UNFPA Lebanon





	Launching of the GYP during the World Population Day July 11, 2005 - Movenpick Hotel, Beirut United Nations Population Fund, Lebanese Family Planning Association and Ministry of Social Affairs celebrated the "World Population Day" for the year 2005 on July 11th at the Movenpick Hotel. Two new UNFPA supported projects were announced during the opening ceremony being the GYP- HIV/AIDS prevention and the Reproductive Tract Infections Project executed by the Armenian Relief Cross NGO. Present were representatives of NGOs dealing with population issues, as well as from the Ministry of Education and Higher Education, Ministry of Public Health and Media professionals. The GYP participated in this celebration through a power point presentation, prepared by all and presented by two of us, introducing the project; its members, goals, and plan of action to the audience.

	GYPs Selecting Interventions Areas July-August 2005 The Ministry of Social Affairs (MOSA) and Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) in Lebanon, under the Reproductive Health program, aimed at improving the quality of health services within five of their centers. One of the main criteria for these centers as to become Center of Excellence (COE) is providing youth friendly services in addition to improving their over all health services for all age groups. Referring back to the plan of action that was developed by the GYPs, visiting these five centers of excellence (COEs) was one of the major activities to be conducted. These visits aimed at collecting data and carrying out a mapping of the 5 COEs in order to identify opportunities and facilitating factors for selecting 2 out of the 5 The centers affiliated to MOSA, MOPH and NGOS are located in the following areas of Lebanon: Two centers in Beirut (MOSA-Burj El Brajneh and Armenian Relief Cross Center-Burj Hammoud, one in Baalbak-MOSA, one in Tyer-Imama Al Khoumeini Health Center, and one in Aakkar-Wadi Khaled affiliated to Makassed NGO). An open ended questionnaire was developed by the GYPs with feedback and input from UNFPA office, the coach and UNFPA supported projects. The questionnaire included items on: 1- Types of services provided for youth 2- Activities and services addressing youth regarding HIV/AIDS 3- Service Providers (age, sex, level of education) 4- Clients of the centers (age, sex, level of education) 5- Opening times of the centers 6- Facilities provided for youth by the center 7- Obstacles faced concerning youth services especially those related to HIV/AIDS 8- Partnership within the community 9- Participation of youth in the planning, implementation and evaluation of services targeting youth 10- Evaluation and impact
	Some of the preliminary findings that appeared in our data were the following: All the centers provide services for all age groups including youth but none specifically targets youth themselves. Most of the centers have services on reproductive health in general like awareness and educational sessions but do not directly tackle HIV/AIDS problem in a direct way. Centers differed in their services provided for youth due to the cultural boundaries, values and believes that specifies each area. (open minded vs. Taboo) Some of the centers did not provide condoms for youth aged between 13 and 18; others had no problems providing these services for youth. The centers differed in their human and financial resources, some had young services’ providers, and others were above 30. In most of the centers there was very low percentage of youth visiting the center for health services. Most of the centers had workshops and training of trainers (TOT) programs for youth. Some other centers had activities in schools with youth like awareness and educational sessions and campaigns. All the centers identified more than one partner that provides financial, logistic, and technical support in addition to other kind of support like help in promoting good reputation.

	The following are some barriers identified by the service providers and GYPS: Lack of financial and human resources in some of the centers. Opening time of the centers is not appropriate to young people where they are either at schools, universities or work. Lack of support and encouragement for youth. Young people do not perceive such centers as youth friendly or as youth targeted. Youth do not do not feel concerned. They are not enough promotion strategies that attract youth to such centers. Cultural barriers like certain attitudes or beliefs, and taboo issues prohibit youth from visiting the center (For example, being in a very conservative area where people have their own religious believes, and values make the HIV/AIDS and sexuality issue very sensitive topic to discuss or talk about openly. It is considered a TABOO since people have lots of misconceptions regarding this topic. To them HIV/AIDS is only something related to forbidden sexual relationship that is socially and religiously unacceptable) The fact that certain political party (which has religious believes and constrains) is dominants or has control over the area makes things even more difficult, especially that this party has its own restrictions and rules. Thus this party has to be informed and has to agree on any project that would be implemented in the area. Without their agreement, any project could be stopped

	The field visits and data gathering steps were followed by the identification of a tool to select the two centers. Thus a matrix including key assessment areas was developed. A scoring sheet to select two centers out of the 5 visited ones was developed. The sheets took into consideration the following variables as criteria for selection: Availability of youth services and awareness (Provision of full range of Reproductive Health services/information including counseling; Provision of various awareness raising and outreach activities; Provision of selected and key HIV/AIDS related awareness activities; Facilitating factors) Service providers (Availability of a multi-disciplinary team; same sex; same age; trained on youth friendly services/awareness) Beneficiaries (Age 16-25; services requested by both sexes; secondary/university education; young people escorted by adults) Youth participation (Planning, implementation and monitoring; positive attitudes and readiness for youth participation) Community partnership (minimum 4 partners from diverse sectors; potential partners or decision makers from a minimum of 4 sectors) Accessibility (Full week services; AM and PM services; Youth drop in days and hours; facilitating factors making services accessible and available) Needs and attitudes (identified need) The two centers scoring high were Armenian Relief Cross in Borj Hammoud-Beirut and MOSA-Baalbeck. Thus they were selected and currently the GYP team is conducting the rest of the planned activities.

	GYP Capacity Development Workshop UN House-September 2005 Based on the advocates’ index that monitors the GYP progress, on recommendations of GYP resulting from the April 2005 workshop, on GYP needs assessment and achievements, the need to further optimize the capacities of the GYP was identified. Thus, a capacity development plan was developed by the UNFPA team and the coach including a training workshop. The Capacity Building Training Workshop took place on the 17th and 18th of September 2005 at the UN house, Beirut- Lebanon. The seven GYP were able to attend the workshop with enthusiasm and the readiness to learn new crucial issues. The objectives of the workshop were mainly three: To increase the GYP understanding of the response to HIV/AIDS at the international and national level. To further strengthen the GYP advocacy related skills. To build GYP capacities in managing their advocacy campaign. In order to meet the objectives of the workshop, the agenda consisted of the following topics: HIV/AIDS related International, Regional & National Epidemiological Situation, Gender & HIV/AIDS, Millennium Declaration & MDG Goal 6, Communication & Negotiation, Administrative and Communication Skills, Print Material Development and Proposal Writing. The approach adopted made the atmosphere of the workshop more diverse and allowed for sharing experiences. The methods used were very interactive and consisted of group work, film viewing, case study and stimulation. All of these objectives were attained during the two-day workshop and the GYPs were more than satisfied since all what has been previously suggested has been consequently successfully achieved. All the GYPs "agreed" or "strongly agreed" on that the workshop met their expectations, its objectives, the topics discussed were relevant to the objectives and that the methodologies used were appropriate. The GYPs revealed that they would require further skills and knowledge in "Negotiation skills", "Team building" and on "how to make a message clear" as part of communication. Another recommendation was to start the workshop with "heavy subjects" and "leave easier ones for the afternoon". Most of them found that the workshop was "very worthwhile" to their future work with the GYP initiative and also "very worthwhile" to attend it. One of the GYPs found that the "duration of the breaks was not adequate" and "was not sure" that "the length of the workshop was good" !! Finally, through building and strengthening GYP knowledge and skills in HIV/AIDS advocacy, global youth partners will have an improved quality of work, thus certainly be prepared to make the difference and become effective health leaders.