Evaluation of Rainforest Foundation Norway’s work in Indonesia

Background

RFN has worked with local partner organizations in Indonesia since 1997 with funding from various donors including Norad. In 2016, RFN had contractual partnerships with 11 local partners. A need was identified to assess the overall work of RFN in Indonesia across programs and projects.

Purpose/objective

To inform RFN’s process of formulating a new strategy for the work in Indonesia, we commissioned a report with input from partner organizations and other stakeholders in order to i) assess strengths and weaknesses with RFN’s current approach and ii) provide input to the next strategy period.

Methodology

The evaluation team interviewed all of RFN’s partner organizations either face-to-face or via Skype/telephone. A list of relevant stakeholders was provided the team by RFN, and most of these were interviewed too in order to provide external input. No field visits were conducted.

Key findings

Overall, RFN partners and other stakeholders are very positive about the work being undertaken by RFN in Indonesia and consider the organization to be doing important and relevant work. RFN is considered to be effective and focusing on the most important issues.

Most, if not all interviewees, are aware that the focus of RFN’s work. RFN is urged by major partners to continue to carry on with current themes and continue to advocate through their partners and internationally for rights-based forest protection plus developing sustainable livelihood of local communities and for the marginalized forest communities to realize sustainable livelihoods.

Recommendations

The report provides a list of 26 rather detailed recommendations. The recommendations to strengthen the network and cooperation between partners, and to increase the systematic capacity building of local organizations, are important and RFN will ensure to focus on this in the next strategy period. In general, the evaluation team suggests that RFN continues the work in Indonesia along the same lines without radical changes.

Comments from the organisation

In retrospect, it is clear that the evaluation team did not get enough time to do a thorough job on this evaluation (due to internal deadlines). As a result, the report is a bit thin, and does not provide the in-dept analysis that we hoped for. The report neither pays any attention to the work RFN has done on drivers of deforestation in Indonesia.

This subject will be covered in another evaluation currently undertaken by RFN, in which the organization’s work on drivers of deforestation is assessed across target countries.