularly in Parliament and State assemblies, and (v) strengthen existing institutional mechanisms and create new ones for gender main-streaming and effective policy implementation.[xxiv]

 

Citizens Charters in India[xxv]

In India, citizens charters as prepared by government organizations outline municipal functions in relation to citizens, addressing reforms and public grievances to a higher degree than, for example citizen’s participation in urban processes. The following are three examples of City Charters:

 

v  The City of Vishakapatnam (state of Andhra Pradesh) through the Greater Vishakpatnam Municipal Corporation provides a series of municipal functions and responsibilities in its citizen’s charter (http://www.gvmc.gov.in/CitizensCharter/CitizensCharter1.html )

v  In 1998-1999, the Citizens Charter of Coimbatore was published by the City Municipal Corporation of Tamil Nadu in compliance with a Tamil Nadu State Government Order. In addition to municipal functions and responsibilities, it includes statements of commitment and partnering processes with citizens (http://www.coimbatore-corporation.com/Dwnld Forms/CitizensCharterEnglish.pdf)

v  The citizen’s Charter of New Delhi is very extensive. It lists the resources and infrastructure provided by the New Delhi Municipal Council as well as details response time for a variety of grievances and issues (http://www.ndmc.gov.in/AboutNDMC/User_CitizenCharter.aspx 

 

Forms of Violence in the Focus of the Pilot Project

 

In terms of the forms and definitions of violence, this project will focus on gender-based violence against women and girls in public spaces and will be understood to cover: sexual violence, including sexual harassment (verbal, physical), unwanted sexual advances (such as being touched, grabbed or brushed against in a sexual way), rape or attempted rape and fatalities resulting from such violent assault, and degrading remarks or gestures of a sexual nature. Stalking ─ including via use of modern communications technologies (e.g. SMS/texting), an emerging form of gender-based violence ─ will be included on a case-by-case basis depending on local context. (Note that this definition draws in part on the CEDAW General Recommendation 19 on violence against women.[xxvi] Given the importance that the perception of insecurity plays in affecting women’s mobility, the project will also try and measure changes in this regard, since changes in actual levels of crime and security (objective realm) do not always translate to reduced levels of fear (subjective realm).[xxvii]

 

While the focus will be on sexual harassment and sexual assault in public spaces, in line with the concept of a continuum of violence from private to public spaces, the project will also assess the degree to which it generates responses to other forms of violence against women in both public and private spaces  (such as incidents of intimate partner violence that occur in public or on streets; kidnapping and abduction for purposes of trafficking or forced marriage practices such as ‘bridenapping’; acid throwing; and robberies and muggings, in which gender is an aggravating factor increasing women’s vulnerability though they are not necessarily gender-specific forms of crime). In addition, other forms of crime and violence are anticipated to be positively impacted through the practical safety measures introduced, with benefits for the public at large. The expectation is that, given the project’s emphasis on public awareness, community mobilization and capacity development of ‘duty bearers’, both public authorities and the public at large will be more likely to react and intervene when witnessing such acts.

 

Note that while adopting this definition and scope for purposes of this project, UNIFEM acknowledges that a comprehensive understanding of the concept of ‘Safe Cities free of violence for women and girls’ is a much broader one that includes domestic and intimate partner violence in the private sphere as well as other forms committed in public spaces, such as sexual harassment and violence in schools, workplaces, refugee camps, cross-border migration, among other acts of violence in rural as much as in urban areas that depend on women’s daily routes and roles in specific settings (e.g. rape in farm fields, during daily survival and family caretaking tasks of women and girls). Thus, outside the parameters of this project, UNIFEM prefers to espouse the more encompassing term ‘Safe Communities Free of Violence against Women and Girls’. 

 

Theory Of Change[xxviii]

Through a process of partnership-building with and capacity development of local government authorities and community-based organizations, and of women’s empowerment and community mobilization for social change, investment in  practical measures for improving women’s safety in urban spaces can lead to reduced prevalence of gender-based violence against women and girls within a three-to-five year time-frame, expanding women's exercise of their rights to enjoy public spaces and freedom of mobility. The approach can also lead to personal security for all community members; as well as to potentially advancing women’s rights and gender equality across a wider spectrum of socio-economic dimensions

 

Strategies

Based on the evidence-base available on promising and effective approaches, core strategies can include:

 

·                     Capacity development of duty bearers, rights holders and other key actors (e.g. local authorities, service providers, women’s, youth, men’s, other grassroots and community groups, the media

·                     Ongoing policy-oriented advocacy with local and national authorities and other key stakeholders

·                     Forging constructive dialogue and partnerships between local governments and community and grassroots groups on prevention of violence against women, women’s empowerment and gender equality;

·                     Outreach and partnership with the media for awareness-raising, community mobilization and advocacy components;

·                     Public awareness and community mobilization utilizing transformational approaches, including  ‘social sanctions’ and ‘zero tolerance’ approaches that make violence against women in public spaces `not acceptable’. This would focus on outreach to men and boys, and young people of both sexes as especially strategic agents of change, and involve partnerships with men’s and youth groups and networks committed to gender equality. This, among other components, would also imply applying a masculinities approach across interventions;

·                     Gender-responsive budgeting, as a strategic approach for advocacy, policy development, monitoring and promoting sustainability;

·                     Facilitating policy linkages and coordination across local, district, provincial and national levels.

·                     Safety audits

 

Key programme components related to these strategies include:

 ·         Carrying out a comprehensive baseline assessment and mapping exercise in each city site of intervention, including as regards: prevalence and incidence of violence against women and girls, with a focus on identifying forms of violence occurring in public spaces, especially sexual violence, abuse and harassment; identification of perpetrator profiles, both private and State actors (e.g. police, public transport employees), and primary spaces in which acts of violence are committed; surveys of attitudes, perceptions and experiences of violence against women in public spaces (of women, men, young people, local policy-makers, police, health providers, media representatives, among others); and analysis of existing policies, laws, procedures, programmes, services and actors/sectors related to the programme’s focus.

·         Carrying out capacity gaps analyses, and developing and implementing capacity development plans for duty bearers and rights holders, based on the baseline assessment findings. This will imply a more in-depth analysis of the existing data, knowledge, skills, mechanisms, policies, and institutional readiness to undertake and sustain quality Safe Cities for women and girls interventions; as well as provide inputs for the programme’s indicators and measurement of results.  Importantly, it will also map and assess the quality and responsiveness of existing services and referral systems in place to support gender-based violence survivors (one of the criteria, based on ethical and experiential considerations, for selection of the sites, see later section).

·         Empowering and training community-based and neighborhood women’s groups in human rights, women’s rights, gender equality and gender-based violence; governmental commitments (including international agreements such as the Beijing Conference and the CEDAW); carrying out safety audit methodologies (with women, youth and/or other specific groups); community organization and mobilization; developing and budgeting proposals for the required safety interventions; and effective policy-oriented advocacy, including via facilitation of local-to-local dialogues between authorities and grassroots groups. In addition, women community leaders who will serve as spokespersons for the concerns and demands of women from their excluded communities and groups would receive mentoring and support in advocacy and public speaking skills (building also on the empowerment processes with impoverished female neighborhood leaders under the UNIFEM-supported programme in Latin America). 

·         Sensitization, advocacy, skills-building, training and sharing of good practice with local government representatives and other main stakeholders on key aspects related to making cities safe for women and girls (e.g. local women’s machinery offices, mayor’s offices, public transportation, urban planning, police and other security personnel, among others) – to foster ownership and sustained commitment by local authorities to implementation of the strategies. This includes strengthening familiarity with international and regional policy frameworks that call for local governments to strengthen support and resources for women’s inclusion in city governance (e.g. the World Charter for Women’s Rights to the City, 2004[xxix]; the European Charter for Women in the City, 1997[xxx]; the International Union of Local Authorities agreement on gender and cities, 1998[xxxi], among others); and access to learning opportunities about similar initiatives implemented by other local authorities, including through South-South and North-South exchanges and select study tours. The latter may also include exploring the development of ‘twin cities’ arrangements for ongoing coaching and cross-fertilization of experiences. Quality technical assistance will be made available to local authorities throughout the programme for implementation and monitoring of practical measures and response systems to prevent gender-based violence in public spaces.

·         Supporting targeted advocacy and technical assistance for policy and legal reforms, as needed, to embed adequate measures for prevention, protection, care and punishment of acts of violence against women and girls in public spaces in local governance, and facilitate alignment with international human rights standards. Such measures include public ordinances, decrees and protocols, among others; as well as identification of sector-specific incentives and sanctions tied to individual and institutional performance for addressing violence against women in public spaces.

·         Specialized training of key sectors directly responsible for implementing the Safe Cities project, including the security and transportation sectors, community outreach and education workers, grassroots women leaders, as well as the wider network of emergency and referral services implied (e.g. service delivery women’s organizations and NGOs, health service providers, lawyers and judges).     

·         Sensitization and trainings with media outlets and journalists, and development of communications and outreach plans in order to foster public dialogue and awareness, and influence policy discussion on the issue (i.e. radio and television, public service announcements in mass media and mass public transport, etc.).

·         Community mobilization for prevention of violence against women and girls, including through awareness-raising (using the media, public and neighborhood events); targeted prevention efforts through communication for social change with strategic groups, including adolescents and young people of both sexes, engaging men, faith-based leaders, others; and involvement of the education sector and civil society (youth, women’s, men’s groups, others) in ‘zero tolerance’. To be effective, this key prevention component, aimed at effecting transformations of attitudes and practices, will adopt an ecological[xxxii] and multi-faceted approach, with emphasis on the community and societal levels. This will include a combination of possible activities most suited to local context and culture, from community educational sessions (e.g. same sex as well as mixed sex group discussions, those targeted at specific groups such as young people); use of mass media; ‘edutainment’ approaches (e.g. theatre, sports, the arts), public marches and marathons, etc.  

·         Reaching out and working with young people of both sexes in the areas of intervention, including supporting youth-led policy-oriented advocacy efforts and skills-building in this regard; as well as their role in community-based mobilization for prevention and ‘zero tolerance’.

·         Developing explicit strategies to reach out to and mobilize men in the community on ‘zero tolerance’ for violence against women and girls, including through tailored communications and educational components applying masculinities perspectives, centered on positive messages of inclusivity, collective responsibility and engagement (aimed at the significant proportion of non-violent men in the communities), also in relation to their roles as local leaders, employers, fathers, husbands, and community members.

·         Ensuring information on accessing multi-sectoral services and referral systems is available to women and girl survivors of gender-based violence and integrated throughout the programme, including through legal literacy and human rights education at community and grassroots levels, as well as through dialogue about the programme and partnership with the local entities responsible for informing about and providing such services (e.g. police, health, judiciary, women’s support groups, etc.).

·         Training for and undertaking gender-responsive budgeting exercises at local levels, to cost, assess and promote adequate local government budgetary appropriations for absorbing, sustaining and expanding the Safe Cities interventions. This component will also explore, wherever possible, incorporating costs for safe cities initiatives in the relevant programme or departmental budgets in order to mainstream Safe Cities investments in strategic policy frameworks (e.g. security sector, urban planning, transportation, judiciary). The particular context and challenges posed by decentralization in each city site will be analyzed to develop tailored strategies, given the potential for varying degrees of autonomy of local authorities in determining budgets.

·         Advocating for and supporting the establishment of participatory mechanisms for policy-making consultation and monitoring with civil society, with a view to building effective accountability frameworks within local government with inputs from community representatives.  These could be nurtured, for example, via the local-to-local safer cities dialogues and safety audits; and through linkages to existing local and/or national observatories on gender equality and ending violence against women, among other opportunities subject to local context. Once institutionalized, such accountability mechanisms could provide the consultation and decision-making platform for instituting ongoing improvement measures; and help ensure enforcement of complaint and redress mechanisms for women by public sector entities.

 

Expected Outputs

v    Methodological safe city model piloted in India

v    Agreement reached between rights holder and duty bearers in the pilot Indian city/cities on what constitutes  a safe city model

v    Community women’s, youth and other grassroots groups (rights holders) from the pilot city/Cities n India have acquired knowledge, skills and organizational capacities to mobilize on Safe Cities and demand their rights and entitlements

v    Local authorities’ (duty bearers) from the pilot city/cities in India have knowledge, skills, partnerships, and commitments to preventing and responding to violence against women in public spaces have increased

 

UNIFEM is inviting proposals from national or regional (governmental, non‐governmental or academic institutions) to pilot a multi-stakeholder safe city pilot initiative in India. This initiative will be linked to the UNIFEM Global Programme (2008-2014) on “Safe Cities Free of Violence against Women and Girls”.

 

UNIFEM promotes initiatives based on the following approaches:

·         Human rights-based and gender-responsive approaches that place paramount priority on promoting, protecting and fulfilling the human rights of women and girls, as well as strengthening institutional capacities at local and national levels to eliminate all forms of violence against women. This includes addressing inequitable gender norms and power disparities as the root cause of violence against women and girls, and as a violation of human rights and an impediment to development.

·         Holistic and multi-sectoral responses that address women’s inter-related rights and needs in terms of prevention and response to violence against women and girls, including safety and protection, access to health, legal, property and inheritance rights, and economic security and rights.

·         Focus on priority groups living in poverty and otherwise especially excluded or disadvantaged, ensuring responsiveness to diversity by tailoring interventions to particular population groups.

·         Coordination and partnership-building, including among government entities, civil society organizations, especially women’s groups, and networks.

·         Commitment to sharing knowledge, by documenting, evaluating and disseminating results.

·         Evidence-based programming, building on lessons learned and recommended practices, to ensure optimal results and use of resources.

 

Submission of proposals:

 

Detailed proposals in English along with complete supporting documentation should be submitted to UNIFEM South Asia Office in by close of business (COB) on 12 June 2009.

 

Criteria for Selection of Safe City Project Site

·                     City in which public safety and security is a priority issue on the policy agenda of the local government and civil society; 

·                     City area in which forms of violence against women in public spaces is high (i.e. sexual harassment, sexual assault, rape);

·                     Local government is committed to gender equality issues, with favourable context for policy development on women’s empowerment and ending violence against women, including expressed commitment to this Safe Cities initiative.

·                     Area of intervention is a city neighborhood characterized by insecurity, inequality, poverty and/or exclusion (where especially neglected groups reside);

·                     Local neighborhood groups or social structures are present in the area of intervention of the city;

·                     Existence of organized civil society women’s networks who can lead the advocacy efforts and support capacity development of grassroots women’s groups;

·                     Existence (or adequate accessibility in nearby communities) of multi-sectoral referral services for women and girls victims/survivors of gender-based violence (including sexual assault and rape);[xxxiii]

·                     High probability of uptake in the local public budget in the medium-to-longer-term (sustainability);

Institutional and other factors (environmental, political) that guarantee measurement of results (in both qualitative and quantitative terms);

 

The submission should not exceed 8-12 pages and should specify the following: Detailed proposals ONLY for phase 1 need to be submitted at this stage along with a well-developed outline for phase II.

 

Phase 1 of the project for 18 months should focus on – problem definition, diagnostics (mapping, base-line assessment, capacity gaps analysis), developing comprehensive project design (conceptual and evaluation), sites selection, building initial partnerships, curriculum development

 

Phase II – should focus on implementation - capacity building, advocacy campaigns, site-specific interventions, mid-term evaluation, deepening partnerships, etc

 

v    Organization contact details

v    Project Scope and Definition

v    Purpose, Intended use, Beneficiaries, Theory of change

v    Goals (long-term objectives, change of state, or improved situation to which the Safe Cities intervention is intended to contribute)

v    Strategies – including sustainability plan

v    Outcomes (likely to be  achieved short-term and medium-term effects or changes of an intervention’s outputs)

v    Outputs (the products, services that result from the intervention) indicated by year

v    Activities (actions taken or work performed through which inputs are utilized to produce the outputs above)

v    Inputs (money, human and material resources used in the intervention – funding, trainers, equipment, etc)

v    Key partnerships

v    Monitoring and Evaluation – provide information on how the baseline information will be collected, how the project will be documented, monitored and evaluated

v    Organization’s background, profile and key experts to be involved in the project.

 

Key competencies

 

Demonstrated capacity to:

 

v  Design a comprehensive project design,

v  Design and conduct diagnostic surveys and capacity gap analysis,

v  Provide evidence-based recommendation for selection of at least (XXX number) sites for programme implementation and ideally (for impact evaluation) XXX control sites. (at least 2

       intervention sites and 2 control sites. Intervention sites should be NEW)

v  Design and conduct evaluation, including base line and end line studies,

v  Lead and facilitate building of community-based partnerships,

v  Design adapted to the local context comprehensive curriculum on GBV and Safe Cities approaches, and deliver capacity building activities (trainings, workshops, participatory surveys, inclusive but

        not limited to safety audits);

v  Design and lead communications and advocacy activities.

 

Key Competencies of the Institution/Agency

The Institution/Agency should be a strong policy-research-and-advocacy organization (NGO) or an academic institution - both with proven track record of quality policy research, connections with and access to multiple key stakeholders (local government's/youth groups, etc). Explicit and proven commitment to/expertise in women's rights and EVAW/EGBV work is a must, as well as shown ability to work successfully with the government on GBV issues/programmes. Details of past achievements as result of work must be spelled out in the application.

 

Governmental authorities at central//national, sub national and /or local levels may apply individually or along with a civil society organization.

 

 Breakdown of financial costs should include:

v    Personnel

v    Base-Line Assessment and Mapping

v    Capacity Gaps Analysis

v    Curriculum Development/Adaptation

v    Training/Seminars/Workshops for key stakeholders on the issues identified by Capacity Gaps analysis

v    Advocacy/Campaigns

v    Equipment (specify)

v    Publications and documentation

v    Contractual services (specify)

v    Monitoring (including travel, other)

v    Evaluation

v    Dissemination of project’s materials and results (knowledge management)

v    Organizational support (communications, materials)

v    Audit

v    Total

  

Budget requests should be within the range of $70,000 to a maximum of $100,000 for a duration of 18 months for phase I activities (in excel with detailed footnotes or a separate line-by-line budget narrative). The budget breakdown for year I and year II should be indicated separately.

 

Phase II activities should be costed as well – initial grant will only be for phase I activities

 

In all cases, emphasis will be placed on demonstrating clear expected results and how they will be achieved; capacity development and sustainability strategies; synergies and coordination with existing initiatives to end violence against women and girls (including those supported by the governments, civil society organizations, donors and the UN system. However the specific intervention sites should be NEW); and matching funds from UN agencies, private donors and governments, wherever possible. Proposals must summarize what capacities will have been installed by the end of the programme and how achievements will be sustained once the grant has ended. A clear indication of how the intervention will be documented and evaluated, and its results disseminated should be included in the proposal.

 

Submission of Proposals:

Proposals can be sent via email to registry.unifem.in@unifem.org mentioning “Proposal to pilot a safe city for women and girls initiative in India” in the subject line

 

If not available in electronic copy, hard copies of proposal and supporting documentation can be to mailed or faxed to

 

Registry

UNIFEM South Asia Regional Office

D-53 Defence Colony, New Delhi – 110024

Fax: 91-11-24622136