“Local Development and Poverty Reduction” and “Asylum and Migration” Programmes
The evaluation of the “Local Development and Poverty Reduction” and “Asylum and Migration” EEA Grants programmes assessed their effectiveness, impact, and sustainability. Conducted through document reviews, stakeholder interviews, and field observations, the assessment aimed to measure programme achievements and extract key lessons for future implementation. The evaluation was implemented by Sarli Kouvaras Consulting.
For Programme I, Local Development and Poverty Reduction, the evaluation examined effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability. The programme demonstrated strong alignment with beneficiary needs, employing integrated and holistic approaches that facilitated cultural and systemic shifts beyond measurable outputs. Despite systemic and bureaucratic barriers, it effectively responded to emerging challenges. Resource allocation was efficient, maximizing direct impact, while adaptive and resilient implementation allowed for systemic ripple effects. Sustainability was supported through integration into public systems, though challenges in institutionalizing best practices remained. Deeper systemic integration is necessary for long-term impact. Recommendations for future programmes include strengthening monitoring and evaluation frameworks, expanding holistic service approaches, fostering collaboration with local governance and the private sector, and addressing systemic barriers while leveraging existing frameworks.
For Programme II, Asylum and Migration, the evaluation focused on effectiveness, sustainability, and impact. The programme excelled in high-quality delivery, holistic and multi-sectoral approaches, and capacity-building efforts. Flexibility and adaptability contributed to its success. Sustainability was driven by systemic change, long-term partnerships, and policy advocacy, though financial sustainability remains a concern. The programme had a lasting impact, increasing beneficiaries’ autonomy and integration, strengthening institutional frameworks, and driving systemic legal advocacy. To improve future efforts, recommendations include promoting equitable integration through education, employment, and social inclusion, strengthening institutional ownership and capacity, institutionalizing training and quality assurance mechanisms, enhancing referral systems and inter-agency coordination, and embedding advocacy, legal reforms, and structured transition strategies.
Key recommendations for implementing organisations include advocating for systemic reforms, strengthening holistic service models, investing in staff capacity and retention, enhancing strategic partnerships, engaging beneficiaries and communities at all stages, and prioritizing long-term sustainability. Local authorities and state actors should facilitate rather than directly implement programmes, address systemic barriers, support holistic service models, motivate multi-stakeholder collaboration, and enhance institutional capacity for policy implementation. Donors should fund scalable pilot projects, set realistic objectives, support flexible long-term funding, prioritize capacity-building, and facilitate stakeholder engagement while addressing institutional barriers.
This evaluation underscores the significant impact of the two programmes while identifying areas for improvement. Future initiatives should embrace holistic, collaborative, and adaptable approaches to enhance effectiveness and sustainability. Strengthening partnerships, addressing systemic barriers, and fostering long-term policy integration will be crucial in ensuring lasting change and greater societal impact.
