Peacebuilding Project

Proyecto Tejiendo Paz

Quarterly Performance Report

FY20Q2

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International
Development by Creative Associates International, Inc. (April 30, 2020)

1
Contents
Acronym List .................................................................................................................................. 3
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 4
Resumen Ejecutivo ......................................................................................................................... 5
Program Overview and Background ............................................................................................... 8
Problem Statement ...................................................................................................................... 8
Theory of Change, Goal, and Objectives .................................................................................... 8
Context and Analysis................................................................................................................... 9
Analysis of Project Implementation.............................................................................................. 11
Challenges and Lessons Learned.............................................................................................. 11
Social Inclusion and Gender Integration .................................................................................. 11
Migration .................................................................................................................................. 13
Private Sector Engagement and Cost Share ............................................................................. 14
Operational and Project Management Activities ..................................................................... 15
Geographic Plan/ Community Selection ....................................................................................... 16
Collaboration with Impact Evaluation Team ................................................................................ 17
Narrative of FY2019 Activities by Objective/ Result................................................................... 17
Objective 1: Establish and/or strengthen inclusive community-led engagement, dialogue, and
mapping to identify, prioritize, and develop action plans addressing sources of and increase
resilience to social conflict ....................................................................................................... 17
Objective 2: Build partnerships between communities and external entities to implement plans
................................................................................................................................................... 27
Objective 3: Strengthen GoG and non-governmental capacity to participate in managing,
responding to, and resolving local conflicts .............................................................................. 30
Monitoring & Evaluation Activities and Indicator Data............................................................... 34
Coordination, Compliance, and Future Activities ........................................................................ 37
Collaboration with USAID Partners and Other USG Agencies ............................................... 37
Security Considerations ............................................................................................................ 37
Development Experience Clearinghouse .................................................................................. 37
Training Events ......................................................................................................................... 38
Success Stories .......................................................................................................................... 38
Future Activities: FY20Q1 ........................................................................................................ 39
Annexes......................................................................................................................................... 41

2
Acronym List
CF Community Facilitator
CentraRSE Centro para Acción de la Responsabilidad Social Empresarial
CICIG Comisión Internacional Contral la Impunidad en Guatemala
COCODE Consejo Comunitario de Desarrollo
COP Chief of Party
COPREDEH Comisión Presidencial de Derechos Humanos
CPD Comisión Presidencial del Diálogo
CRA Conflict and Resilience Analysis
CV Community Vision
DCOP Deputy Chief of Party
DEC Development Experience Clearinghouse
DEMOS Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios para la Democracia Social
EWS Early Warning System
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
GoG Government of Guatemala
IE Impact Evaluation
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NGO Non-governmental organization
PDH Procurador de los Derechos Humanos
PIRS Performance indicator reference sheets
PMP Performance and Monitoring Plan
PNC Policia Nacional Civil
RFA Request for Application
SAA Secretaría de Asuntos Agrarios
SARTCA Early Warning and Response System for Agriculture Conflicts
SBCC Social behavior change communication
UCN Unión del Cambio
UNE Unidad Nacional de la Esperanza
USAID United States Agency for International Development
USG United States Government

3
Executive Summary
Summary of Key Activities

Collaboration with the Impact Evaluation Team: After the external evaluator shared technical
concerns last quarter regarding the likelihood that the project Peacebuilding+ intervention would
be able to produce effects that could be detected, largely due to budget constraints, and reaching
an impasse on a feasible solution, United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
decided to discontinue the impact evaluation (IE), effective January 2020. The project has
continued to implement in the communities randomized by the IE. Despite discontinuing the
impact evaluation, there will still be valuable information and lessons learned that can be drawn
from the baseline data.

Community Implementation: This quarter, the Peacebuilding Project concluded community

entry and the rapid stakeholder analysis in the municipalities and communities in the first entry
group. The project also updated the community entry strategy based on lessons learned from the
first group of communities. The project began the conflict and resilience analysis (CRA) in all 27
target communities. The project also started engaging with potential youth participants that will
form the Voceros Juveniles networks. In
response to the COVID-19 crisis, the
project suspended community level work
in mid-March, but has stayed in touch
with project participants to understand
the evolving situation in their
communities and to assess potential
sources of social conflict that may arise
due to the virus. The communications
team also published key messages related
to mitigating conflict due to the health
crisis in Spanish, Mam and K’iche on
project social media pages.

Grants and Partnerships: As of March 2020, the Peacebuilding Project was ready to award the
following small grants that are designed to building partnerships and respond to initial conflict
assessments: 1) assessment of Government of Guatemala (GoG) early warning systems; 2)
formation of community mediator network; 3) assessment of Comisión Presidencial de Derechos
Humanos (COPREDEH) psychological support needs; 4) design of a behavior change campaign
focused on inter-familial violence; and 5) implementation of municipal peace fairs. Some of the
small grants include desk work and interviews that can be done remotely, but given the inability of
partners to travel to the areas of intervention and uncertainty over the severity of the crisis, the
project reevaluated which small grants should be currently awarded in light of the COVID-19 crisis.
The project determined that two of small grants can be implemented in the short-term at least in
part virtually and are the most relevant in the context of the widespread health crisis: inter-familial
violence prevention campaign and GoG early warning systems. The remaining grants will be
awarded when appropriate.

4
Institutional Strengthening: The project reaffirmed relationships with incoming representatives
from GoG entities responsible for managing, responding to, and resolving local conflicts,
particularly COPREDEH, Comisión Presidencial del Diálogo (CPD), Procurador de los Derechos
Humanos (PDH) and Secretaría de Asuntos Agrarios (SAA). The project organized the first
departmental inter-institutional meeting this quarter, which took place in Huehuetenango and
focused on conflicts related to natural resources. The project also continued to work with the PDH
on strategic communications around social conflict, holding two meetings in FY20Q2. The team
was prepared to implement a capacity building program with the GoG and NGOs and was finalizing
materials for a conversación comprehensiva on conflict related to youth and migration. Since the
outbreak of COVID-19, these activities are on hold, although the project is continuing to document
and finalize the methodologies and/ curricula and will be ready to resume when feasible.

Challenges and Lessons Learned

The biggest challenge this quarter was the need to respond quickly and responsibly to a rapidly
evolving COVID-19 crisis. The entire Peacebuilding Project began working remotely on Tuesday,
March 17, in compliance with government instructions. The project community facilitators are in
regular communication via telephone with community leaders and members to understand the
evolving COVID-19 situation in their communities, providing regular updates to the USAID and
GoG partners. The team has developed a robust remote workplan and holds regular virtual check-
ins. All in-person activities are currently on hold and as such the FY2020 implementation timeline
is likely to shift.

The project community selection process was designed taking into consideration impact evaluation
restrictions and Do No Harm principles, and as such the project did not hold community level
interviews prior to selection. As a result, there is a possibility of communities deciding not to
participate in the project during the community entry stage. In total, 27 out of 33 communities in
the first group have decided to participate in the project. Prior to the COVID-19 crisis, the project
was analyzing the possibility of expanding into communities from the control group in the first
group of municipalities. However, entry into any new communities is on hold until the COVID-
19 crisis has subsided.
Indicator Data

Number of people participating in project activities that address the peaceful management and
resolution of conflicts: During FY20Q2, a total of 933 unique individuals (533 women and 400
men) participated in project activities that addressed the peaceful management and resolution of
conflicts.

Indicator 1.0: Number of citizens engaged in cooperative community dialogue, including

community vision (CV) development: During FY20Q2, 772 citizens (443 women and 329 men)
engaged in cooperative community dialogue through the conflict and resilience analysis and first
session of the vocero juvenil methodology.

Indicator 3.0: Number of trainings, exchanges, and coordination meetings with GoG and/ or non-
governmental organizations related to preventing, managing, and resolving conflict: During
FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding Project held five coordination meetings related to preventing,
managing, and resolving conflict with GoG and NGO representatives.

5
Resumen Ejecutivo
Resumen de las actividades clave

Colaboración con el Equipo de Evaluación de Impacto: Después de que el evaluador externo

compartiera el trimestre pasado sus preocupaciones técnicas en relación a la probabilidad de que
la intervención del proyecto "TejiendoPaz+" pudiera producir resultados que pudieran detectarse,
debido en gran medida a las limitaciones presupuestarias, y de que se llegara a un punto muerto
en cuanto a una solución viable, la Agencia de los Estados Unidos para el Desarrollo Internacional
(USAID) decidió suspender la evaluación de impacto, a partir de enero de 2020. El proyecto se ha
seguido ejecutando en las comunidades aleatorizadas por la evaluación de impacto. A pesar de la
suspensión de la evaluación de impacto, todavía habrá información valiosa y lecciones aprendidas
que se pueden extraer de los datos de referencia.

Implementación Comunitaria: Este trimestre, el Proyecto Tejiendo Paz concluyó el ingreso a la

comunidad y el análisis rápido de actores en los municipios y comunidades del primer grupo de
ingreso. El proyecto también actualizó la estrategia de ingreso a la comunidad basada en las
lecciones aprendidas del primer grupo de comunidades. Inició el análisis de resiliencia y conflictos
(ARCO) en las 27 comunidades. El proyecto también comenzó a involucrarse con posibles
participantes jóvenes que formarán las redes de Voceros Juveniles. En respuesta a la crisis de
COVID-19, el proyecto suspendió el trabajo a nivel comunitario a mediados de marzo, pero se ha
mantenido en contacto con los participantes del proyecto para comprender la evolución de la
situación en sus comunidades y evaluar las posibles fuentes de conflicto social que puedan surgir
debido al virus. El equipo de comunicaciones también publicó mensajes clave relacionados con la
mitigación del conflicto debido a la crisis sanitaria, en español, Mam y K'iche en las páginas de
redes sociales del proyecto.

Alianzas y asocios: A partir de marzo de 2020, el Proyecto Tejiendo Paz estaba listo para otorgar
las siguientes pequeñas subvenciones que están diseñadas para construir asocios y responder a las
evaluaciones iniciales de conflictos: 1) evaluación de los sistemas de alerta temprana del Gobierno
de Guatemala (GdG); 2) formación de una red de mediadores comunitarios; 3) evaluación de las
necesidades de apoyo psicológico de la Comisión Presidencial de Derechos Humanos
(COPREDEH); 4) diseño de una campaña de cambio de comportamiento centrada en la violencia
intrafamiliar; y 5) implementación de ferias municipales de la paz. Algunas de las subvenciones
incluyen trabajo de escritorio y entrevistas que se pueden hacer de forma remota, pero dada la
incapacidad de los socios para viajar a las áreas de intervención y la incertidumbre sobre la
gravedad de la crisis, el proyecto reevaluó qué pequeñas subvenciones deberían otorgarse
actualmente a la luz de la crisis del COVID-19. El proyecto determinó que dos de las pequeñas
donaciones pueden implementarse a corto plazo, al menos en parte, de manera virtual y son las
más relevantes en el contexto de la crisis de salud generalizada: la campaña de prevención de
violencia intrafamiliar y la evaluación de los sistemas de alerta temprana del Gobierno de
Guatemala. Las subvenciones restantes se otorgarán cuando corresponda.

Fortalecimiento Institucional: El proyecto reafirmó las relaciones con los representantes

entrantes de las entidades del Gobierno de Guatemala responsables de la gestión, la respuesta y la
resolución de los conflictos locales, particularmente la COPREDEH, Comisión Presidencial del

6
Diálogo (CPD), Procurador de los Derechos Humanos (PDH) y Secretaría de Asuntos Agrarios
(SAA). El proyecto organizó este trimestre la primera reunión interinstitucional departamental,
que tuvo lugar en Huehuetenango y se centró en los conflictos relacionados con los recursos
naturales. El proyecto también continuó trabajando con la PDH en la comunicación estratégica en
torno al conflicto social, realizando dos reuniones en este trimestre. El equipo estaba preparado
para implementar un programa de desarrollo de capacidades con el GdG y las ONG y estaba
finalizando los materiales para una conversación comprensiva sobre los conflictos relacionados
con la juventud y la migración. Desde el estallido de COVID-19, estas actividades están en
suspenso, aunque el proyecto sigue documentando y finalizando las metodologías y/o planes de
estudio y estará listo para reanudar cuando sea factible.

Desafíos y lecciones aprendidas

El mayor desafío este trimestre fue la necesidad de responder de una manera rápida y responsable
ante de la crisis de COVID-19 en rápida evolución. Todo el equipo del Proyecto Tejiendo Paz
comenzó a trabajar de forma remota a partir del martes 17 de marzo, de conformidad con las
instrucciones del gobierno. Los facilitadores comunitarios se comunican regularmente por teléfono
con los líderes y miembros de las comunidades para comprender la situación cambiante de
COVID-19 en sus comunidades, proporcionando actualizaciones periódicas a USAID y GdG. El
equipo ha desarrollado un plan de trabajo remoto robusto y realiza reuniones virtuales regulares.
Todas las actividades presenciales están actualmente en espera y, como tal, es probable que el
cronograma de implementación del año fiscal 2020 cambará.

El proceso de selección comunitarias del proyecto se diseñó teniendo en cuenta las restricciones
de evaluación de impacto y los principios de Acción sin Daño, y como tal el proyecto no realizó
entrevistas a nivel comunitario antes de su selección. Como resultado, existe la posibilidad de que
las comunidades decidan no participar en el proyecto durante la etapa de ingreso a la comunidad.
En total, 27 de las 33 comunidades del primer grupo han decidido participar en el proyecto. Antes
de la crisis de COVID-19, el proyecto estaba analizando la posibilidad de expandirse a algunas
comunidades del grupo de control en el primer grupo de municipios. Sin embargo, el ingreso a
nuevas comunidades está en espera hasta que la crisis de COVID-19 haya disminuido.

Datos de los Indicadores

Número de personas que participan en las actividades del proyecto para la sensibilización en el
manejo y la gestión pacifica de los conflictos: Durante FY20Q2, un total de 933 individuos únicos
(533 mujeres y 400 hombres) participaron en actividades del proyecto para la sensibilización en el
manejo y la gestión pacifica de los conflictos.

Número de ciudadanos participando en el dialogo comunitario cooperativo, incluyendo el

desarrollo de las visiones comunitarias: Durante FY20Q2, un total de 772 ciudadanos (443 mujeres
y 329 hombres) participaron en el dialogo comunitario cooperativo a través del ACRO y la primera
sesión de la metodología de voceros juveniles.

Número de espacios de capacitación, intercambio y articulación para la prevención, gestión, y

resolución de conflictos: Durante FY20Q2, el Proyecto Tejiendo Paz realizaron cinco reuniones
de articulación relacionadas a la prevención, gestión y resolución de conflictos.

7
Program Overview and Background
Problem Statement

The proliferation of social conflict marks the social and political landscape of Guatemala. These
conflicts manifest themselves through roadblocks, public protests, and seizures; in some cases
leading to dialogue, and in others escalating into further conflict. These tensions play out against
a backdrop of endemic poverty, inequality, insecurity, and weak institutions, which can be seen as
results of entrenched corruption. Government of Guatemala (GoG) institutions struggle with low
levels of citizen confidence due to challenges in delivering public goods and services to rural
communities. The historic and pervasive marginalization of indigenous people in Guatemala
magnifies these issues. Having suffered disproportionately during the internal armed conflict, with
devastating effects on the social fabric and wellbeing of communities, the Western Highlands are
particularly vulnerable to conflict and violence. The marginalization of communities in the
Western Highlands of Guatemala has also led to high levels of migration from this region, both
internally to urban areas and externally to the United States. The youth bulge, limited economic
and civic participation opportunities, and gang and criminal violence further threaten stability.
Family violence and gender-based violence (GBV) are common, and the full involvement of
women in social, political, or economic development is limited by interconnected territorial,
ethnic, and gender inequalities. To address these challenges and achieve the goal of conflict
reduction and improved social cohesion in the Western Highlands, the Peacebuilding Project will
effect change at the individual and group levels (relationship-building) and the socio-political level
(institutional strengthening). This approach is critical to the effectiveness and long-term
sustainability of peacebuilding efforts.

Theory of Change, Goal, and Objectives

To achieve the goal of reducing social conflict and violence and improving social cohesion and
peacebuilding in the Western Highlands, the Peacebuilding Project is guided by the following
theory of change:

8
The Peacebuilding Project has three mutually reinforcing objectives:
Objective 1: Establish and/or strengthen inclusive community-led engagement, dialogue,
and mapping to identify, prioritize, and develop action plans addressing sources of, and
increasing resilience to social conflict;
Objective 2: Build partnerships between communities and external entities to implement
these plans; and
Objective 3: Strengthen GoG and non-governmental capacity to participate in managing,
responding to, and resolving local conflicts.

Context and Analysis

This quarter started with the swearing-in in mid-January of a new president of Guatemala, the
congressional representatives of 2020-2024 legislative period and all mayors and their municipal
councils. The transition, as expected, was largely peaceful and free from serious conflict.
• Executive office: the incoming government started its mandate with a focus on “bringing
prestige” back to presidency and distinguishing itself from the outgoing government. This
quarter, the President Giammattei created the Comisión Presidencial contra la Corrupción
in an effect to address corruption and fill the void left by the departure of the Comisión
Internacional Contral la Impunidad en Guatemala (CICIG). The commission reports
directly to the president, although it is still not clear what type of powers and
responsibilities will be given to the commission.
• Legislative branch: The new congress is characterized by a high number of parties, 19 in
total. Only three have more than nine representatives – Vamos (the party of President
Giammattei and the president of congress) with 17, Unidad Nacional de la Esperanza
(UNE) with 52, and Unión del Cambio (UCN) with 12. The other 79 representatives are
divided among 16 parties. This dispersion of political parties means that representatives
will need to form alliances to get legislative initiatives passed. The major legislative
initiative passed this quarter was the Ley de Organizaciones No Gubernamentales para el
Desarrollo, known as the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Law, which imposed
additional restrictions on international and local NGOs operating in the country1. Despite
pressure from civil society groups concerns about transparency and freedom of expression,
President Giammetti signed it into law. The Constitutional Court then provisionally
suspended enactment of law and final ruling on its constitutionality is currently pending.
• Municipal governments: On January 15, one day after the president and congress were
sworn-in, 340 municipal governments took their offices throughout the country. Of the 15
municipalities in which the Peacebuilding Project will work, 13 have new mayors. The city
councils in all 15 changed members.

On March 5, President Giammattei declared a 30-day state of calamity (which was later extended)
in response to the raising global COVID-19 crisis. A state of calamity provides the GoG with
powers to take exceptional measures to protect its national security. On March 13, two days after
the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a global pandemic, Guatemala reported its
first confirmed case of the virus. The Guatemalan Government quickly closed their boarders,
barring entry to most non-Guatemalans and suspending commercial air traffic. On March 16,

1
https://www.wola.org/analysis/qa-guatemalas-controversial-ngo-law/

9
President Giammattei announced that public transportation was suspended immediately and that
places where people gather in groups, such as shopping malls and restaurants, would be closed
(excluding supermarkets and pharmacies). He also encouraged non-essential businesses to close
or work remotely, although he later stated that they could stay open if they took steps to ensure the
hygiene and safety of their workers. Under the state of calamity, the Guatemalan Government
imposed a nationwide curfew from 4:00pm – 4:00am. The curfew was originally instated from
March 22 – 29 but was extended into April.

Many municipalities and communities took their own additional actions to restrict individuals from
entering and/or exiting their jurisdiction. For example, in Quetzaltenango where the central project
office is located, municipal authorities set up check points and stated that only residents and those
with justifiable reasons can enter the city. Smaller municipalities throughout the western highlands
have taken similar measures.

These restrictions have implications for seasonal workers that come from other parts of the country
or southern Mexico and returnees who have been deported from the United States or Mexico.
There are fears that these citizens may return to their communities carrying the virus, and some
municipalities have restricted their entrance. Some returnees have refused to take medical tests
being requested by local health authorities. There is a potential for increased social conflict around
COVID-19 and internal and external migration.

The mostly rural communities in which the Peacebuilding Project works have expressed fears
around the implications of measures being taken to prevent the spread of the virus:
• Lack of access to food: given the suspension of public transportation, closing or restricted
hours of local markets, increases in prices of basic goods, and lack of money due to limited
economic opportunities, many communities have concerns over being able to access food.
• Economic loses: many rural communities depend on an informal economy, which is being
hit hard by the closing of businesses, inability for people to sell goods in the street and the
suspension of transportation. In addition, many families depend on remittances sent by
family members in the United States, which have dwindled during this crisis.
• Lack of adequate medical attention: communities in the western highlands depend on small
health centers or posts, which many fear may not be adequately prepared to provide the
necessary services to respond to a massive COVID-19 outbreak.
• Increase in violence and conflict: lack of money, lack of food, inadequate medical
attention, returnees refusing to take medical tests, and community members not respecting
quarantine or curfews all have the potential to result in increased violence and conflict.

The COVID-19 crisis has the potential to be particularly devasting for vulnerable communities
that already have limited access to government services and who depend on an informal economy.
A wide-scale health crisis could exacerbate underlying conflicts and give rise to new conflicts,
particularly related to particularly related to governance (e.g. lack of access health services,
inability of municipal governments to deliver essential services such as water) and youth, gender,
and families (e.g. increase in inter-familial and gender-based violence). The severity of a potential
crisis depends on multiple factors that are hard to predict, but the Peacebuilding Project is prepared
to support communities as appropriate and needed, particularly taking into consideration Do No
Harm and conflict sensitivity approaches.

10
Analysis of Project Implementation
Challenges and Lessons Learned

The biggest challenge this quarter was the need to respond quickly and responsibly to a rapidly
evolving COVID-19 crisis. In response to the situation in Guatemala, the project made the
following decisions and adjustments:
• Given the risks around continuing to implement community activities, the project
community facilitators suspended all field activities as of Monday, March 16.
• The entire Peacebuilding Project began working remotely on Tuesday, Marcy 17, in
compliance with government instructions. Each team member is located in their
municipality of origin (which in some - but not all - cases corresponds with the target
municipalities).
• In response to the funding situation, the project had entered an additional municipality in
the first group and was planning to enter the second group of municipalities later in the
fiscal year. Entry into new municipalities is on hold until a) there is the potential for follow-
on funding (so that the project can complete at least one cycle of the community
implementation cycle); and b) the COVID-19 crisis is under control.
• The project community facilitators are in regular communication via telephone with
community leaders and members to understand the evolving COVID-19 situation in their
communities, providing regular updates to the USAID and GoG partners.

The team has developed a robust remote workplan and holds regular virtual check-ins. Please see
the Future Activities section for activities that the Peacebuilding Project will implement next
quarter if the team is unable to resume in-person activities.

As noted in previous reports, the project community selection process was designed taking into
consideration impact evaluation (IE) restrictions and Do No Harm principles, and as such the
project did not hold community level interviews prior to selection. As a result, there is a possibility
of communities deciding not to participate in the project during the community entry stage.
However, given the original IE restrictions, the project would not change the community selection
approach. In total, 27 out of 33 communities in the first group have decided to participate in the
project. Prior to the COVID-19 crisis, the project was analyzing the possibility of expanding into
communities from the control group in the first group of municipalities. However, entry into any
new communities is on hold until the COVID-19 crisis has subsided, and the team can analyze
needs and priorities based on a potentially new context with potentially different types of conflict.

Social Inclusion and Gender Integration

Social inclusion and gender are an integral part of the Peacebuilding Project design. The project is
designed to engage with a diverse range of participants, including marginalized groups such as
women, youth, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) communities. The
Peacebuilding Project design is also intrinsically focused on engagement with indigenous peoples
as the project target communities are predominantly indigenous and speak Mayan languages.
During FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding Project continued to integrate the following actions into
programming.

11
Gender Integration
• Encourage Gender Representation: The Peacebuilding Project promotes equal participation of
men and women in project activities. The project has gender representation within the
community implementation team, with six men and nine women. This quarter, female
participation in the CRA sessions was 55 percent. Within the project consultative committee,
there is gender parity with five women and four men participating as members.
• Facilitate Gender Perspective in Conflict and Resilience Analysis: CRA sessions were
organized by groups, allowing women to work in small groups with other women to ensure
that their perspectives are effectively included in the CRAs. During the first three sessions,
women identified social conflict, analyzed the causes and effects for them, their families and
communities, and mapped conflict, risk, and safe places. Additionally, session four is
specifically designed for all community members to reflect on and analyze the role of women
in conflict resolution. Results from CRAs with gender perspectives will facilitate the inclusion
of priority issues for both women and men in the community visions (CVs).
• Promote Women as Leaders in Conflict Resolution: The Peacebuilding Project seeks to support
women in strengthening their capacity as leaders so that they can take on more active roles in
community decision-making and in the resolution of social conflict. This quarter the Asesoras
de Cambio methodology was developed. Women community members have been identified as
potential Asesoras de Cambio and the trainings will start following the COVID-19 crisis when
the team can return to the communities.
• Prevent Gender-Based Violence: One of the types of conflicts that the project is seeing in all
communities is GBV. A Request for Applications (RFA) to develop and implement a social
behavior change communication (SBCC) campaign to reduce domestic violence (including
gender-based violence) in Western Highlands was published this quarter and will be awarded
next quarter. One of the project impact indicators is “percentage of community members
reporting domestic violence as unacceptable under any circumstances.”
• Establish a Gender-Sensitive M&E System: Results from the CRA sessions were entered in
the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) system with separate records of participation by gender.
In addition, one of the project performance indicators is “number of local women participating
in a substantive role or position in a peacebuilding process supported with USG assistance.”

Youth Participation
• Facilitation of Youth Perspective and Representation in CRA: Youth representatives
participated in all CRA sessions. Youth identified social conflict as well as risk and resilience
factors, which will be incorporated in the community visions. The fourth section of the CRA
incorporates exercises to analyze the contribution of youth in social conflict resolution.
• Promotion of Youth Leadership in Conflict Resolution: The methodology for Voceros
Juveniles was developed this quarter, which is designed to support youth in strengthening their
leadership skill as well as capacities to monitor the implementation of the community visions.
A group of potential youth were identified to participate as Voceros Juvenil in the target
communities; the trainings will resume following the COVID-19 crisis.

Indigenous Representation
• Respect for Indigenous Culture, Cosmovision, Values and Practices: The community entry
strategy is designed to respect indigenous values and practices. Community facilitators met

12
 with the community mayors, which represents indigenous community members, and requested
their endorsement and support for the project. The perspective of indigenous communities
regarding conflict was collected in all sessions as majority of participants are indigenous.
• Facilitate Participation of Indigenous Women and Men in Project Activities: The majority of
the people that participated in CRA were indigenous. Two members of the project consultative
council are indigenous.

Migration

The departments of the Western Highlands of Guatemala have some of the highest rates of outward
migration in the country. The root causes of migration are complex and intertwined, with economic
opportunities, violence and conflict, and family reunification often cited as the most common
drivers. Data on returnees tends to be the most reliable data on migration given that the numbers
are tracked by governmental agencies; however, it does not necessarily capture actual migration
rates and it is not disaggregated at a community level.

Through the impact evaluation baseline, the project has been able to analyze quantitative
information on community members intention to migrate and some of the drivers of this intention
to migrate. The baseline was implemented with 3,866 respondents in 186 communities in 15
municipalities in the departments of Huehuetenango, Quiché, San Marcos and Totonicapán. The
project is developing external communication materials around the findings, but has identified
initial results:
• 18.5 percent of respondents have considered leaving Guatemala to live, work or study in
another country in the last twelve months.
• 14.2 percent of respondents have considered moving to another part of Guatemala to live,
work or study in the last twelve months.
• 18.9 percent of respondents have had someone in their household move to another country
in the last three years.
• 10.7 percent of respondents have had someone in their household move to another part of
the Guatemala in the last twelve months.
• Controlling for other factors such as age, work, marital status, perceptions of security and
trust, asset-based poverty and the amount of time they have lived in the community, men
are more likely to want to migrate both abroad and internally compared to women.
• Likewise, age is important in the intention to migrate both externally and internally. Older
individuals seem to be less likely to want to migrate, with the rest of the variables remaining
constant.
• Individuals with higher levels of education are more likely to want to migrate both
internally and externally.
• Those individuals who feel more secure in their community are less likely to want to
migrate both internally and externally. Likewise, those individuals who think that their
community is more peaceful also have a lower probability of wanting to migrate.
• Those individuals who have suffered threats of physical violence in their communities are
more likely to want to migrate both abroad and internally.
• Finally, those individuals who think that their neighbors are trustworthy or highly
trustworthy are less likely to migrate both internally and externally.

13
Please see Annex A for an internal report on findings from migration questions in the impact
evaluation.

Private Sector Engagement and Cost Share

The Peacebuilding Project cooperative agreement includes a 10 percent cost share requirement.
While cost share can and will be identified across the three project objectives, the team anticipates
leveraging support from external partnerships in implementing the community visions as a critical
component of this, which means that the majority of the cost share related to community-level
implementation cannot be identified until the CVs are developed, originally anticipated to start in
FY20Q4 and continuing into FY2021.

Depending on the length and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, this crisis could impact the
projects capacity to identify cost share as planned this fiscal year. As noted, the team anticipates
identifying cost share opportunities to finance parts of the CVs once they are developed. So, if
there are significant delays in their development because the team cannot resume community level
work, there may also be delays in identifying cost share for their implementation. In addition, an
extended crisis could have a negative impact on the economy, affecting the private sector and their
corporate social responsibility efforts. As noted in Objective 2, the team will maintain relationships
with private sector contacts throughout the crisis.

An External Resource and Grants Strategy, which will be finalized next quarter, will include an
updated cost share budget, identifying potential sources of funding. Until the CVs are developed,
the team will continue to identify other options for cost share.

Table 1: Cost Share Reported in the Quarterly Financial Report (QFR), FY20Q2
Activity Dates/ Location Activity Description Cost Share
Name
Gender, February 19-23 Discuss the experiences and proposals of US$2,550.00
Childhood & migrant women and defenders; the role that
Youth on the Baja California, minors play in current migration dynamics,
Move México making their needs and specific proposals
visible; and begin to identify joint
opportunities to address migration between
donors, civil society organizations and
other actors. This activity contributes to
results under Objective 1.
TOTAL US$2,550.00

The Peacebuilding Project started identifying community level cost share this quarter, specifically
meeting spaces donate and participate time. While many communities have limited resources and
may not be able to contribute large amounts, any contributions from local sources ensures
ownership and sustainability.

Table 2: Peacebuilding Project Community-Level Cost Share, Disaggregated by Municipality

FY20Q01 (Oct-Dec 2019) FY20Q02 (Jan-Mar 2020)

14
 Municipality/ Value of use Value of Value of use Value of Total
Department of meeting participant of meeting participant community
space 1 hours2 space 1 hours2 contributions
Chiantla,
Huehuetenango US$182.02 US$382.33 US$377.71 US$548.55 US$1,490.61
San Pedro
Nécta, US$78.29 US$635.99 US$272.57 US$1,371.38 US$2,358.24
Huehuetenango
Comitancillo,
San Marcos US$117.43 US$628.64 US$285.55 US$1,506.69 US$2,538.32
Totonicapán,
Totonicapán US$104.38 US$742.61 US$324.49 US$1,561.55 US$2,733.03
TOTAL US$482.12 US$2,389.58 US$1,260.33 US$4,988.18 US$9,120.21

The Peacebuilding Project began engaging with municipal authorities that were re-elected during
FY20Q1. As a result, both of those municipalities committed to providing a workspace in City
Hall to the project community facilitators.

Table 3: Peacebuilding Project Municipal-Level Cost Share

Municipality/Departament Value of office space use for project activities1
San Pedro Nécta, Huehuetenango US$260.26
Totonicapán, Totonicapán US$390.38
TOTAL US$650.64
(1) The value of the office space was determined based on the market value of similar spaces that could have
been rented for office use.

The Peacebuilding Project is committed to identifying cost share and as such is reporting these
contributions in the narrative report. However, given the COVID-19 crisis, the team was unable to
finalize the financial documentation necessary to support the costs (which require certifications
from community and municipal authorities). Once the team can visit community and municipal
authorities to finalize this documentation, these costs will be reported in the QFR.

Operational and Project Management Activities

Human Resources: The new project Finance Manager started this quarter. The HQ Regional
Finance Manager traveled to Guatemala to provide with orientation and an introduction to Creative
financial systems. The project Security Manager left the project this quarter and the team was
internally restructured to cover the responsibilities of the position. Please see the Security
Considerations section for more details.

The Deputy Chief of Party (DCOP)/Objective 3 resigned in November 2019. Given that the
DCOP/Objective 1 was not replaced per the June 2019 contingency plan approved by USAID, and
to have a more unified programmatic approach, Creative replaced both positions with a single
DCOP/Programs that oversees all programmatic aspects of the project. The candidate, who is key
personnel, was approved by USAID and started this quarter. This position is now based in
Quetzaltenango (although she is currently in Guatemala City for the duration of the COVID-19
crisis).

15
Subwards and Grants: Creative HQ and the field team reviewed and responded to USAID’s
comments to the Peacebuilding Project grants manual in FY2019 and are awaiting its approval.

Geographic Plan/ Community Selection

During FY2019, the Peacebuilding Project team selected 195 communities in 15 municipalities,
which were then randomized into 130 intervention communities (65 Peacebuilding core and 65
Peacebuilding+2) and 65 control communities by the external evaluators. As planned, the project
began implementing a phased approached, entering four municipalities and 33 communities in
FY20Q1. As of FY20Q2, 27 of the 33 communities randomized through the IE were participating
actively in the project. Please see Challenges and Lessons Learned section for more details.

Table 4: Municipal Entry, Group 1 (Entered in FY20Q1)

Predominate Language3
Department Municipality Community
Español Mam K’iche’
Communities participating in the Peacebuilding Project
Patio De Bolas X
Chuscaj X
Chiantla Las Tejas X
(six communities) Capilla X
La Zeta X
El Rancho X
Huehuetenango La Pinada X
Tepán X
Camposeco X
San Pedro Nécta
Jolimex X
(seven communities)
San Pedro Necta X
El Rancho X
Canoguitas X
Las Flores X
Tuichilupe X
Agua Tibia X
Comitancillo
San Marcos Vista Hermosa X
(seven communities)
La Torre X
Comitancillo X
Chicajalaj X
Nimasac X
Totonicapán Chuicaxtun, Chiyax X
Totonicapán
(seven communities) Pachoc X
Cojxac X

2
Per the design of the USAID contracted impact evaluation, the 130 project intervention communities were divided into two groups: 65
Peacebuilding core communities that were to receive the project intervention and 65 Peacebuilding+ interventions that were to receive the project
intervention plus an additional intervention focusing on women’s participation. Peacebuilding+ was envisioned as being a specific (or multiple
specific) actions that the project team, USAID, and the IE team believed would allow women to more actively participate in the community
vision development process. Please see the Collaboration with the Impact Evaluation Team section for more details.
3
This information comes from the IE baseline questions: ¿Cuál es su idioma materno?

16
 Predominate Language3
Department Municipality Community
Español Mam K’iche’
Nimapa X
Poxlajuj X
Tzanixnam X
Communities that decided not to participate in the Peacebuilding Project
Huehuetenango Chiantla Ocubishal X
Las Presas X
Santo Tomas X
San Marcos Comitancillo Chixal X
Los Ángeles X
Totonicapán Totonicapán Mactzul X

Collaboration with Impact Evaluation Team

The Peacebuilding Project originally included an external impact evaluation as part of its project
design. The IE team randomized the 195 selected communities into 65 peacebuilding core
communities, 65 peacebuilding+ communities, and 65 control communities and conducted a
baseline survey in the 195 communities in September and October 2019. The baseline dataset was
shared with the Peacebuilding Project during FY20Q1.

After the external evaluator shared technical concerns last quarter regarding the likelihood that the
project Peacebuilding+ intervention would be able to produce effects that could be detected,
largely due to budget constraints, and reaching an impasse on a feasible solution, USAID decided
to discontinue the IE, effective January 2020. The project has continued to implement in the
communities randomized by the IE.

Despite discontinuing the impact evaluation, there will still be valuable information that can be
drawn from the baseline data. Creative is working on a proposal for potential midline and endline
evaluation activities should additional funding become available. The IE survey included questions
that respond to indicators in the project performance and monitoring plan (PMP), which will be
reported on next quarter. The Peacebuilding Project has not received the baseline data report that
was to be developed by NORC, the external firm responsible for implementing the IE. The project
is internally analyzing the dataset received by NORC to report against the approved impact
indicators. The baseline data will also be used in making decisions about expanding to new
municipalities and communities in the future. Finally, baseline data will be incorporated into the
community context analysis and action plans.

Narrative of FY2019 Activities by Objective/ Result

Objective 1: Establish and/or strengthen inclusive community-led engagement, dialogue, and
mapping to identify, prioritize, and develop action plans addressing sources of and increase
resilience to social conflict

17
Following the completion of the community selection process, the Peacebuilding Project team
began implementing activities under Objective 1 in late FY2019 and continued with the process
in the first group of four municipalities and 27 communities this quarter.

Figure 1: Community Implementation Cycle

Result 1.1. Communities are prepared to come together to discuss and address social conflict

Activity 1.1.1. Train Community Facilitators (CFs)

A strong community implementation team is key to the success of all Peacebuilding Project
activities at the community level. In addition, building local capacity is one of the project’s core
implementation principals and is critical to building long-term sustainability beyond the life of the
project. A follow-up training with the community implementation team to reinforce skills related
to addressing social conflict was scheduled for the last week in March. However, due to the
COVID-19 crisis, it was postponed. ProPaz and the DCOP began working on virtual training
capsules that will be implemented virtually over the next quarter.

Activity 1.1.2 (originally 1.1.3). Develop the Project’s strategic communications strategy

Strategic communications is a fully integrated component of the Peacebuilding Project design. As

such, the project communications team developed a strategic communications strategy in FY2019
to guide program communications across the three objectives. As of FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding
Project was awaiting USAID approval of the communications strategy.

18
The project communications
strategy is designed to allow the
team to communicate issues around
social conflict as they emerge and
evolve. As such, the team was able
to respond quickly in developing
messages related to the COVID-19
crisis and the implications that it
may have on social conflict in the
western highlands. During the last
two weeks of March, the team
published key messages and shared
information related to mitigating
COVID-19, including in local
languages K’iche and Mam4. For the duration of the crisis, as part of the projects focus on
supporting communities, government entities and traditional authorities in addressing sources of
and resilience to conflict, the Peacebuilding Project team is well positioned to continue to
communicate and promote clear, fact-based information on how communities can prevent the
spread of the virus and mitigate consequences of the health crisis that relate to social conflict.

Activity 1.1.3 (originally 1.1.4). Design and implement community entry strategy (Step 1)

The community entry strategy is designed to initiate contact with key stakeholders early on at the
departmental, municipal, and community levels to generate interest and support, as well as ensure
a shared vision of expectations. Community entry started last quarter and continued into FY20Q2
in the first group of municipalities.

As part of the projects commitment to learning and adapting, the community implementation team
updated Peacebuilding Project community entry strategy based on lessons learned from
implementation in the first group of municipalities and communities. This revision took place
during the period of remote work due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Please see Annex B for the
updated Peacebuilding Project Community Entry Strategy.

Municipal Level: During the community entry process, the community implementation team starts
engaging with municipal authorities to present the project and generate buy-in. The meetings serve
as an opportunity to formally communicate to municipal leaders that their municipality has been
selected for participation and to share which communities the project will implement in. It is also
an opportunity to respond to any questions from municipal authorities on the focus of the project.
• Chiantla, Huehuetenango: The community implementation team met with the newly
sworn-in mayor and city council on March 12 to present the project. The team was planning
an event for the formally signing of the MOU and officially launch the project in Chiantla,
but it was delayed due to the COVID-19 crisis.
• Comitancillo, San Marcos: The community implementation team met with the newly
sworn-in mayor and city council, as well as with representatives from various municipal

4
https://www.facebook.com/Proyecto-Tejiendo-Paz-1172860242882763
https://twitter.com/TejiendoPazGT

19
 offices, on February 17 to present the project. The team was planning an event for the
formally signing of the MOU and officially launch the project in Comitancillo, but it was
delayed due to the COVID-19 crisis.
• San Pedro Necta, Huehuetenango: Given that the mayor was re-elected, community entry
took place with municipal authorities last quarter. The team was planning on holding an
event with new city council to officially launch the project, but it was delayed due to the
COVID-19 crisis.
• Totonicapán, Totonicapán: Given that the mayor was re-elected, community entry took
place with municipal authorities last quarter. On January 7, the team met with the recently
elected Board of Director of 48 Cantones, which expressed their endorsement of the project
and requested close communication between project and the board. The team was planning
on holding an event with new city council and 48 Cantones to officially launch the project,
but it was delayed due to the COVID-19 crisis.

Community Level

Chiantla, Huehuetenango: The project completed community visits in all nine communities
randomized by the IE last quarter in Chiantla. In total, three communities in Chiantla decided not
to participate in the Peacebuilding Project. Please see the FY20Q1 report for information on the
reasons the communities of Ocubishal and Las Presas decided not to participate. Las Presas
confirmed in January that they had decided not to participate. In addition, the community of Santo
Tomas decided that since the project focused on social outcomes, rather than infrastructure or
other tangible results, they did not want to participate. One of the challenges identified by the team
in Chiantla is that this municipality has received significant support from USAID projects and
were less receptive to another project.

Comitancillo, San Marcos: The project completed community visits in all nine communities
randomized by the IE last quarter in Comitancillo. In total, two communities in Comitancillo
decided not to participate in the Peacebuilding Project. Please see the FY20Q1 report for
information on the reason that the community of Chixal, which confirmed their decision this
quarter, decided not to participate. In addition, the community of Los Angeles decided that they
did not want to continue participating, despite having initially demonstrated interest and agreeing
to participate. Community leaders, including female leaders, indicated that they were too busy to
continue engaging with the project.

San Pedro Nécta, Huehuetenango: The project completed community visits in all seven
communities randomized by the IE last quarter in San Pedro Necta. The community of Centro de
San Pedro Nécta had indicated that they were not sure about their participation in the project;
however, this quarter they decided that they were interested in participating and signed a letter of
commitment. All seven original communities are actively participating in the project.

Totonicapán, Totonicapán: The project completed community visits in seven of the eight
communities randomized by the IE last quarter in Totonicapán. The only community that the
Peacebuilding Project was unable to visit was Cojxac, which the team visited this quarter and
signed a letter of commitment. Despite having initially demonstrated interest and agreeing to

20
 participate, the community of Maczul, decided not to participate as of this quarter. They cited lack
of tangible goods from the project.

As noted in the Challenges and Lessons Learned section, prior to the COVID-19 crisis, the project
was analyzing the possibility of expanding into communities from the control group to replace the
communities that decided not to participate. However, entry into any new communities is on hold
until the COVID-19 crisis has subsided.

Table 5: Participants in the Community Entry Process, FY20Q2

Participants Ethnicity Age Group
Municipality Community
Women Men Indigenous Non-indigenous 29&under 30+
San Pedro Nécta San Pedro Necta 3 5 4 4 2 6
Totonicapán Cojxac 14 10 24 0 6 18
TOTAL 32 17 15 28 4 8 24

Activity 1.1.4 (originally 1.1.2). Conduct Rapid Stakeholder Assessment (Step 2)

The second step in the community implementation cycle is the rapid stakeholder assessment. The
purpose of the rapid stakeholder assessment exercise is to identify key actors for each of the types
of conflicts in each community. It is also an opportunity to raise awareness about the project and
its activities and start to build trust and momentum with participants. The assessment, which has
four steps, is implemented over one session with approximately 15 community members, including
COCODE representatives, community mayors, women leaders, and youth.

The rapid stakeholder analysis was implemented in the majority of the communities in the first
group of municipalities during FY20Q1. During FY20Q2, the community implementation team
conducted the rapid stakeholder analysis in the final six (of 27) communities.

Table 6: Participants in the Rapid Stakeholder Assessment

Participants Ethnicity Age Group
Municipality Community
Women Men Indigenous Non-indigenous Under 29 30+
Capilla 8 13 0 21 6 15
Chiantla
El Rancho 3 9 0 12 5 7
San Pedro Nécta Centro SPN 4 5 3 6 4 5
Comitancillo Tuichilupe 6 4 10 0 3 7
Cojxac 13 7 20 0 11 9
Totonicapán
Nimasac 9 10 19 0 13 6
TOTAL 91 43 48 52 39 42 49

The community implementation team used a spider diagram technical to identify key stakeholders
by conflict category. While not uniform across all communities, in general the following
tendencies emerged:
• Land and natural resource conflicts: COCODE leaders and Auxiliary/Community mayors,
which represent the statutory and the traditional authorities in the communities.
• Family and gender conflicts: midwives, security committees and parent organizations.
• Youth conflicts: Auxiliary/Community mayors.
• Governance conflicts: security committees, health organizations and parent organizations.

21
 Figure 2: Spider Diagram Example
COMMUNITY IN HUEHUETENANGO
Tierrra
10.0 COCODE
8.0
Familia 6.0 Gobernabilidad ALCALDES AUXILIARES
4.0
2.0
ORGANIZACIÓN DE PADRES DE
-
FAMILIA OPF

Recursos ORGANIZACIÓN DE MUJERES

Genero
Naturales
COMISIÓN DE SALUD
Juventud

As part of the remote work during the COVID-19 crisis, and as part of the projects commitment
to learning and adapting, the community implementation team began updating the Peacebuilding
Project rapid stakeholder analysis based on lessons learned from implementation in the first group
of municipalities and communities. This revision will be completed next quarter.

Result 1.2. Communities (including members, groups, local government, and traditional
authorities) identify, prioritize, and devise strategies to address sources of and resilience to
social conflict

Activity 1.2.1. Facilitate community-driven Conflict and Resilience Analysis (CRA) (Step 3)

As planned, the project beginning implementing the conflict and resilience analysis (known as the
analisis de resiliencia y conflicto - ARCO in Spanish) this quarter. The methodology is divided
into seven sessions: 1) Identifying community conflicts; 2) Analyzing community conflicts; 3)
Analysis of risk of conflict; 4) Identifying the importance of
women and youth participation in managing conflicts; 5)
Recognizing community resilience; 6) Understanding the
reality of migration in the community; and 7) Responses to
conflicts identified.

The Peacebuilding Project community implementation team

was trained on the methodology of the first two session during
the week of January 13-17 and sessions 3 and 4 during the week
of February 24-27. The trainings for sessions 5 -7 was
scheduled for the last week of March but had to be postponed
due to the COVID-19 crisis.

The team had planned on implementing sessions 1 – 4 in the

first group of communities this quarter; however, due to the
COVID-19 crisis multiple sessions had to be postponed.

22
 Table 7: Dates of Sessions 1 – 4 of the Conflict and Resilience Analysis
Municipality Community Session 1 Session 2 Session 3 Session 4
Patio De Bolas 27/jan/20 10/feb/20 09/mar/20 Pending
Chuscaj 15/feb/20 15/feb/20 19/mar/20 Pending
Las Tejas 29/jan/20 12/feb/20 11/mar/20 Pending
Chiantla
Capilla 03/feb/20 Pending Pending Pending
La Zeta 08/feb/20 02/feb/20 Pending Pending
El Rancho 04/feb/20 18/feb/20 10/mar/20 Pending
La Pinada 4/feb/20 18/feb/20 11/mar/20 Pending
Tepán 23/ene/20 12/feb/20 4/mar/20 Pending
Camposeco 29/ene/20 17/feb/20 9/mar/20 9/mar/20
San Pedro
Jolimex 21/ene/20 10/feb/20 3/mar/20 Pending
Nécta
San Pedro Necta 3/mar/20 Pending Pending Pending
El Rancho 5/feb/20 13/feb/20 5/mar/20 Pending
Canoguitas 22/jan/20 11/feb/20 2/mar/20 Pending
Las Flores 5/feb/20 4/feb/20 4/mar/20 4/mar/20
Tuichilupe 4/feb/20 17/feb/20 9/mar/20 9/mar/20
Agua Tibia 22/jan/20 18/feb/20 Pending Pending
Comitancillo Vista Hermosa 23/jan/20 21/feb/20 10/mar/20 10/mar/20
La Torre 21/jan/20 14/feb/20 Pending Pending
Comitancillo 29/jan/20 13/feb/20 5/mar/20 5/mar/20
Chicajalaj 29/ene/20 12/feb/20 4/mar/20 4/mar/20
Nimasac 13/feb/20 13/feb/20 11/mar/20 Pending
Chicaxtun Chiyax 05/feb/20 19/feb/20 04/mar/20 Pending
Pachoc 04/feb/20 18/feb/20 10/mar/20 Pending
Totonicapán Cojxac 30/jan/20 14/feb/20 09/mar/20 Pending
Nimapa 27/jan/20 10/feb/20 02/mar/20 Pending
Poxlajuj 31/jan/20 19/feb/20 10/mar/20 Pending
Tzanixnam 18/jan/20 11/feb/20 10/mar/20 Pending

Table 8: Unique Participants in the Conflict and Resilience Analysis

Participants Ethnicity Age Group
Municipality Community
Women Men Indigenous Non-indigenous 29&under 30+
Patio De Bolas 5 6 0 11 3 8
Chuscaj 1 4 0 5 5 0
Las Tejas 14 5 0 19 7 12
Chiantla
Capilla 4 4 0 8 4 4
La Zeta 11 5 0 16 12 4
El Rancho 5 6 0 11 1 10
La Pinada 17 8 15 10 7 18
Tepán 12 11 23 0 10 13
Camposeco 14 16 30 0 16 14
San Pedro
Jolimex 20 13 33 0 13 20
Nécta
San Pedro Necta 5 5 7 3 4 6
El Rancho 20 8 23 5 14 14
Canoguitas 14 23 35 2 17 20
Las Flores 16 6 22 0 5 17
Comitancillo
Tuichilupe 6 27 33 0 19 14

23
 Participants Ethnicity Age Group
Municipality Community
Women Men Indigenous Non-indigenous 29&under 30+
Agua Tibia 26 13 38 1 18 21
Vista Hermosa 13 24 37 0 12 25
La Torre 11 12 23 0 7 16
Comitancillo 34 30 64 0 32 32
Chicajalaj 30 19 49 0 17 32
Nimasac 21 6 27 0 14 13
Chicaxtun Chiyax 19 5 24 0 9 15
Pachoc 24 10 34 0 16 18
Totonicapán Cojxac 8 6 14 0 11 3
Nimapa 25 20 45 0 18 27
Poxlajuj 26 18 43 1 26 18
Tzanixnam 30 13 43 0 21 22
TOTAL 754 431 323 662 92 338 416

The Peacebuilding Project community implementation team will assess the results of the conflict
and resilience analysis once it has been completed in all communities within a municipality.
During the first session, all communities identified at least two types of conflict, and many
identified more. The table below is an initial list of some of the types of sources and causes of
conflict that have been preliminarily identified.

Table 9: Examples of Sources and Causes of Conflict Identified during CRA

Category Examples of Sources of Conflict Examples of Causes of Conflict
Natural • Availability and use of water • Lack of regulations for water use and
Resources • Illegal logging of woodlands conservation
• Lack of investment of municipal government
for water conservation
• Lack of compliance with regulations on
woodlands management and conservation
• Lack of education on natural resource
protection
• Lack of understanding of indigenous values
regarding natural resources.
• Personal interest above collective welfare
Gender and • Violence against women • Sexist culture
Youth • Differences between two women’s groups • Lack of interest of authorities and leaders in
• Lack of opportunities for youth (education, women’s development.
work, recreation, participation, technology) • Lack of opportunities for youth
• Youth rebelliousness against their parents • Loss of cultural values and practices
• Youth delinquency • Lack of interest of authorities in youth
• Youth alcoholism • Migration and family disintegration
• Inappropriate use of technology • Remittances sent by migrants are used by youth
to buy alcohol
Family • Intergenerational conflicts • Migration
• Family violence • Culture of violence
• People do not wear their traditional clothing • Alcoholism
• Family disintegration due to migration • Lack of work and resources
• Alcoholism
Governance • Insufficient roads for community access • Weak public institutions, including
• Cost of energy/location of electric power poles municipalities, low presence in communities,

24
 • Attendance of children at schools from different not responsive to community needs, lack of
communities cultural relevance, and ethical and technical
• Lack of health services weaknesses in the public administration.
• Risks in schools • Authoritarian practices of public authorities and
• Disposition of garbage officials reflected in the lack of spaces for
• Weak community organization/weak decision dialogue and not respectful of communities’
making of leaders values, systems and practices.
• Differences between government and • Weak community participation
communities • Weak relationships of government with
• Discrimination of midwifes from public health communities: distrust, transactional relationship
services (clientelism), little credibility of public
• Lack of territory planning officials.
• Lack of participation of parents in school • Lack of interest of governments in rural
meetings communities
Land • Border disputes between communities • Lack of property titles
• Unclear limits between communities
• Lack of interest of authorities to take decision
and define clear border limits.

As stated in the workplan, based on Figure 3: Example of community map identifying areas of conflict
the findings and types of conflict
once the CRA is complete, the
communities may be clustered into
groups that will work together to
develop community visions to
address the identified conflicts.
However, the project also recognizes
that communities may prefer to
develop their own CVs. Given that the
IE is no longer a restriction in forming
clusters, this process will depend
completely on the results of the CRA.

As part of the remote work during the COVID-19 crisis, and as part of the projects commitment
to learning and adapting, the community implementation team began updating the conflict and
resilience analysis methodology based on lessons learned from the implementation of the first four
sessions. This revision will be completed next quarter prior to reengaging with communities
following the COVID-19 crisis. Some of the adjustments may take effect in the current group of
municipalities/ communities and others in the next group of municipalities/ communities.

Activity 1.2.2. Facilitate development of community visions (Step 4)

This quarter, the Peacebuilding Project team continued to work on developing a standard template
for the community visions. Key components of the CVs include: findings from the CRA;
community priorities; specific strategies to address those priorities; partnership/mobilization
strategy; timeframes; and monitoring and follow-up mechanisms. The process of developing the
CVs with community members is designed to take place once the CRAs have been completed,
originally anticipated for late FY20Q3. Given delays in implementation of the CRA due to the
COVID-19 crisis, there may be delays in finalizing CVs. However, during the remote work period,

25
 the community implementation team is starting to draft CVs based on the information collected to
date through the CRAs. Once the team can go back into the communities, these documents will be
the starting point for continued work. In addition, as part of the review of the CRA and CV
development methodologies, the team will assess if is possible to condense and/or reorder some
of the CRA sessions so that there are not extensive delays in the development of the CVs.

Activity 1.2.3. Ensure monitoring and follow-up (Step 6)

The Peacebuilding Project community implementation team began organizing community-level

youth-led monitoring committees (known as Redes de Voceros Juveniles Comunitarios) during
FY20Q2. Potential participants for the youth monitoring committees were identified through the
rapid stakeholder assessment and then follow-up visits with youth. The community
implementation team engaged with 100 (60 women
and 40 women) in the four project municipalities who
have been identified as potential voceros juveniles.
The groups are generally created in parallel with the
fourth session of the CRA although the exact timing
depends on each community.

The role of these committees is to help monitor the

progress of CV implementation against the decisions
and goals set by the community during the CRA and
CV development processes. The Voceros Juveniles
methodology incorporates a series of participatory
trainings that will provide youth with tangible skills. The trainings will include communication
techniques and technology so that monitoring efforts can be more interactive and participatory.
The first meeting in the methodology is known as Guía Cero; it includes a presentation of the
initiative and the formal creation of the groups. The team had planned to hold these meetings in
late March in multiple communities but had to postpone the meetings due to the COVID-19 crisis.
The community implementation team was able to hold this introductory session in two
communities.

Table 10: Participants in Voceros Juveniles Trainings, FY20Q2

Participants Ethnicity Age Group
Municipality Community
Women Men Indigenous Non-indigenous 29&under 30+
Chuscaj 5 2 1 6 7 0
Chiantla
Las Tejas 7 4 1 10 11 0
TOTAL 18 12 6 2 16 18 0

Activity 1.2.4. Support women’s active role in community peacebuilding

The Peacebuilding Project recognizes that women’s civic participation at the local level is
constrained by various barriers, including household responsibilities, limited skills and experience,
and patriarchal gender norms. The Peacebuilding Project also recognizes that women are critical
for peacebuilding success and sustainability and that while women may not have formal leadership
roles in decision-making bodies, they often play informal roles within their communities. The
women Peace Promoters (Asesoras de Cambio) intervention is based on the premise that to create

26
sustainable gender equality and lasting peace, women need to be provided the tools to increase
their potential for civic participation and political mobilization.

The Peacebuilding Project had agreed with the IE team that the Asesoras de Cambio activity would
constitute the Peacebuilding+ intervention. The IE had randomized the 65 communities that the
Asesoras de Cambio methodology was to be implemented in; 15 of those were in the first group
of communities that the project is currently implementing the project. Given that the IE has been
cancelled, the project did not start implementing the Asesoras de Cambio methodology this
quarter. As stated in the approved workplan, if the communities were not randomly assigned and
the Peacebuilding Project was able to select in which communities the Asesoras de Cambio groups
were formed, the team would wait until after the CRA and use that analysis to decide in which
communities there is the greatest need and opportunity. As such, the project will start forming the
Asesoras de Cambio groups next quarter (if feasible given the COVID-19 crisis) once the CRA
has been completed. Potential participants were identified during the rapid stakeholder assessment
and implementation of the CRA to date. Given the limited budget, the Asesoras de Cambio will
not be formed every communities; the exact number would depend on the results of the CRA (the
project estimates that it will still be in approximately half of the communities).

Result 1.3. Communities have increased resources for peaceful conflict resolution

Activity 1.3.1. Establish and strengthen network of community mediators

Starting in FY2020, the Peacebuilding Project, with leadership from ProPaz, is planning on
establishing a community mediator network in municipalities in the four target departments. The
network is designed to serve as a resource that communities can call upon to generate conditions
for dialogue or facilitate peaceful conflict resolution, specifically once the community visions have
been developed. During FY20Q2, ProPaz and Creative finalized and published terms of reference
for a small grant that will be responsible for a) identifying potential candidates; b) presenting the
candidates to project leadership for final selection; c) drafting a letter of agreement to be signed
between the community mediators and the Peacebuilding Project; and d) creating a Community
Mediator Management and Sustainability Guide. As of March, the team had identified a potential
grantee, but due to the COVID-19 crisis has decided to postpone finalizing the award. The majority
of the small grant activities require field work, which is not currently possible. The project plans
to award the small grant once the COVID-19 crisis is under control, but these delays could have
implications for establishing and training the network this fiscal year. During the remote work
period, ProPaz will finalize the methodologies related to the community mediator network.

Objective 2: Build partnerships between communities and external entities to implement plans

Result 2.1. Communities implement action plans (Community Visions) to address drivers of
social conflict and promote cohesion, with support from external entities

Activity 2.1.1. Support target communities in implementing CVs (Step 5)

As of March 2020, the Peacebuilding Project was ready to award the following small grants that
are designed to building partnerships and respond to initial conflict assessments:
1. Formation of community mediator network (Objective 1);
27
 2. Implementation of municipal peace fairs (Objective 2);
3. Design of a behavior change campaign focused on inter-familial violence (Objective 2);
4. Assessment of Comisión Presidencial de Derechos Humanos (COPREDEH) psychological
support needs (Objective 3); and
5. Assessment of GoG early warning systems (Objective 3).

Some of the small grants include desk work and interviews that can be done remotely, but given
the inability of partners to travel to the areas of intervention and uncertainty over the severity of the
crisis, the project reevaluated which small grants should be currently awarded in light of the
COVID-19 crisis. The project determined that two of small grants can be implemented in the short-
term at least in part virtually and are the most relevant in the context of the widespread health crisis:
inter-familial violence prevention campaign and GoG early warning systems. The remaining grants
will be awarded when appropriate and relevant.

Activity 2.1.2. Foster partnerships for the implementation of CVs (Step 5)

To ensure sustainability and lay the groundwork for the implementation of the community-based
action plans, Peacebuilding Project leadership has conducted outreach with private sector
coalitions that support corporate social responsibility efforts. The Peacebuilding Project had
planned on attending a two-day alliance building activity for organizations engaged in social
developing being organized by CentraRSE. However, the activity was canceled due to the COVID-
19 crisis. The alliance building activity was supposed to take place in Guatemala City and the
project leadership was planning on organizing other bilateral meetings with private sector
representatives during that trip, which also had to be canceled.

The Executive Director of the Centro para Acción de la Responsabilidad Social Empresarial
(CentraRSE), the largest coalition of private sector companies in Guatemala that supports
corporate social responsibility, joined the project Consultative Committee this quarter. Please see
Objective 3 for more details on the role of the committee and its activities this quarter. The
participation of a private sector representative on the committee will contribute to fostering
partnerships for the implementation of CVs.

In February, the COP and Operations Director meet with Roberto Gutierrez, a businessman from
Quetzaltenango and founder of the Grupo Gestor to discuss potential for collaboration with small
business owners from the western highlands. The project is considering inviting a private sector
representative to participate in the Consultative Council and/or creating a petit committee in
Quetzaltenango to foster private sector partnerships outside of Guatemala City.

The COVID-19 crisis is likely to have widespread economic impacts, affecting the private sector
and corporate social responsibility efforts. The project will stay in touch with key contacts and will
assess the most effective approach for engaging with the private sector. The project will look for
opportunities to establish public-private alliances to respond to community needs during the crisis.

28
Activity 2.1.3. Promotion of cross-learning across communities (Step 5)

As noted in Activity 2.1.1, one of the small grants to be awarded is for the organization and
implementation of municipal peace fairs. The fairs were to be implemented in the current four
target municipalities in June 2020, coinciding with the completion of the CRA and the
development of the CVs. The purpose of the fairs is to raise awareness at the community and
municipal level around conflict mitigation and violence prevention by providing information on
resources and sharing key messages through participatory activities. However, given the COVID-
19 crisis and the fact that the CRA and CV activities are on hold, the project has decided to
postpone awarding this grant. A potential grantee has been identified, therefore once the team is
able to reinitiate community and municipal level work, the project will submit the award approval
package to USAID.

Activity 2.1.4. Promote key changes in behavior (Step 5)

As noted in Activity 2.1.1, one of the small grants to be award is for the design of a behavior change
campaign focused on preventing inter-familial violence. Given that one of the types of conflict that
is likely to increase during the COVID-19 crisis is gender-based and inter-familial violence, the
project has prioritized this grant. The team has identified at potential grantee and will submit the
small grants package to USAID for approval in early FY20Q3.

Result 2.2. Improved communication and collaboration around conflict management at the
municipal level

Activity 2.2.1. Increase understanding of local conflict dynamics and ensure vertical and
horizontal information flows among stakeholders at municipal level and with communities

The Peacebuilding Project consortium recognizes the importance of working with key municipal
stakeholders to improve their understanding of local dynamics and grievances, identify emerging
trends, and work with the appropriate actors to address them. This quarter, the project hired a
consultant to develop materials and train key actors at the municipal and community levels on
social conflict and conflict resolution mechanisms. The consultant began designing the
methodology, which includes one municipal workshop per municipality, one community
workshop per municipality (bringing together community leaders from multiple communities
within a municipality) and one round table per municipality with municipal and community
leaders. During FY20Q2, the consultant prepared the content and materials for the workshops and
identified the list of participants for each municipality and communities. He visited the
municipality of Chiantla to meet with municipal authorities to explain the purpose of the municipal
workshop and agreed on April 24 as the date for the first workshop. He was in the process of
scheduling introductory meetings with municipal leaders in the other three municipalities when
the COVID-19 crisis began. As a result, all municipal and community trainings are currently on
hold. Once the team can reinitiate field work, these trainings will be rescheduled, but there will
likely be delays. To ensure that this activity continues to advance, the consultant will focus during
the remote work period on the design of two guides that increase municipal and community leaders
understanding of local conflict dynamics, methodologies to resolve conflicts, and tools for
coordination and relationships building.

29
Objective 3: Strengthen GoG and non-governmental capacity to participate in managing,
responding to, and resolving local conflicts

Cross-cutting Activities

Establish Consultative Committee for Peacebuilding Project

The Consultative Committee is a mechanism to facilitate the advancement of the Peacebuilding

Project objectives and provide technical advice on issues related to peacebuilding and reduction
of social conflict and violence. The Consultative Committee is an important mechanism for the
sustainability of the project and as such includes members from different sectors with diverse
experiences. The project held two consultative committee meetings this quarter:
• Addressing Conflict in the Context of a New Administration: In February, the
consultative committee meeting focused on discussing recommendations around how the
project can effectively address conflict taking into consideration the priorities and initial
statements of the newly sworn-in administration. There is still uncertainty around decisions
the incoming authorities will make with regards to key institutions. Three members of the
committee participated, as well as two representatives from USAID and project staff.
• Impact of COVID-19 on Conflict: In March, the project held a virtual meeting to discuss
the impact of COVID-19 and how the project can responsibly address the issue within the
framework of mitigation conflict. The meeting was productive in establishing contacts with
other organizations that are disseminating messages in indigenous languages, which is
relevant for the Peacebuilding Project. Five committee members, one USAID
representative and project staff participated in the meeting.

Given challenges in convening meetings due to members having demanding schedules, the project
decided to increase the number of members from seven to 10-12 with the understanding that
members may not be able to participate in every meeting. The project will select a date, still
approximately once a quarter or when there is an extraordinary measure to discuss, based on the
availability of the most members. This quarter, two new members joined the committee:
• Juan Pablo Morataya: Executive Director of CentraRSE, which is the largest coalition of
private sector companies in Guatemala that supports corporate social responsibility.
• Anabella Rivera: Executive Director of the Instituto Centroamericano de Estudios para
la Democracia Social (DEMOS), which is a civil society organization with experience
working with youth, women and indigenous groups on peacebuilding, human rights and
citizen participation.

Peacebuilding Project Bulletins and Analysis

Peacebuilding Project partner ProPaz is responsible for providing timely analysis on the most
salient issues related to social conflict. The purpose of the analysis is to improve communication
and understanding around the topics and issues most relevant to the project, particularly once the
project is implementing in the target communities. Please see Annex C for the ProPaz Report on
Political Conflict, FY20Q2. This report is produced in Spanish and the opinions expressed are the
author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Creative Associates or the Peacebuilding
Project. The purpose of the report is for internal project decision-making.

30
Result 3.1. Government and non-governmental actors have increased capacity and
coordination to identify, prevent, address, and respond to local conflict

Activity 3.1.1. Strengthen GoG capacity and inter-institutional coordination

GoG Capacity Building Program: During the reporting period, PartnersGlobal finalized the
detailed curriculum for the capacity building programs for government officials and civil society
representatives. Drafts of the curriculum, including the detailed agenda for the first in-person
session, were validated by the project team in January and February. PartnersGlobal also
developed associated administrative materials for the capacity building program, including: 1)
formal invitation letter for potential participants; 2) commitment letter; 3) registration form; and
4) two-pager flyers with summary agendas. During the reporting period, PartnersGlobal held
several calls with ProPaz to discuss different contextual and cultural sensitivities and refine certain
exercises and contents for the inaugural session of the program.

The COVID-19 crisis will impact the implementation of capacity building program. The training
program was scheduled to start the week of April 20, with follow-up in-person sessions in June
and August and virtual sessions in May, July, and September. If the crisis is relatively short, the
capacity building program will start in July and could be completed this fiscal year as planned. If
the crisis prevents the program from being implemented in July, there will be more significant
delays and the project will need to assess the best course of action.

Inter-Institutional Meetings: One of the main findings of the GoG assessment implemented by
PartnersGlobal in FY2019 refers to the absence of a coherent government strategy to address social
conflict. The Inter-Institutional Meetings, convened by Creative, are designed as a space to
promote discussion and coordination between government institutions on the causes of and
potential solutions to specific types of social conflict.

During FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding Project held the first departmental-level Inter-Institutional
Meeting in Huehuetenango. The meeting focused on conflicts related to the use and exploitation
of natural resources and was held with representatives from the Huehuetenango Mesa
Departamental de Seguridad y Atención a la Conflictividad (MEDESACH), which is a working
group made up of COPREDEH, CPD, Ministry of the Interior, Unidad de Prevención de la
Violencia y el Delito, National Civil Police, Ministry of Defense, and PDH. A total of 17 people
(nine women and eight men) participated in the half-day activity. Results from the meeting include:
• List of main conflict related to use and exploitation of natural resources in the five target
municipalities in Huehuetenango (Chiantla, San Pedro Nécta, Huehuetenango, San
Sebastián Huehuetenango, San Idelfonso Ixtahuacán), based on official COPREDEH data.
• Identification of opportunities for collaboration between the Peacebuilding Project and
MEDESCH:
o Technical assistance in developing the MEDESACH annual operating plan;
o Support in implementing two workshops with technical personnel to review and
prioritize main conflicts to address in Huehuetenango; and
o Support in systematizing and elaborating protocols for MEDESACH in addressing,
responding to, and managing conflict.

31
In early March, the Peacebuilding Project held a planning meeting with representatives from the
Comisión Departamental de Seguridad, Prevención y Resolución de Conflictos in San Marcos.
The project was planning on holding the Inter-Institutional Meeting in San Marcos in late March
but had to postpone due to the COVID-19 crisis. Follow-up with the Huehuetenango MEDESACH
is also on hold until the health crisis has subsided.

COPREDEH: In March, the project held a meeting with the incoming president of COPREDEH,
Juan Alfonso Fuentes Soria. The meeting was an opportunity to discuss coordination between the
institution and the project, which has been positive over the past year, and review the agreements
included in the MOU between COPREDEH and the Peacebuilding Project. Based on the meeting,
the team anticipates maintaining a close working relationship with COPREDEH. COPREDEH
also agreed to co-convene the capacity building program being implemented by the project.

One of the actions in the MOU is an assessment of psychological support needs of COPREDEH
delegates. COPREDEH is a key government partner, both under this activity as well as Activity
3.1.2 Strengthen Early Warning and Response. Psychosocial support for COPREDEH delegates
in the field will increase COPREDEHs capacity to respond to and prevent social conflict. This
quarter, the project received proposals from local organizations to implement the assessment. The
team preliminarily identified an organization but has further questions and comments on their
proposed methodology. The team will continue to work with the organization to finalize the
proposal but will not award it until project is able to resume field work.

Regional Exchange: During the reporting period, PartnersGlobal finalized a summary description
and a design for the two-day regional exchange between government officials from neighboring
countries to discuss shared structural issues related to conflict in the sub-region. The project sent
the document explaining the design and focus of the regional exchange to USAID for feedback in
February. Per the approved workplan, the exchange will focus on Migration, Displacement, and
Cross-Border Conflicts, and on the institutional responses and intergovernmental coordination
needed to effectively address the issue. The overarching objective of the exchange is to serve as a
safe space for dialogue and coordination between government authorities in Guatemala and
neighboring countries.

The exchange is currently planned for September 2020. The COVID-19 crisis may impact the
project ability to plan and prepare logistics, particularly if it is not clear if international travel will
resume. The team will evaluate next quarter if the regional exchange should be delayed, although
any delays would mean that it could not be implemented as planned this fiscal year.

Activity 3.1.2. Strengthen early warning and response

During FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding Project met with the Secretaria de Asuntos Agrarios (SAA) to
discuss their Early Warning and Response System for Agriculture Conflicts, known as SARTCA.
The SARTCA was launched in late 2019 with support from the Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) of the United Nations. The SAA is planning on training departmental delegates on the use
of SARTCA in the coming months.

32
As with the meetings with COPREDEH and PDH on their systems last quarter, the Peacebuilding
Project team identified potential opportunities to support and strengthen existing EWSs. however,
the focus of support through the Peacebuilding Project will need to be targeted given limited
financial resources. Terms of reference were published this quarter for an organization to conduct
an assessment on the strengths and weaknesses of existing early warning systems. An organization
was identified; the small grants approval package will be submitted to USAID early next quarter.
Following the completion of the assessment the Peacebuilding Project leadership team will assess
the viability of and political will around options for supporting ESWs in Guatemala. The project
plans to award the grant to conduct the assessment despite the COVID-19 crisis given that a
significant amount of work can be done virtually. However, the completion of the assessment
could be delayed if the crisis is protracted.

Activity 3.1.3. Strengthen non-governmental actor capacity and engagement

NGO Capacity Building Program: The activities described under Activity 3.1.1 also cover the
capacity-building process for civil society organizations in the four target departments.
PartnersGlobal decided to develop joint terms of reference for the two capacity-building processes
given their similarity in scope, format, and potential topics. Similarly, PartnersGlobal have decided
to explore the possibility of having some joint sessions with government officials and civil society
actors during the capacity-building processes but agreed that this would not be the case for the first
session originally planned for late April 2020. PartnersGlobal and Creative coordinated regarding
the potential participants in the capacity-building process and developed a final list of potential
participants.

Result 3.2. GoG and other key stakeholders have improved information-sharing,
communication, and coordination mechanisms

Activity 3.2.1. Facilitate comprehensive conversations

During FY20Q2, ProPaz began planning a comprehensive conversation focused social conflict and
youth migration, which was scheduled for early FY20Q3 in Guatemala City. However, given the
COVID-19 crisis, the in-person meeting was canceled. The project will instead implement a virtual
comprehensive conversation around the same date on Voices and Perspectives from Indigenous
Communities on the COVID-19 Emergency.

Activity 3.2.2. Build GoG capacity in strategic communication

During the reporting period, PartnersGlobal presented and validated the findings from the rapid
strategic communications audit of the PDH conducted last quarter. The project held a
presentation/validation workshop with the leadership of the institution on February 13 and a second
one with the full team from the Social Communications Directorate on March 11. In this session,
the project presented a summary of the findings as well as the proposed follow-up pilot
intervention. A total of 25 people (17 women and eight men) participated in the sessions.

Based on the discussions with both groups (senior leadership and Social Communications
Directorate), PartnersGlobal proposed three concrete follow-up steps as part of the intervention:

33
 1. Review relevant institutional documents such as the current strategic plan and vision, as
well as communication materials (flyers, posters, press releases, etc.) to identify current
best practices and shortcomings as well as the guiding principles for a strategic
communications intervention.
2. Facilitate a two-day in-person co-design workshop to identify the general guidelines to
develop a communications strategy. The findings from the rapid audit and the e desk review
of relevant institutional documents would provide the basis and parameters for the
discussions during this workshop. The workshop was planned for April 20 and 30 but has
been postponed due to COVID-19.
3. Provide on-demand “light touch” support to the Social Communications Directorate to
finalize and implement the general strategic communications guidelines co-developed in
the previous step.

The COVID-19 crisis will also have an impact on the implementation of the strategic
communications component. It will be impossible for the PartnersGlobal team to travel to
Guatemala to implement the intervention on the originally planned dates in late April). However,
the impact is mitigated because the assessment has already been completed and validated and the
pending work is not as reliant on in-person meetings. Any pending activities could, in theory, be
carried out virtually. Since there is the possibility of additional disruptions, the team has envisioned
two possible scenarios:
• Under the first scenario, there are only minor disruptions in terms of daily work for the
people who participate in the PDH pilot intervention. This includes closing of the physical
PDH offices and remote work for staff. If this is the case, the planned work could continue
with some adjustments to the methodologies and agenda during the following intervention
steps. Specifically, the co-design workshop could be held next quarter as planned but in a
virtual format. The 16 hours for this workshop could be divided into four sessions of four
hours each to guarantee the attention, energy, and focus of the staff.
• Under the second scenario, the COVID-19 crisis forces various state institutions, including
the PDH, to participate in the response and containment efforts and therefore their activities
are severely affected by the situation. In that case, the PDH staff may be too busy with
other tasks because of the health crisis. If this second scenario occurs, it may be necessary
to rethink the intervention methodology completely and/or anticipate delays in the start of
specific activities such as the co-design workshop, since participation of the PDH would
not be guaranteed, even in a virtual situation.

Monitoring & Evaluation Activities and Indicator Data

As part of the FY2019 workplan submittal, the Peacebuilding Project provided a list of proposed
indicators to USAID. USAID approved the survey indicators during FY2019, which will be
measured through the impact evaluation survey. As part of the FY2020 workplan process, the
Peacebuilding Project presented the project performance indicator reference sheets (PIRS) with
detailed information on each survey and performance indicator as well as an updated performance
monitoring plan (PMP). As of the end of FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding Project indicators are under
review by USAID. However, the Peacebuilding Project does not anticipate significant revisions
and is reporting on the indicators for which the project collected data this quarter.

34
Please see Annex D for the Performance Indicator Tracking Table_FY20Q2 that has the values for
all indicator data.

Survey Indicators

The Peacebuilding Project received the baseline dataset from NORC this quarter but did not
receive the baseline report that was supposed to accompany it. The project is internally analyzing
the baseline data related to the project survey indicators and will report those values next quarter.

Performance Indicators

Indicator 0.4: Number of local women participating in a substantive role or position in a

peacebuilding process supported with USG assistance (GNDR 10): As part of the rapid stakeholder
analysis (mostly conducted last quarter but finalized in all 27 communities this quarter), the
community facilitators utilized an instrument designed to identify: the differentiated needs of
women at the community level; women’s barriers to participation; norms, ideas and practices
related to the requirements, interests, and needs of women; and levels of women’s participation in
the communities. After analyzing the results, the project M&E team has determined that at the start
of the intervention in the first 27 communities, zero (0) women are participating in a substantive
role or position in peacebuilding processes per the definition of the indicator.

Indicator 0.5: Number of people participating in project activities that address the peaceful
management and resolution of conflicts: During FY20Q2, a total of 933 unique individuals (533
women and 400 men) participated in project activities that addressed the peaceful management
and resolution of conflicts. This brings the total number of unique individuals reached during
FY2020 to 1,482 (not double counting between FY20Q1 and FY20Q2).

Table 11: Age and Ethnicity Disaggregation of Peacebuilding Project Participants, FY20Q2
Under 29 30 and Older Maya Non-Indigenous
Female Male Total Female Male Total
237 172 409 296 228 524 746 187

Activities included in this indicator this quarter are:

Objective 1
• Community Entry: During the process of community entry, a total of 32 people (17 women
and 15 men) at the community level participated in community entry meetings during
FY20Q2.
• Rapid Stakeholder Assessment: During FY20Q2, a total of 91 people (43 women and 48
men) participated in the rapid stakeholder assessment at the community level.
• Conflict and Resilience Analysis: During FY20Q2, a total of 754 unique people (431
women and 323 men) participated in the CRA sessions.
• Voceros Juveniles: A total of 18 youth (12 women and six men) participated in the
introductory session of the Voceros Juveniles methodology during FY20Q2.

35
 Please see Activities 1.1.3, 1.1.4, 1.2.1 and 1.2.3 for disaggregation by community. Please note
that some of the same people participated in community entry, rapid stakeholder analysis, CRA
and/or Vocero Juvenil activities; they are not double counted in the total of unique individuals
(933) being reported.

Objective 3
• Consultative Committee: A total of seven unique individuals (four women and three men)
participated in two consultative committee meetings, which took place in Guatemala City,
during FY20Q2.
• Inter-Institutional Meetings: A total of 17 unique individuals (nine women and eight men)
participated in an Inter-Institutional meeting that took place in Huehuetenango during
FY20Q2.
• PDH Strategic Communication Meetings: During FY20Q2, at total of 25 unique
individuals (17 women and eight men) participated in two PDH strategic communication
meetings in Guatemala City.

Indicator 1.0: Number of citizens engaged in cooperative community dialogue, including

community vision (CV) development: During FY20Q2, 772 citizens (443 women and 329 men)
engaged in cooperative community dialogue through the conflict and resilience analysis and
vocero juvenil methodology. Please see Activities 1.2.1 and 1.2.3 for disaggregation by gender,
age groups, ethnicity, community, and municipality.

Indicator 3.0: Number of trainings, exchanges, and coordination meetings with GoG and/ or non-
governmental organizations related to preventing, managing, and resolving conflict: During
FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding Project held five coordination meetings related to preventing,
managing, and resolving conflict with GoG and NGO representatives.

Table 12: Objective 3 Activities Disaggregated

Age
Participants Ethnicity
Group
Activity Institution Location
Women

Indigen

indigen

29&un
Non-
Men

30+
ous

ous

der
II Consultative Committee
Peacebuilding Project Guatemala 1 2 1 2 0 3
Meeting
III Consultative Committee
Peacebuilding Project Virtual 4 3 2 5 0 7
Meeting
Inter-Institutional Meeting MEDESACH Huehuetenango 9 8 1 16 4 13
Presentation of strategic
Communications Audit to PDH Guatemala 8 1 2 7 0 9
Senior Leadership
Presentation of strategic
Communications Audit to PDH Guatemala 9 7 1 15 3 13
Communications Team
Total 31 21 8 44 7 45

36
Coordination, Compliance, and Future Activities
Collaboration with USAID Partners and Other USG Agencies

During FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding Project continued to participate in the monthly Cross-
Coordination (X-CO) meetings in Guatemala City. The purpose of these meetings is for USAID
implementing partners to share relevant information and coordinate actions.

Security Considerations

In January, the Creative Regional Security Manager visited the Peacebuilding Project to conduct
a follow-on security assessment given that the project is now implementing at the community and
municipal level (an original assessment took place at project start-up in 2018). As part of her
assessment, she conducted community visits, met project participants, conducted interviews with
project staff and held a call with the USAID Partner Liaison Security Advisor. The visit resulted
in an updated security checklist and changes to the project security plan.

During FY20Q2, the Peacebuilding Project reorganized the project security team. The Project
Security Manager left the project. His responsibilities were redistributed to an Administrative,
Security and Transportation Coordinator (who was promoted internally), responsible for
supervising the four drivers, and the IT and Cybersecurity Coordinator. Both positions are
supervised by the Director of Operations.

This quarter, Creative introduced the use of a cell phone-based security application known as
SECBASE. The app allows staff to check-in, live track their location, and request emergency help.
As of February, the community implementation team and drivers were using the application daily
to track their movements in the project target communities. Following the outbreak of the COVID-
19 pandemic, the team began using the application to record daily check-ins and check-outs.

In late March 2019, a land boundary conflict between the municipalities of Santa Catarina
Ixtahuacán and Nahualá flared up. The conflict, which is historic and has periodically re-emerged,
is further complicated by the curfew imposed in response to COVID-19 given that community
members regularly conduct night patrols. The Political Nacional Civil have been deployed and the
president is considering imposing a state of emergency (estado de sitio). Both municipalities are
in the department of Sololá and are not within the Peacebuilding Project geographic scope.
However, one of the project community facilitators is from Nahualá and is based there while
working remotely. As such, the Peacebuilding Project is closely monitoring the situation.

Development Experience Clearinghouse

This quarter, the following documents were uploaded to the Development Experience
Clearinghouse (DEC):
• Peacebuilding Project FY20Q1 Performance Report

37
Training Events

No training events to report during FY20Q2.

Success Stories

Please see Annex E for the FY20Q2 success stories, which are based on interviews conducted with
project participants as the project is starting community-level engagement. The stories are
designed to provide context on the situation in the communities prior to the development and
implementation of the community visions. The project team will continue to follow-up with the
participants over the life of the project to document progress.

In addition, Creative published a short piece on the Peacebuilding Project response to COVID-19
as part of a longer article on responses in Latin America.5

Guatemala: Knowledge of local languages helps get messages to indigenous communities

The Peacebuilding Project in Guatemala addresses conflict related to natural resources, land rights,
governance, and youth, gender and families, relying on community facilitators to build
relationships in rural, often remote environments. The facilitators work in vulnerable communities
that already have limited access to government services and who depend on an informal economy,
making the COVID-19 crisis an even greater threat. A wide-scale health crisis could exacerbate
underlying conflicts and cause new ones. But even as Guatemala has instituted strict lockdown
measures and mandated a nationwide
curfew, the community facilitators are
finding innovative ways to continue to build
social cohesion.

From their homes, the facilitators are

working to strengthen relationships with
community leaders and authorities through
WhatsApp and phone calls. The facilitators
have focused their communications to
primarily engage with youth groups and
community leaders and members to
understand the evolving situation in their
contexts, accompanying them as they
participate in their own communities’
response to COVID-19.

As new challenges arise from the pandemic, the community facilitators’ presence will continue to
be important in mitigating potential disputes and ensuring the right information is communicated.

5
https://www.creativeassociatesinternational.com/stories/creatives-latin-american-and-caribbean-projects-respond-
to-covid-19/

38
What the facilitators are learning about how these communities respond in emergency situations
and what challenges arise will also inform the “community visions” the project is working to
develop. Intended to offer communities a roadmap to resolving their own conflicts and accelerating
their own development, these documents are one of the project’s key objectives and will now
involve risk management.

An area of potential dispute coming to light during the pandemic is the Western Highlands’ high
rates of migration, both external and internal. Deportees and seasonal farm laborers who can no
longer work are coming back to some of these rural, more isolated communities. Since the
authorities’ focus is on preventing the virus from reaching these areas, the facilitators have reported
some conflicts arising in communities seeing an influx of returned migrants. With added stressors
like the migration situation in mind, the facilitators will continue to conduct conflict analysis, with
a focus on the COVID-19 crisis and any potential for an increase in conflict and violence if the
infection rate rises.

At a broader level, the Peacebuilding Project has

also met and coordinated with government
representatives, members of the private sector,
and civil society organizations involved in
violence prevention and conflict resolution
initiatives to disseminate messaging around
COVID-19 for indigenous communities. In
many areas where the project works, Spanish is
the people’s second language. The community
facilitators’ fluency in the local languages Mam
and K’iche will continue to be a major asset
during the crisis as messages are disseminated to
their networks about the pandemic. In this way,
the project can keep building connections between the communities and relevant government
agencies to better support them in the pandemic. In addition to messages about coronavirus, the
project will share messages about inter-familial conflict, gender-based violence, and child abuse,
providing information on resources and how to access support, which is an ongoing project
objective.

Future Activities: FY20Q3

In light of the uncertainty surround the COVID-19 crisis, the project has identified actions that can
be completed virtually as well as the originally planned activities that will be implemented once
the project is able to return to the communities and conducted in-person activities.

Objective 1
Virtual
• Hold virtual trainings for community facilitators and other team members and create
written training capsules on peacebuilding topics.
• Finalize and publish project communication materials on approach towards peacebuilding
and conflict sensitivity.

39
 • Translate and disseminate messages in response to COVID-19 to project networks in
K’iche, Mam and Spanish.
• Review and document project methodologies for eventual publication (Rapid Stakeholder
Analysis, Conflict and Resilience Analysis, Community Vision Development, Asesoras de
Cambio, Voceros Juveniles, and Community Mediators).
• Translate select methodologies and communication materials into indigenous languages.
• Start drafting community visions for 27 communities based on information to date
collected through the Conflict and Resilience Analysis.
• Maintain regular communication via telephone with community leaders and members to
understand the evolving COVID-19 situation in their communities, providing regular
updates to USAID and GoG partners.

In-person (date depends on COVID-19 crisis)

• Assess the most responsible approach for re-entering communities that may have been
affected by COVID-19, taking into consideration Do No Harm and conflict sensitivity
approaches.
• Complete the CRA methodology sessions in the 27 communities.
• Draft community visions with the 27 communities.
• Continue forming Voceros Juveniles groups and start training youth on topics related to
communication and technology for peacebuilding.
• Start forming Asesoras de Cambio groups and begin trainings with women on topics related
to civic participation and peacebuilding.
• Award community mediator small grant to start identifying potential candidates for
mediator network.

Objective 2
Virtual
• Develop External Resource and Grants Strategy that includes sources for funding the
community visions as well as identifying cost share opportunities.
• Award small grants that require deskwork and are relevant in the context of coronavirus:
behavior change campaign around inter-familial violence and early warning system.
• Stay in touch with key private sector contacts look for opportunities to establish public-
private alliances to respond to community needs.
• Support grantee in conducting deskwork and developing messages related to a behavior
change campaign focused on preventing inter-familial violence, including messages
relevant for the context of increased inter-familial violence during the COVID-19 outbreak.
• Design two guides that increase municipal and community leaders understanding of local
conflict dynamics, methodologies to resolve conflicts, and tools for coordination.

In-person (date depends on COVID-19 crisis)

• Award small grants that are dependent on extensive field work: community mediators,
COPREDEH psychological support and municipal peace fairs.
• Hold in-person meetings with private sector representatives to present the project and
continue fostering partnerships for the implementation of CVs.
• Hold municipal peace fairs in target municipalities.

40
 • Conduct field work for the assessment of inter-familial violence that will inform the design
of a behavior change campaign focused on preventing inter-familial violence.
• Hold four (1 per municipality) trainings with municipal representatives and four (1 per
municipality) trainings with community leaders on social conflict and the importance of
constructing positive working relationships in addressing conflict and violence.

Objective 3
Virtual
• Review and document project methodologies for eventual publication (e.g. inter-
institutional meetings and comprehensive conversations).
• Conducting interviews with key informants to collect data to write and publish the first
external bulletin on social conflict.
• Hold a virtual meeting with the Peacebuilding Project Consultative Committee
• Finalize slide decks and other materials, such as role plays and group exercises, for the first
and second in-person sessions of the GoG and NGO capacity building sessions.
• Prepare methodology for interinstitutional meeting with the Departmental Commission on
Conflict Prevention in San Marcos.
• Hold virtual coordination calls with the Departmental Commission on Conflict Prevention
in Huehuetenango.
• Conduct virtual check-ins with COPREDEH, SAA, CPD and PDH points of contact.
• Award and begin implementation of small grant to conduct assessment of early warning
systems.
• Hold two virtual comprehensive conversations: one will be on indigenous perspectives and
concerns around COVID-19 emergency and the second will on analyzing the COVID-19
emergency with a gender perspective.
• Conduct the desk review of relevant institutional documents from PDH to inform the final
detailed agenda for the co-design workshop.
• Potentially conduct the PDH co-design workshop virtually (preference is for in-person).

In-person (date depends on COVID-19 crisis)

• Conduct the first in-person session of the GoG and NGO capacity building program.
• Implement Inter-Institutional Meeting in the department of San Marcos.
• Provide in-personal technical assistance to the Departmental Commission on Conflict
Prevention in Huehuetenango
• Conduct co-design workshop with the PDH.

Annexes
A. Findings from Migration Questions in the Impact Evaluation
B. Peacebuilding Project Community Entry Strategy
C. ProPaz Report on Political Conflict, FY20Q2
D. Performance Indicator Tracking Table_FY20Q2
E. Peacebuilding Project Success Stories, FY20Q2

41